重讀涂爾幹:社會認識論與記憶社會學間的系譜學考察

黃敏原 黃敏原
{"title":"重讀涂爾幹:社會認識論與記憶社會學間的系譜學考察","authors":"黃敏原 黃敏原","doi":"10.53106/221866892020120018001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n 本文旨趣有二,其一乃透過法國思考脈絡與法文閱讀來對涂爾幹進行重新耙梳。關於宗教研究的探討,筆者認為涂氏對之具有終身連續的「一貫關懷」,而與既有研究中指出的「中途轉向」說不同。另外,涂氏系列宗教研究中提出的核心命題如「神聖性之起源」及「群體之分類認識能力」,實乃導源於「社會」這個根源等見解,正是一種「知識社會學」的進路。此種特有的「集體思維」學說建立在「社會事實說」等基本預設上並開展出法式結構主義的思想風格。建立在上述對涂氏社會認識論的考察,本文欲探討涂爾幹與「涂爾幹學派」中阿部瓦克思(M. Halbwachs)之間的思想接續。作為「記憶社會學」的開創者,學界慣常指稱阿氏乃涂氏門生。但本文卻將兩人的「師徒關係」重新置疑:阿氏身上是否承襲涂氏思維的「學術DNA」?如果是,又是在那些點上有所關連?此應透過嚴謹的學術考據加以證成。透過兩人學術上核心概念的比對、基本假設的對照以及邏輯推演的相互參照,本文指出其在思想系譜上的繼承性。由此,不只反省涂氏與「涂派成員」間之關連,同時也回過頭重估涂氏學說對後世記憶研究與相關文化研究等開展之貢獻。\n This article clarifies the specificity of Durkheim’s social epistemology, particularly his study of religion. Durkheim held that both “divine nature”and the collective capacity for classification are derived from “the Society.”This approach, as well as his research on “social facts” and “the dualism of human nature,” considerably influenced later sociologists. Specifically, Maurice Halbwachs inherited Durkheim’s ideas to develop his theory on the sociology of memory from a social psychology perspective. By comparing their core concepts, theoretical assumptions, and inferences, this article identifies the theoretical genealogy between Durkheim and Halbwachs. Additionally, it highlights the contributions of some Durkheimian perspectives to the development of cultural studies.\n \n","PeriodicalId":215816,"journal":{"name":"社會分析","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"社會分析","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53106/221866892020120018001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

本文旨趣有二,其一乃透過法國思考脈絡與法文閱讀來對涂爾幹進行重新耙梳。關於宗教研究的探討,筆者認為涂氏對之具有終身連續的「一貫關懷」,而與既有研究中指出的「中途轉向」說不同。另外,涂氏系列宗教研究中提出的核心命題如「神聖性之起源」及「群體之分類認識能力」,實乃導源於「社會」這個根源等見解,正是一種「知識社會學」的進路。此種特有的「集體思維」學說建立在「社會事實說」等基本預設上並開展出法式結構主義的思想風格。建立在上述對涂氏社會認識論的考察,本文欲探討涂爾幹與「涂爾幹學派」中阿部瓦克思(M. Halbwachs)之間的思想接續。作為「記憶社會學」的開創者,學界慣常指稱阿氏乃涂氏門生。但本文卻將兩人的「師徒關係」重新置疑:阿氏身上是否承襲涂氏思維的「學術DNA」?如果是,又是在那些點上有所關連?此應透過嚴謹的學術考據加以證成。透過兩人學術上核心概念的比對、基本假設的對照以及邏輯推演的相互參照,本文指出其在思想系譜上的繼承性。由此,不只反省涂氏與「涂派成員」間之關連,同時也回過頭重估涂氏學說對後世記憶研究與相關文化研究等開展之貢獻。  This article clarifies the specificity of Durkheim’s social epistemology, particularly his study of religion. Durkheim held that both “divine nature”and the collective capacity for classification are derived from “the Society.”This approach, as well as his research on “social facts” and “the dualism of human nature,” considerably influenced later sociologists. Specifically, Maurice Halbwachs inherited Durkheim’s ideas to develop his theory on the sociology of memory from a social psychology perspective. By comparing their core concepts, theoretical assumptions, and inferences, this article identifies the theoretical genealogy between Durkheim and Halbwachs. Additionally, it highlights the contributions of some Durkheimian perspectives to the development of cultural studies.  
重读涂尔干:社会认识论与记忆社会学间的系谱学考察
本文旨趣有二,其一乃透过法国思考脉络与法文阅读来对涂尔干进行重新耙梳。关于宗教研究的探讨,笔者认为涂氏对之具有终身连续的「一贯关怀」,而与既有研究中指出的「中途转向」说不同。另外,涂氏系列宗教研究中提出的核心命题如「神圣性之起源」及「群体之分类认识能力」,实乃导源于「社会」这个根源等见解,正是一种「知识社会学」的进路。此种特有的「集体思维」学说建立在「社会事实说」等基本预设上并开展出法式结构主义的思想风格。建立在上述对涂氏社会认识论的考察,本文欲探讨涂尔干与「涂尔干学派」中阿部瓦克思(M. Halbwachs)之间的思想接续。作为「记忆社会学」的开创者,学界惯常指称阿氏乃涂氏门生。但本文却将两人的「师徒关系」重新置疑:阿氏身上是否承袭涂氏思维的「学术DNA」?如果是,又是在那些点上有所关连?此应透过严谨的学术考据加以证成。透过两人学术上核心概念的比对、基本假设的对照以及逻辑推演的相互参照,本文指出其在思想系谱上的继承性。由此,不只反省涂氏与「涂派成员」间之关连,同时也回过头重估涂氏学说对后世记忆研究与相关文化研究等开展之贡献。 This article clarifies the specificity of Durkheim’s social epistemology, particularly his study of religion. Durkheim held that both “divine nature”and the collective capacity for classification are derived from “the Society.”This approach, as well as his research on “social facts” and “the dualism of human nature,” considerably influenced later sociologists. Specifically, Maurice Halbwachs inherited Durkheim’s ideas to develop his theory on the sociology of memory from a social psychology perspective. By comparing their core concepts, theoretical assumptions, and inferences, this article identifies the theoretical genealogy between Durkheim and Halbwachs. Additionally, it highlights the contributions of some Durkheimian perspectives to the development of cultural studies.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信