【作者】 郭忠华；

【导师】 孙关宏；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 政治学理论， 2004， 博士

【摘要】 本文旨在对吉登斯的现代性思想进行系统研究。在系统论证吉登斯思想体系中各大要素之间关系的基础上，作者提出，反思和重建现代性是吉登斯学术生涯中始终不渝的研究主题，同时，他对现代性发展的反思又是围绕着解放政治这一核心思想展开的，在系统反思解放政治所带来的各种问题的基础上，他提出了生活政治的理论构想作为对晚期现代性社会的未来展望。对解放政治发展的反思和对生活政治的未来展望代表吉登斯反思和重建现代性思想的核心线索。围绕着这一核心线索，本文对吉登斯现代性思想的研究分如下步骤展开： 首先，导论部分，它在清理国内外吉登斯研究现状的基础上，论证了本文研究吉登斯所要围绕的核心线索，即现代性的研究主题、解放政治的核心思想以及生活政治的未来关怀。分析了现代性、解放政治和生活政治等概念的基本内涵以及它们之间的内在关联，然后再围绕这一核心线索，提出了本文的基本架构以及论述过程中将要涉及到的主要方法。 其次，“群像与融通：晚期现代性图景”则在廓清吉登斯现代性思想主要来源的基础上，分析其现代性理论框架，全面展现他描绘的晚期现代性社会图景。“群像”主要表现在吉登斯对马克思、涂尔干和韦伯等三大思想家现代性思想的全面反思上，而“融通”则主要表现在他对三大思想家现代性思想的融会贯通，对当今现代、后现代思想的批判继承上。作为反思与融通的结果，它表现在吉登斯重建的现代性理论框架上，资本主义、工业主义、监控和军事暴力是这一理论框架的四个基本维度，它们代表了吉登斯描绘的晚期现代性社会的基本图景。 再次，以解放政治为核心，分析了晚期现代性社会形成的原因和方式，体现在论文的第三到五章上。在吉登斯看来，晚期现代性社会的形成归根结底是启蒙运动以来解放政治发展的结果。因此，为了研究解放政治的悖论性发展，这一部分首先以吉登斯的结构化理论为基础，深入分析了解放政治的行动模式。结构化理论的根本目标在于重建社会研究的核心问题，即行动与制约，或者说能动与结构这一范畴之间的关系，认为相对于行动来说，结构同时兼具使动性和制约性，表现为一种媒介与制约关系，而且这种关系还通过行动不断被再生产出来。表现在解放政治的行动分析中，它体现在解放行动与现代性这一意外后果之间的关系上，解放行动导致和再生产出现代性的后果，而现代性又进一步成为解放行动的条件与制约因素。以这一分析模式为基础，接下去分析了启蒙运动以来反映在社会变迁向度上的解放追求所导致的各种悖论性后果。科学是使人类从与自然和传统等的依附中解放出来的根本武器，但现代科学发展所导致的解传统化、人造空间以及风险社会等后果表明，科学带给人类的并不仅仅是确定性，它所产生的人为风险不仅己经深深渗透在人们社会生活的各个方面，而且还深入到自我本体安全的最深处。同时，这一部分还以解放行动的分析模式为基础，分析了解放政治在民族国家层面形成的各种悖论性后果。普遍的公民权利、主权的独立与平等以及民族的解放与自决代表了启蒙运动以来人类在狭义政治层面追求解放的几个基本方面，但民族国家的现状表明，它所展现给人类生存和生活的并不仅仅是解放的一面，民族国家无所不在的监控、令人发休的军事暴力以及民族主义的侵略性日益成为解放的对立面。 最后，在反思解放政治所带来的现代性后果的基础上，分析了吉登斯重建现代性的构想，它表现在生活政治的理论构想以及第三条道路的现实策略等两个方面。生活政治针对晚期现代性的社会现实，提出了“超越匾乏型经济’，、“环境伦理的重建”、“协商民主的政治”以及“非暴力化社会”等理论设想以走出现代性的困境。同时，作为生活政治的理论设想与现实社会的连接点，吉登斯还提出了第三条道路的现实策略，体现在新的混合型经济、社会团结的修复、福利国家的改革以及世界主义的国家等方面。 作为当今世界最重要的社会思想家之一，与当代其他思想家的现代性理论相比较，吉登斯的现代性思想既体现出相似性一面，也存在着差异性一面。归根结底，他对现代性问题进行反思和重建的根本目标在于反思和重新思考人类实现自由和解放的方式。同时，吉登斯的现代性思想对于中国现代化发展也具有较强警示意义，对于思考中国现代性问题具有借鉴意义。这是本文作者对吉登斯思想做出的基本判断和评价，它们的出现意味着本文的结束。更多还原

