历史，文化与人格
|
摘要
白鲁恂是政治文化研究领域心理文化诠释学派的代表人物,开创了西方学者对当代中国政治文化的心理文化分析。以呈现和解析白鲁恂的心理文化分析路径为目的,本文以历史主义方法从平面与纵深两个角度展开如下问题的讨论：1)白鲁恂为什么对政治文化乃至于中国政治文化产生兴趣,哪些因素影响了白鲁恂政治文化研究方法的取向?2)白鲁恂如何运用心理文化分析法研究中国政治文化?3)从白鲁恂关于中国政治文化的心理文化解释中,怎样理解心理文化分析法的解释力与价值及其固有的困境?
生于中国、长于中国,固然赋予白鲁恂关注中国政治文化的情怀,但是,白鲁恂学术养成时期的时代背景和美国社会科学各学科的突破性进展、以及白鲁恂的师长与同辈是影响白鲁恂学术取向的更重要因素。20上半叶人类社会经历的痛苦与创伤让美国社会科学各领域追问着社会科学最本质的问题：人性与人的行为。文化与心理因素引起了美国人文社会科学界前所未有的重视。心理学、社会学、人类学都出现了强调以文化或心理解释人的行为的学派。行为主义政治学的大师们也呼吁政治学研究吸收与采纳心理学、社会学等邻近学科的最新理论与研究方法,并实践着自己的主张：阿尔蒙德提出了政治文化概念,拉斯韦尔开创了政治心理学研究,莱特从事政治精英的心理研究,他们都作为白鲁恂的师长或同辈引导了白鲁恂的研究取向。与此同时,以埃里克森为代表的新弗洛伊德学派的理论与研究方法则为白鲁恂提供了从心理文化角度诠释政治行为的最重要分析工具。这些理论与方法的更新如同来自各方向的光源汇聚于白鲁恂一身,形成他以心理文化的角度研究政治行为、解释中国政治的独特取向。这是本文第一章的主要内容。
什么是政治文化的心理文化诠释?依据白鲁恂的整个政治文化研究历程、内容与方法来看,白鲁恂的心理文化分析法不仅意味着从心理学、社会学、文化人类学等学科引入分析工具,还意味着研究范畴的定向：分析政治行为的心理与文化根源,尤其是文化传统与人格因素。作为政治文化研究心理文化诠释学派的代表,白鲁恂的政治文化研究显示出一些持久的特征：历史主义视野；层面丰富的比较；以文化、人格与政治行为的关系为研究内容；研究主题集中于权力与权威观；在宏观研究与微观研究的平衡中,往往滑向微观的政治精英研究等。在整体上体现出他是一个具有强烈历史意识、强调问题的启发性意义、受到“新弗洛伊德主义”深刻影响、注意运用各学科理论与研究方法,尤其注重从心理文化根源理解与分析政治行为的学者。
白鲁恂如何运用心理文化法研究中国政治文化,诠释中国人的政治行为?本文第三章到第五章分别从三个维度——民族与政治体系、官僚与大众、政治领袖——进行了解析。
宏观维度——民族国家建设与政治体系发展——的考察,白鲁恂以转型社会政治发展中常出现的文化认同与权威危机作为阻碍中国现代化进程的基本问题。白鲁恂认为,中国没有出现其他转型社会常见的认同危机,但中国人对权威危机的体验却比其他转型社会更为深重。其原因在于中国传统政治与社会秩序结构上的高度封闭性和一元性以及由此衍生出来的政治文化特征,再加上家庭社会化的结果,一并将权威高度理想化,构成中国文明极易形成权威危机的环境。
在官僚与大众的中观维度,白鲁恂运用安全与归属理论和自我认同概念分析中国政治文化在整体上呈现的矛盾性特征：共识与派系的张力；传统精英文化与大众文化、当代毛泽东的理想主义与邓小平的实用主义的二元共存。在他看来,共识的文化紧要性和派系的形成都出自安全感的渴求；而二元文化共存的根源在于人们同时被某些相互排斥的观念所吸引,以至于每一种价值观的选择背后都存在另一个可供替代的价值观。这种矛盾情感在深层心理上同出一源：自我与他者界线的模糊不清。
微观维度的政治领袖研究,白鲁恂糅合拉斯韦尔重视人生史的主张、埃里克森的心理历史研究方法,截取人生史重要片段对毛泽东的人格特质进行心理历史的精神分析,指出毛泽东政治风格的矛盾性实际上出于其人格的一致性,而邓小平那独特的既秉承传统又超越传统的政治风格则来自他对中国精英政治文化传统的继承和个人社会化过程的特殊性。
不可否认,白鲁恂对于中国政治文化研究作出了开创性贡献。然而,对于白鲁恂关于中国政治文化的心理文化诠释,学界褒贬不一。在各种路径的政治文化研究中,心理文化诠释是否具有不可替代的价值?其优劣何在?与问卷调查式的政治文化研究相比,心理文化方法在解释的宽度与深度上更胜一筹,然而也存在主观性较强、信服度不充分等缺陷,白鲁恂在利用心理文化分析法诠释中国政治的过程中的确出现了诸如过分重视想象、证据不充分等问题。然而,在没有任何一种方法可以解决所有问题的困局下,我们惟一的选择不应该是抛弃它,而是在不断批评的同时充分利用其长处。
As being a pioneer and a leading scholar in the field of contemporary Chinese political culture study among western scholars, Lucian Pye is well-known for his psycho-cultural interpretation of Chinese political culture. Why does he develop such a special interest in Chinese political culture? What makes him use some theories and concepts coming from other disciplines such as psychology, sociology and cultural anthropology to study political culture? What does the psycho-cultural interpretation mean? How does he study Chinese political culture in making use of the approach of psycho-cultural interpretation? What does the strength and weakness of the psycho-cultural interpretation have? How should we evaluate Pye's study about Chinese political culture? The aim of this dissertation is to answer these questions.
