个人与社会

【作者】 陈华森；

【导师】 马德普；

【作者基本信息】 天津师范大学 ， 政治学理论， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 个人与社会的关系是社会的基本关系,其他关系都是在这一关系基础上的深化、延伸或展开。中西古今思想家、政治家和学者试图消除个人与社会二者之间的张力,遗憾的是,它却是一个过去没有解决、现在正在解决、将来有待解决的历史课题。社会主义和自由主义的产生都是社会和时代的呼唤,都是试图解决个人与社会关系问题的路径选择。自19世纪中期以来,社会主义和自由主义之间一直进行着争论、对立或对话。本文选取两大政治思潮作为考察对象,并选取二者对个人与社会关系的理论和观点作为考察的重点。本文在对该论题进行探讨时,坚持线和面的统一:在线上,考察社会主义和自由主义的发展变化;在面上,对二者有关个人与社会关系的论点进行对比性分析。本文第一章将大略考察社会主义和自由主义理论分歧的起源和发展。20世纪以前,主要是社会主义批评自由主义的理论基础和资本主义社会现实。到了20世纪,由于社会主义成为现实,批评的主要对象由自由主义转变为社会主义。社会主义批评自由主义的主要原因是它所主导下的社会现实中的个人与社会的对立,而自由主义对社会主义的批评则主要集中在其社会现实中的集权主义或全权政府对个人自由的妨碍方面。二者的共存史既是二者的争论史,同时也是二者的互鉴史。本文第二章和第三章主要从二者对个人与社会关系的认识差异和价值选择分歧两方面进行对比分析。第二章着力分析社会主义和自由主义对个人与社会关系的认识差异。其中,马克思和恩格斯与古典自由主义思想家的认识差异主要包括对人的本质的认识差异以及对个人与社会主客体关系的认识差异两个方面;20世纪社会主义和自由主义的认识差异主要体现在二者对人的本质的认识、对社会的认识以及对人的个性的认识等方面。本文第三章主要分析社会主义和自由主义对个人与社会的不同价值选择。在马克思和恩格斯与古典自由主义思想家那里,主要体现在个人与社会价值的辩证统一论和个人价值本位论的分歧上。20世纪社会主义和自由主义的基本价值倾向没变:社会主义坚持社会价值优先,同时重视个人价值的实现;自由主义也仍然固守其古典自由主义的个人价值本位传统。基于以上分析,本文第四章将得出一些启示,并做出一些结论性的判断。本文认为,自由主义对个人与社会的认识是不全面的,它没有展示个人与社会关系的全貌,因此,其个人价值本位观也不能自发导致社会公共利益的实现。但它并非一无是处,其几百年的历史进程正说明其合理性所在。较言之,社会主义对个人与社会关系的解剖更为客观和全面,在其价值观指导下,可以更好地实现人与人之间的和谐与共存。但是,其理论中也有一些易致失误之处。最后,本文把二者对个人与社会关系的认识差异和价值分歧纳入系统论的视角下进行考察,指出系统方法对研究个人与社会关系的价值,并得出自由主义非系统的个人与社会关系观、社会主义系统的个人与社会关系观的结论。基于马克思主义系统论的分析,本文认为,社会系统中的个人与社会是相互联系和制约的关系,一方面,个人是社会发展的力量源泉,另一方面,社会是个人发展的必要条件。处理二者关系的总则是,坚持“社会优先,兼顾个人”的原则,促进二者在对立中统一。更多还原

【Abstract】 The relationship between individual and society is a basic relationship of society, other relationships are all deepening, extension or outspread of it. Thinkers, politicians and scholars ever had had their best to eliminate the tension between individual and society. Unfortunately, it is a historical task which had not been solved in the past, which is being solved at present and will being solved in the future.Socialism and liberalism were both callings of society and era, both path-selections to try to solve the relationship between individual and society. Since middle 19^th century, there have been controversies, oppositions or dialogues between socialism and liberalism. This dissertation chooses the two thoughts to review, and chooses their theories and standpoints on individual and society as the core. In its discussion, there are both string and surface: discussing the development of both and analyzing contrastively their argumentation of the relationship between individual and society.The source and development of theoretical divergence between socialism and liberalism will be clarified sketchily in Chapter One. It can be seen that socialism criticized the theoretic basic of liberalism and the capitalistic reality in most time before 20^th century. In 20^th century, because of the actualization of socialism, the main critical object turned into socialism. The main reason that socialism criticizes liberalism is the antinomy between individual and society existing in social reality under the dominance of liberalism. The main sphere of the criticism of liberalism to socialism was that it had disturbed individual liberty because of its centralization and freehand government in reality. They disputed and used for reference one another in their coexisting history.Chapter Two and Chapter Three mainly analyze contrastively about the cognitive differences and the divergence of value choices in their views on relationship between individual and society. In Chapter Two, it mainly discusses the cognitive differences which socialism and liberalism think of the relationship between individual and society. It comprises of cognitive differences of essence of human and the subject-object relationship of individual and society between Marx and Engels’ and classical liberal thinkers’. Their main cognitive differences exist in their cognition about human essence, society and individuality.The third chapter mainly analyzes their different value choices between individual and society. In Marx and Engels’ and classical liberal thinkers’ opinions, their divergences consist of dialectic value unification and value standard of individual. Their basic value preferences keep the same as before: socialism proposed priority of social value and emphasized individual value at the same time, while liberalism also kept their classic liberal tradition of value standard of individual.Based on above analysis, the fourth chapter gains some apocalypses and conclusive judgements. It holds that liberalistic cognition of relationship between individual and society is not comprehensive because it has not laid out the panorama of the relationship between individual and society, for this reason, its value standard of individual also has not resulted in common interests. However, it is not in the least neither rhyme nor reason, its hundreds of years’ history had showed its rationality. Comparatively, socialism’s dissection to the relationship between individual and society is more objective and comprehensive, under whose leading, individuals could harmoniously coexist better. However, there is somewhere that is prone to lapsus in its theory. Lastly, it discusses their cognitive differences and value divergences about relationship between individual and society in the purview of systematic theory, and points out the significance of systemic method to research relationship between individual and society, and meanwhile, concludes that the view of liberal relationship between individual and society is non-systemic, but socialism’s is systemic.On the basic of Marxist systemic theoretic view, this dissertation holds that individual and society contact and restrict each other in social system. On the one hand, individual is strength and headspring of social development. On the other hand, the development of individual must recur to society. The general principle used to deal with it is society first and giving attention to individual at the same time, with which, they two could unify together in opposition.更多还原