现代性、风险社会与个体化的世界想象
|
摘要
现代社会对进步的信奉经由全球风险而与现代性自我去魅的过程相矛盾。作为现代性内部变异的一种新形态,风险社会成为自反性现代化的代名词。社会风险从社会结构转移到个体身上,风险社会的增长与不确定的个体自由成为现代人的双重生活特征,要求个人被迫发展出具有自反性的政治行动。个体化的世界主义通过强调承认社会的差异和他性的价值判断,既崇尚平等又尊重差异的政治方案实现了个体自由与世界社会的内在联结。将人的行动与意义联系起来的个体化宗教信仰,成为主体间道德感生成的缘由。全球风险对日常生活的不断侵蚀,导致个体化时代的认同困境不仅表现为个体愈来愈严重的社会认同危机,而且表现为自我认同的困境。这也成为现代性研究的一个谜。
As a new form of the internal variability of modernity,risk society has become the pronoun of reflexive modernization. The social risk is transferred from the social structure to the individual,the growth of the risk society and the uncertain individual freedom become the dual life characteristics of the modern people,and the individual is forced to develop the self-reflexivity political action. Cosmopolitanism has realized the inherent connection between individual freedom and the world society by emphasizing the social differences and the value judgment of his sex,and the political scheme that advocates both equality and respect for differences. The individualized religious belief that connects human action to meaning is the reason for the generation of intersubjective moral sense. The constant intrusion of global risk to daily life leads to the identity dilemma of the individualized age not only for the more and more serious social identity crisis of the individual,but also as the predicament of self-identity. This has also become a mystery of the study of modernity.
As a new form of the internal variability of modernity,risk society has become the pronoun of reflexive modernization. The social risk is transferred from the social structure to the individual,the growth of the risk society and the uncertain individual freedom become the dual life characteristics of the modern people,and the individual is forced to develop the self-reflexivity political action. Cosmopolitanism has realized the inherent connection between individual freedom and the world society by emphasizing the social differences and the value judgment of his sex,and the political scheme that advocates both equality and respect for differences. The individualized religious belief that connects human action to meaning is the reason for the generation of intersubjective moral sense. The constant intrusion of global risk to daily life leads to the identity dilemma of the individualized age not only for the more and more serious social identity crisis of the individual,but also as the predicament of self-identity. This has also become a mystery of the study of modernity.
引文
(1)孙菲、杨君:《个体化时代的风险自由与社会认同》,《东岳论丛》2015年第11期,第163-167页。
(1)贝克、威尔母斯:《自由与资本主义——与著名社会学家乌尔里希·贝克的对话》,路国林译,浙江人民出版社2004年版,第14-15页。
(2)贝克、吉登斯、拉什:《自反性现代化:现代社会秩序中的政治、传统和美学》,赵文书译,商务印书馆2001年版,第2页。
(1)杨君:《第二现代性下的风险社会与个体化》,《内蒙古社会科学(汉文版)》2013年第1期,第131-136页。
(2)Mills M.,Demand for Flexibility or Generation of Insecurity?The Individualization of Risk,Irregular Work Shifts and Canadian Youth.Journal of Youth Studies,2004,7(2):115-139.
(3)Beck Ulrich,Risk Society,Towards a New Modernity.Trans.by Mark Ritter.London:Sage Publications,1992.
(4)Giddens,A.,Beyond left and right:The future of radical politics.Cambridge:Polity,1994.
(1)Simmel G.,The Philosophy of Money.2nd ed.Transom Bottom ore and David Frisby.London:Routledge.Reprinted,1990.
(2)熊万胜等:《个体化时代的中国式悖论及其出路——来自一个大都市的经验》,《开放时代》2012年第10期。
(3)贝克、威尔母斯:《自由与资本主义——与著名社会学家乌尔里希·贝克的对话》,路国林译,浙江人民出版社2004年版,第46页。
(4)吉登斯:《现代性与自我认同》,赵旭东等译,三联书店1998年版,第214页。
(1)贝克:《什么是世界主义?》,章国锋译,《马克思主义与现实》2008年第2期,第54-57页。
(2)涂尔干:《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠敬东、汲喆译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第422页。
(1)鲍曼:《现代性与大屠杀》,杨渝东、史建华译,译林出版社2002年版,第233-234页。
(2)同(1),第260页。
(3)Paul du Gay,Is Bauman’s Bureau Weber’s Bureau:A Comment?British Journal of Sociology.Vol.50,No.4,1999,PP.575-587.
(4)Beck,Ulrich,A God of One’s Own:Religion’s Capacity for Peace and Potential for Violence.Trans.by Rodney Livingstone.Cambridge:Polity,2010,P.79.
(5)鲍曼:《被围困的社会》,郇建立译,江苏人民出版2005年版,第15页。
(1)鲍曼:《个体化社会》,范祥涛译,上海三联书店2002年版,第183 -184页。
(2)鲍曼:《流动的现代性》,欧阳景根译,上海三联书店2002年版,第56页。
(1)贝克、威尔母斯:《自由与资本主义——与著名社会学家乌尔里希·贝克的对话》,路国林译,浙江人民出版社2004年版,第14-15页。
(2)贝克、吉登斯、拉什:《自反性现代化:现代社会秩序中的政治、传统和美学》,赵文书译,商务印书馆2001年版,第2页。
(1)杨君:《第二现代性下的风险社会与个体化》,《内蒙古社会科学(汉文版)》2013年第1期,第131-136页。
(2)Mills M.,Demand for Flexibility or Generation of Insecurity?The Individualization of Risk,Irregular Work Shifts and Canadian Youth.Journal of Youth Studies,2004,7(2):115-139.
(3)Beck Ulrich,Risk Society,Towards a New Modernity.Trans.by Mark Ritter.London:Sage Publications,1992.
(4)Giddens,A.,Beyond left and right:The future of radical politics.Cambridge:Polity,1994.
(1)Simmel G.,The Philosophy of Money.2nd ed.Transom Bottom ore and David Frisby.London:Routledge.Reprinted,1990.
(2)熊万胜等:《个体化时代的中国式悖论及其出路——来自一个大都市的经验》,《开放时代》2012年第10期。
(3)贝克、威尔母斯:《自由与资本主义——与著名社会学家乌尔里希·贝克的对话》,路国林译,浙江人民出版社2004年版,第46页。
(4)吉登斯:《现代性与自我认同》,赵旭东等译,三联书店1998年版,第214页。
(1)贝克:《什么是世界主义?》,章国锋译,《马克思主义与现实》2008年第2期,第54-57页。
(2)涂尔干:《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠敬东、汲喆译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第422页。
(1)鲍曼:《现代性与大屠杀》,杨渝东、史建华译,译林出版社2002年版,第233-234页。
(2)同(1),第260页。
(3)Paul du Gay,Is Bauman’s Bureau Weber’s Bureau:A Comment?British Journal of Sociology.Vol.50,No.4,1999,PP.575-587.
(4)Beck,Ulrich,A God of One’s Own:Religion’s Capacity for Peace and Potential for Violence.Trans.by Rodney Livingstone.Cambridge:Polity,2010,P.79.
(5)鲍曼:《被围困的社会》,郇建立译,江苏人民出版2005年版,第15页。
(1)鲍曼:《个体化社会》,范祥涛译,上海三联书店2002年版,第183 -184页。
(2)鲍曼:《流动的现代性》,欧阳景根译,上海三联书店2002年版,第56页。