First, why does he develop such a special interest in Chinese political culture, and why is he opted for the interpretation of politics from a psycho-cultural angle? Pye was born and brought up in China, which gave us a clue that why he has been attracted by China and Chinese politics. The main reasons that made him focus on the field of political culture, however, should be traced back to the background of the era and academic currents in American social science in the first half of 20th century as well as the influences of his tutors and colleagues upon him during the stage of his intellectual development. The trauma experienced by human in the first half of 20th century stimulated and invited social scientists to ask why human's actions could go for the directions that could make disasters. Almost every discipline in American social science has formed a school which intended to emphasize the influences of culture or psyche upon human actions in explaining social phenomenon. Some leading scholars of behavoral movement in political science have also encouraged taking new theories and approaches of adjacent disciplines such as psychology and sociology into political science research. Pushed by such academic currents Pye was greatly influenced by Gabriel Almond, his tutor, the person who first brought forward the concept of political culture; Harold Lasswell and Nathan Neites, both well known as political psychologist; especially Erik Erikson, an exceptional representative of Neo-Freudian, who provided him with some very important psychological analytic tools in his political culture study.
Second, what does the psycho-cultural interpretation mean? According to the characteristics in Pye's political culture study, we understand that what he called the approach of psycho-cultural interpretation not only means borrowing some analytic tools from psychology, sociology and the others, but also refers to the orientation of his study, that is, the psychological or cultural bases of political actions on the part of human being. His psycho-cultural interpretations of Chinese politics are characterized by the following features:explaining political culture from a historical perspective and various comparative perspective, the theme of his study focusing on the formation of the view of power and authority, being concerned with the relationship between culture, personality and political actions, preference for the study of political elites on the balance of microanalysis and macroanalysis. In short, Pye is a scholar who pays much attention to the understanding of psycho-cultural bases of political actions, stressing the heuristic meaning of questions, influenced deeply by Neo Freudian, analyzing politics with historical perspective and useful tools and theories from other disciplines.
Third, how does Pye study Chinese political culture with the approach of psycho-cultural interpretation? According to there dimensions in the Pye's study of political cultures, we will analyze these different aspects respectively.