【Abstract】 This essay represents its writer’s essential interpretation of Giddens’ modernity thoughts. On the basis of systematical discussion of the main elements of Giddens’ thoughts, the author holds that, the endeavor of reflection and reconstruction of modernity is the consistent disquisition theme throughout his academic career. Around the core issue of emancipatory politics, Giddens sets his way to reflect the development of modernity, and on the basis of systematically reflect the problems that emancipatory politics has resulted in, he puts forward the theoretical conformation as the future prospect of the late modernity society. Reflections of the emancipatory politics and prospects of the life politics represent the central clue of Giddens’ reflection and reconstruction modernity thoughts. Around this clue, this essay sets out to study Giddens’ modernity thoughts by the following steps:Firstly, after liquidating the status quo of the studying of Giddens’ thoughts in and out of our country, the preface has demonstrated the central clue that this essay will circumfuse. That is the disquisition theme of modernity, the core idea of emancipatory politics and the future prospect of life politics, illustrates the inherence relationship among these concepts. After doing that, this part also advances the basic analytical framework that this essay will be based on and the main researching methods that this essay will involve.Secondly, "various images and coalescence: prospect of the late modernity society". This part elucidates the main sources of Giddens’ modernity thoughts and the modernity theory that he has reconstructed, comprehensively exhibits the fundamental views that he holds for the late modernity society. "Various images" represented Giddens’ reflection of Marx’s capitalism theory, Durkheim’s industrialism theory and Weber’s rationalization theory, while "coalescence" represents on the basis of his inheritance of the three ideologists modernity thoughts and his absorption of modernism and post-modernism, his reconstruction of the modernity theoretical framework: capitalism, industrialism, surveillance and violence. These four dimensions reveal the vivid picture of the late modernity thatGiddens has depicted.Thirdly, in the light of emancipatory politics, this part illustrates the reasons and models that the late modernity society has come into being, which embodies from chapter three to chapter five. In the final analysis, the formation of the late modernity society is the results of the emancipatory politics, which originated from the Enlightment. So on the bases of the analyses of Giddens’ Structuration Theory, this part construed the models of the emancipatory politics thoroughly. The ultimate goal of the Structuration Theory is to rebuild the relationship of the central category in social theory, that is the relationship between action and constraint, or between agent and structure. It deems that social structure has both enhancement and constraint functions to human’s action. And the relationships between structure and action are media and constraint, which are continuously reproduced out through people’s actions. Embodies on the emancipatory politics, these relationships incarnate on the categories between emancipatory action and modernity. Emancipation stands for action, it results in and reproduces the intended consequences of modernity. But these unintended consequences become the conditions and constraints of the emancipatory actions furthermore. With this analytical model, the following chapters analyze the paradoxes in which the emancipatory actions had resulted in the process of social vicissitude. Scientific technologies are fundamental weapons that enable people to be liberated from the adherence of nature and tradition. But the consequences of de-traditionx created environment and manufactured risks which result from the development of modern scientific technology indicate that what science has brought to human is not just certainty, but also uncertainty which not only has saturated in all as更多还原