To begin with, on the dimension of the sense of national identity and collective expectations about legitimacy and the role of power and authority, Pye trys to discover the obstacles that have operated to impede China's modernization from the perspective of the crisis of culture identity and authority crisis which often prevail in transitional societies. In his opinion the Chinese have been spared the crises of culture identity common to most other transitional societies. However, the Chinese experienced more profound crisis of authority than the others. Some of the reasons could be attributed to the fact that the problem in cultural identity have been translated into the problems of authorities, to the fact that the sense of frustration and incompetent the Chinese felt in their course of modernization both had been exaggerated. On the other hand, the factors helping to produce the circumstances in which the crises of authority readily happen should be found in some particular and enduring characteristics of Chinese traditional social system and political system, of Chinese political culture, as well as the results of family socialization.
On the dimension of group, that is, the elite and the mass, Pye takes the theory of the needs of personality and the concept of self-identity into analyzing the reasons of the ambivalences in Chinese political culture. According to Pye, Chinese political culture is characterized by contradictory tendencies, including the tension between consensus and factions, both driven by the sense of safety, and the co-existence of an elitist high political culture and a populist heterodox political culture, lots of elements in the two cultures both shared by the elites and the mass. In contemporary China the contradictory of political culture manifests itself in a dualistic co-existence of idealism of Mao Zedong and pragmatism of Deng Xiaoping. Pye points out that the reason for the co-existence of the two cultures lies in a common origin at an even deeper psychological level:the ambiguous line of the relationship of the self to others.
On the dimension of leaders, Pye mixes both the points of view of Lasswell who emphasized the importance of life-histories in research and of Erikson who created the approach of psycho-history into his study of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping and so on. He analyzes Mao's personality traits from the perspective of psychoanalysis by extracting the most important section in Mao's life history, the relationship between Mao's style of leadership and his personality traits. Pye points out that if we find out the coherence in Mao's personality traits the contradictory of Mao's style of leadership will be well-understood, that if we want to understand Deng's unique style of leadership which is both built on the tradition and beyond the tradition we should go back to the particularity of his political socialization and the influences of Chinese traditional elitist political culture upon him.
No one can deny Lucian Pye's contributions to the study of Chinese political culture, however, what he had done both received compliments and critiques. Does the psycho-cultural interpretation have its irreplaceable value among various interpretations of political culture? What the advantages and disadvantages it have? Comparing to the approach of questionnaire survey in political culture study, the psycho-cultural interpretation of political culture is better at the width and depth of explanation than the questionnaire survey. At the same time it also has the weakness of subjectivity and of being less convincible. In the psycho-cultural interpretation of Chinese political culture on the part of Lucian Pye there indeed exists some fallacies. However, on account of the fact that no method is perfect the only choice for us is to improve it by accepting various critiques.
生于中国、长于中国,固然赋予白鲁恂关注中国政治文化的情怀,但是,白鲁恂学术养成时期的时代背景和美国社会科学各学科的突破性进展、以及白鲁恂的师长与同辈是影响白鲁恂学术取向的更重要因素。20上半叶人类社会经历的痛苦与创伤让美国社会科学各领域追问着社会科学最本质的问题：人性与人的行为。文化与心理因素引起了美国人文社会科学界前所未有的重视。心理学、社会学、人类学都出现了强调以文化或心理解释人的行为的学派。行为主义政治学的大师们也呼吁政治学研究吸收与采纳心理学、社会学等邻近学科的最新理论与研究方法,并实践着自己的主张：阿尔蒙德提出了政治文化概念,拉斯韦尔开创了政治心理学研究,莱特从事政治精英的心理研究,他们都作为白鲁恂的师长或同辈引导了白鲁恂的研究取向。与此同时,以埃里克森为代表的新弗洛伊德学派的理论与研究方法则为白鲁恂提供了从心理文化角度诠释政治行为的最重要分析工具。这些理论与方法的更新如同来自各方向的光源汇聚于白鲁恂一身,形成他以心理文化的角度研究政治行为、解释中国政治的独特取向。这是本文第一章的主要内容。
什么是政治文化的心理文化诠释?依据白鲁恂的整个政治文化研究历程、内容与方法来看,白鲁恂的心理文化分析法不仅意味着从心理学、社会学、文化人类学等学科引入分析工具,还意味着研究范畴的定向：分析政治行为的心理与文化根源,尤其是文化传统与人格因素。作为政治文化研究心理文化诠释学派的代表,白鲁恂的政治文化研究显示出一些持久的特征：历史主义视野；层面丰富的比较；以文化、人格与政治行为的关系为研究内容；研究主题集中于权力与权威观；在宏观研究与微观研究的平衡中,往往滑向微观的政治精英研究等。在整体上体现出他是一个具有强烈历史意识、强调问题的启发性意义、受到“新弗洛伊德主义”深刻影响、注意运用各学科理论与研究方法,尤其注重从心理文化根源理解与分析政治行为的学者。
白鲁恂如何运用心理文化法研究中国政治文化,诠释中国人的政治行为?本文第三章到第五章分别从三个维度——民族与政治体系、官僚与大众、政治领袖——进行了解析。
宏观维度——民族国家建设与政治体系发展——的考察,白鲁恂以转型社会政治发展中常出现的文化认同与权威危机作为阻碍中国现代化进程的基本问题。白鲁恂认为,中国没有出现其他转型社会常见的认同危机,但中国人对权威危机的体验却比其他转型社会更为深重。其原因在于中国传统政治与社会秩序结构上的高度封闭性和一元性以及由此衍生出来的政治文化特征,再加上家庭社会化的结果,一并将权威高度理想化,构成中国文明极易形成权威危机的环境。
在官僚与大众的中观维度,白鲁恂运用安全与归属理论和自我认同概念分析中国政治文化在整体上呈现的矛盾性特征：共识与派系的张力；传统精英文化与大众文化、当代毛泽东的理想主义与邓小平的实用主义的二元共存。在他看来,共识的文化紧要性和派系的形成都出自安全感的渴求；而二元文化共存的根源在于人们同时被某些相互排斥的观念所吸引,以至于每一种价值观的选择背后都存在另一个可供替代的价值观。这种矛盾情感在深层心理上同出一源：自我与他者界线的模糊不清。
微观维度的政治领袖研究,白鲁恂糅合拉斯韦尔重视人生史的主张、埃里克森的心理历史研究方法,截取人生史重要片段对毛泽东的人格特质进行心理历史的精神分析,指出毛泽东政治风格的矛盾性实际上出于其人格的一致性,而邓小平那独特的既秉承传统又超越传统的政治风格则来自他对中国精英政治文化传统的继承和个人社会化过程的特殊性。
不可否认,白鲁恂对于中国政治文化研究作出了开创性贡献。然而,对于白鲁恂关于中国政治文化的心理文化诠释,学界褒贬不一。在各种路径的政治文化研究中,心理文化诠释是否具有不可替代的价值?其优劣何在?与问卷调查式的政治文化研究相比,心理文化方法在解释的宽度与深度上更胜一筹,然而也存在主观性较强、信服度不充分等缺陷,白鲁恂在利用心理文化分析法诠释中国政治的过程中的确出现了诸如过分重视想象、证据不充分等问题。然而,在没有任何一种方法可以解决所有问题的困局下,我们惟一的选择不应该是抛弃它,而是在不断批评的同时充分利用其长处。
As being a pioneer and a leading scholar in the field of contemporary Chinese political culture study among western scholars, Lucian Pye is well-known for his psycho-cultural interpretation of Chinese political culture. Why does he develop such a special interest in Chinese political culture? What makes him use some theories and concepts coming from other disciplines such as psychology, sociology and cultural anthropology to study political culture? What does the psycho-cultural interpretation mean? How does he study Chinese political culture in making use of the approach of psycho-cultural interpretation? What does the strength and weakness of the psycho-cultural interpretation have? How should we evaluate Pye's study about Chinese political culture? The aim of this dissertation is to answer these questions.
First, why does he develop such a special interest in Chinese political culture, and why is he opted for the interpretation of politics from a psycho-cultural angle? Pye was born and brought up in China, which gave us a clue that why he has been attracted by China and Chinese politics. The main reasons that made him focus on the field of political culture, however, should be traced back to the background of the era and academic currents in American social science in the first half of 20th century as well as the influences of his tutors and colleagues upon him during the stage of his intellectual development. The trauma experienced by human in the first half of 20th century stimulated and invited social scientists to ask why human's actions could go for the directions that could make disasters. Almost every discipline in American social science has formed a school which intended to emphasize the influences of culture or psyche upon human actions in explaining social phenomenon. Some leading scholars of behavoral movement in political science have also encouraged taking new theories and approaches of adjacent disciplines such as psychology and sociology into political science research. Pushed by such academic currents Pye was greatly influenced by Gabriel Almond, his tutor, the person who first brought forward the concept of political culture; Harold Lasswell and Nathan Neites, both well known as political psychologist; especially Erik Erikson, an exceptional representative of Neo-Freudian, who provided him with some very important psychological analytic tools in his political culture study.
Second, what does the psycho-cultural interpretation mean? According to the characteristics in Pye's political culture study, we understand that what he called the approach of psycho-cultural interpretation not only means borrowing some analytic tools from psychology, sociology and the others, but also refers to the orientation of his study, that is, the psychological or cultural bases of political actions on the part of human being. His psycho-cultural interpretations of Chinese politics are characterized by the following features:explaining political culture from a historical perspective and various comparative perspective, the theme of his study focusing on the formation of the view of power and authority, being concerned with the relationship between culture, personality and political actions, preference for the study of political elites on the balance of microanalysis and macroanalysis. In short, Pye is a scholar who pays much attention to the understanding of psycho-cultural bases of political actions, stressing the heuristic meaning of questions, influenced deeply by Neo Freudian, analyzing politics with historical perspective and useful tools and theories from other disciplines.
Third, how does Pye study Chinese political culture with the approach of psycho-cultural interpretation? According to there dimensions in the Pye's study of political cultures, we will analyze these different aspects respectively.
To begin with, on the dimension of the sense of national identity and collective expectations about legitimacy and the role of power and authority, Pye trys to discover the obstacles that have operated to impede China's modernization from the perspective of the crisis of culture identity and authority crisis which often prevail in transitional societies. In his opinion the Chinese have been spared the crises of culture identity common to most other transitional societies. However, the Chinese experienced more profound crisis of authority than the others. Some of the reasons could be attributed to the fact that the problem in cultural identity have been translated into the problems of authorities, to the fact that the sense of frustration and incompetent the Chinese felt in their course of modernization both had been exaggerated. On the other hand, the factors helping to produce the circumstances in which the crises of authority readily happen should be found in some particular and enduring characteristics of Chinese traditional social system and political system, of Chinese political culture, as well as the results of family socialization.
On the dimension of group, that is, the elite and the mass, Pye takes the theory of the needs of personality and the concept of self-identity into analyzing the reasons of the ambivalences in Chinese political culture. According to Pye, Chinese political culture is characterized by contradictory tendencies, including the tension between consensus and factions, both driven by the sense of safety, and the co-existence of an elitist high political culture and a populist heterodox political culture, lots of elements in the two cultures both shared by the elites and the mass. In contemporary China the contradictory of political culture manifests itself in a dualistic co-existence of idealism of Mao Zedong and pragmatism of Deng Xiaoping. Pye points out that the reason for the co-existence of the two cultures lies in a common origin at an even deeper psychological level:the ambiguous line of the relationship of the self to others.
On the dimension of leaders, Pye mixes both the points of view of Lasswell who emphasized the importance of life-histories in research and of Erikson who created the approach of psycho-history into his study of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping and so on. He analyzes Mao's personality traits from the perspective of psychoanalysis by extracting the most important section in Mao's life history, the relationship between Mao's style of leadership and his personality traits. Pye points out that if we find out the coherence in Mao's personality traits the contradictory of Mao's style of leadership will be well-understood, that if we want to understand Deng's unique style of leadership which is both built on the tradition and beyond the tradition we should go back to the particularity of his political socialization and the influences of Chinese traditional elitist political culture upon him.
No one can deny Lucian Pye's contributions to the study of Chinese political culture, however, what he had done both received compliments and critiques. Does the psycho-cultural interpretation have its irreplaceable value among various interpretations of political culture? What the advantages and disadvantages it have? Comparing to the approach of questionnaire survey in political culture study, the psycho-cultural interpretation of political culture is better at the width and depth of explanation than the questionnaire survey. At the same time it also has the weakness of subjectivity and of being less convincible. In the psycho-cultural interpretation of Chinese political culture on the part of Lucian Pye there indeed exists some fallacies. However, on account of the fact that no method is perfect the only choice for us is to improve it by accepting various critiques.
引文
① Lucian W.Pye在海峡两岸的中文译名有多种：路辛·派伊、卢西恩·派伊、裴鲁恂、鲁恂·W·派伊等等,不一而足。萧延中曾以电子邮件询问Lucian W.Pye,获知“白鲁恂”是Pye本人给自己起的中文名。因此,本文采用“白鲁恂”一名。
②这篇博士论文后来以"Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China"为名于1971年在纽约出版。
③有些图书馆的搜索结果似乎显示白鲁恂专著很多,比如MIT图书馆的搜索结果为65条,但实际上并不全是白鲁恂的专著,有很多是他发表在MIT国际研究中心出版的系列丛书上的文章。World Cat虚拟图书馆的搜索结果更是多达316条,需要仔细区分。
①这6本分别是《中国政治的变与常》(1988)、《中国人的政治心理》(1988)、《中共的商业谈判作风：一个文化心理的剖析》(1991)、《中国人的政治文化》(1992)、《东南亚政治制度》(1992)、《政治发展面面观》(2009)。前四本的译者出自台湾,后两本出自大陆。其中,《中国人的政治文化》和《中国人的政治心理》都译自"The Spirit of Chinese Politics",只是不同的译者对书名采用了不同的译法。
② http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/obit-pye-0908.html
③ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):882.
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambrige,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:7
⑤ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):891.
①这批学者包括孔杰荣(Jerome Cohen)、费正清、帕金斯(Dwight Perkins)、赖肖尔(Edwin Reischauer)、史华慈(Benjamin Schwartz)、汤姆森(James Thomson)、傅高义(Ezra Vogel)、鲍大可(A. Doak Barnett))等人。他们在哈佛大学肯尼迪政治学院主持下就美国与东亚关系进行了一年的不公开讨论之后,提出这份报告。可惜这份对美中关系发生过实质性影响的报告由于少有人提及,无论美国和中国都鲜为人知。
②转引自资中均,姬虹.美国学术界对中美关系的研究,1969-1992.美国研究.1995(1):56
③“中国研究大学服务中心”1963年组建时并不隶属于香港中文大学,是一个由“美国教育与世界事务”基金会和卡耐基基金会联合资助的独立研究机构,位于香港“亚皆老街”(Argyle Street)155号。1988年,因财政困难由香港中文大学吸收,遂搬离“亚皆老街”迁至香港中文大学。
①TANG TSOU.Review:Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21(4):653
① DAVID SHAMBAUGH.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre：China's Political Cultures by Lucian W pye.The China Quarterly.1990(122):310
①根据笔者在中国期刊全文数据库的检索,自1987年至2009年,《政治学研究》、《中国社会科学》、《北京大学学报》共刊发以“政治文化”为标题的文章17篇,其中关于当代中国政治文化研究的文章5篇,《政治学研究》3篇,1篇《论发展中国特色社会主义政治文化》,1篇《论建构社会主义和谐社会进程中的政治文化建设》,1篇讨论“商品经济与政治文化概念”；《中国社会科学》1篇,讨论“政治文化与中国当代文艺学”；《北京大学学报》1篇,讨论“政治发展进程中的中国政治文化构建”。从内容上看,关于当代中国政治文化研究的文章过于倾向一般化的讨论,不如传统中国政治文化研究有深度。笔者检索的范围虽然有限,但与美国加州大学芭芭拉分校政治学教授刘平邻关于大陆学者对中国政治文化研究方法的调查报告相比较,结论却是相似的。参见刘平邻.中国政治文化研究的各种方法：百花齐放,百家争鸣.何思因主编.中国大陆研究方法与成果.台北：国立政治大学国际关系研究中心,2003:1-31
②依据刘平邻给出的关于1994-2001年大陆学者中国政治文化研究的文章的统计数据,在90篇属于当代中国政治文化研究的文章中,一般性的研究占56%,大众研究占38%,对有权势的人和团体的研究占5.5%(其中“2篇讨论中共和毛泽东对文艺家的态度,1篇论中共党史,1篇论人民代表大会的监督作用”)。刘平邻.中国政治文化研究的各种方法：百花齐放,百家争鸣.何思因主编.中国大陆研究方法与成果.台北：国立政治大学国际关系研究中心,2003:5,16
③参见闵琦.中国政治文化：民主政治难产的社会心理因素.云南人民出版社,1989.张明澍.中国“政治人”——中国公民政治素质调查报告.中国社会科学出版社,1994.
④参见张分田《亦主亦奴：中国古代官僚的社会人格》(2000)；葛荃《立命与忠诚：士人政治精神的典型分析》(2000)、《权力宰割理性：士人、传统政治文化与中国社会》(2003)、《屈原的政治人格与心态析论》(1997)、《张之洞政治人格刍议：基于政治文化的视角》(2010)等著作与文章。
① HARRY HARDINGThe Study of Chinese politics:Toward a Third Generation of Scholarship. World Politics.1984,36(2):284-307
② PETER MOODY.Trends in the Study of Chinese Political Culture,The China Quarterly.1994(139):733
③ http://www.nytimes.eom/2008/09/12/us/12pye.html
④ LLOYDI RUDOLPH.Review.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultral Dimensions of Authoritarity by Lucian W Pye. http://www.nytimes.eom/1986/02/09/books/the-east-psychoanalyzed.html
⑤ JEROME CH'EN.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye. Pacific Affairs,1977,50(1): 120
① PETER MOODY.Review:The Cadre and Mandarine by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies,1989,48 (4):840
②LOWELL DITTMET. Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.Reviewed book(s) Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye. The China Quarterly.1976(68):822-828. JEROME CH'EN.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader.by Lucian W Pye. Pacific Affairs.1977,50(1):119-120
③HILARY CONROY.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1986(488):197
④萧公权.求学和出路.刘梦溪主编.中国现代学术经典·萧公权卷.石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999:947
①例如台湾学者马起华《政治学原理》(1988),石之瑜《政治心理学》(2003),大陆学者高洪涛《政治文化论》(1990),孙正甲《政治文化》(1992),王卓君《文化视野中的政治系统》(1997),张小劲、景跃进《比较政治学导论》(2001),潘一禾《观念与体制——政治文化的比较研究》(2003),马庆钰《告别西西弗斯——中国政治文化的分析与展望》(2003),萧延中《巨人的诞生——“毛泽东现象”的意识起源》(2005),葛荃《中国政治文化教程》(2006),王泽壮,李祖红《革命领袖何以形成——西方学者的三种方法论视角》(2007),尚庆飞《略论国外毛泽东研究领域的“心理历史学派”》(2008),单伟《美国学界对中国政治精英的研究》(2008)等。
②唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂台北：允晨文化实业股份有限公司,1982:18
③唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化实业股份有限公司,1982:36
①此外,石之瑜还指导其学生将白鲁恂对中国政治文化的研究成果运用于实证分析,比如周翊婷的硕士论文《白鲁恂对中国政治文化的心理分析——以中兴票券案为例》(2001),自己也运用精神分析理论研究政治精英的政治心理和政治行为,著有《政治文化与政治人格》(2003),体现了白鲁恂的政治文化研究方法在台湾的影响。
②笔者推测,艾思明和胡祖庆可能是同一个人。1992年,台湾风云出版社出版胡祖庆译著《中国人的政治文化》,同样是根据"The Spirit of Chinese Politics" 1968年版译出,与艾思明1988年所译《中国人的政治心理》其内容与篇幅完全相同。
③王乐理.政治文化导论.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2000:71
④就在本文撰写的过程中,张英魁的这篇博士论文于2009年10月更名为《中国传统文化及其现代价值：以白鲁恂的研究为考察中心》由中央编译出版社出版,这是中国大陆第一部研究白鲁恂的专著。
①张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:摘要页
②张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:133
③参见萧延中,曾子墨.探索毛泽东晚年的生命焦虑.史林.2007(4):1-12.萧延中.试论关于晚年毛泽东的整体解读.毛泽东邓小平理论研究.2003(6):118-125.萧延中.毛泽东的个性密码.报刊荟萃.2007(2):10-12.
④萧延中.巨人的诞生.南昌：江西人民出版社,2005:324
⑤刘宪阁.走进毛泽东的心理世界：一次重要尝试.湖南科技大学学报社科版.2004(5):5-13.尚庆飞.略论国外毛泽东研究领域的“心理历史学派”.学术界.2008(3):291-296
①参见王景伦.毛泽东的理想主义和邓小平的现实主义.北京：时事出版社,1996
② PETER MOODY.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre. China's Political Cultures by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1989,148(4):840.
① DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye,Political Science and Politics. 1988,21(4):882-891
② JEROME CH'EN. Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye. Pacific Affairs.. 1977,50(1):120
③ PETER MOODY.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1989,48(4):840
④ J BRUCE JACOBS.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W.Pye.Pacific Affairs.1990,63(1):94
⑤ HARSH SETHI. Culture as Politics or Politics as Culture.Economic and Political Weekly.1987,22 (12):497
⑥ ARDATH W BURKS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W. Pye. The Journal of Asian Studies.1988.47(4):843
⑦ BRUCE J DICKSON. What Explains Chinese Political Behavior? The Debate over Structure and Culture.Comparative Politics..1992,25(1):111
⑧ LOWELL DITTMER. Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.The China Quarterly.1976(68):826
①萨义德.东方学.王宇根,译.北京：三联书店,1999:21
②余英时.重寻胡适历程.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2004:196
③萧公权.中国政治思想史.刘梦溪主编.中国现代学术经典·萧公权卷.石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999:759
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:x
① LUCIAN W PYE.Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China. New York:Praeger,1971:vii
②张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:42
① GERHARD LOEWENBERG.The Influence of European Emigre Scholars on Comparative Politics,1925-1965.The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):597-604
①古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006:67
② GERHARD LOEWENBERG.The Influence of European Emigre Scholars on Comparative Politics,1925-1965.The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):597-604
③ TALCOTT PARSONS,BERNARD BARBER.Sociology,1941-46.The American Journal of Sociology.1948,53(4):245
④ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):871
①奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004:186(注释3)
②奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004:143
① JOHN B WATSON.Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It. Psychological Review.1994,101(2):248-253
②车文博.透视西方心理学.北京：北京师范大学出版社,2007:72-75
①弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:28
②弗洛伊德.弗洛伊德自传.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:44
③弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:568
④弗洛伊德.一个幻觉的未来.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:405
⑤弗洛伊德.图腾与禁忌.赵立玮,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2005:78
⑥弗洛伊德.图腾与禁忌.赵立玮,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2005:187
①弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:118
②车文博.透视西方心理学.北京：北京师范大学出版社,2007:121
③弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:537
①弗洛伊德.自我与本我.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:388
②弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:539
③有必要指出,不能把力比多简单地理解为通常意义的“性”。弗洛伊德所说的力比多包括所有在“爱”这个名词下的所有能量。其核心内容虽是以性结合为目的的性爱,但也包括“自爱、对双亲与子女的爱、友爱与对整个人类的爱,同样也包括对具体对象和抽象观念的爱”(弗洛伊德.群体心理学和自我的分析.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:372)。很多时候,弗洛伊德所使用“性”的概念也不等同于生殖器欲望,而是一个含义宽泛的术语,泛指一切使人愉悦的生活。
④弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:539
①弗洛伊德.图腾与禁忌.赵立玮,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2005
②弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:571
③弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:58
④郭本禹.潜意识的意义：精神分析心理学(上).济南：山东教育出版社,2009:171
①弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:68
②弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:156
③弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987:32
④埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:82
⑤爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:303
① "identity"这个词,心理学领域常译为“同一性”,在政治学里,往往译为“认同”。所谓的认同危机,其本源指的就是心理学上的同一性危机。在这里,笔者采用同一性的译法。但在后文关于政治文化的分析中,考虑到习惯用法,多数情况下采用“认同”译法。
②埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:152
③埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:9
①弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987:217
②弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987:2
①米德、本尼迪克特和林顿、卡迪纳虽同属文化与人格研究学派,但他们研究的方向是有区别的。米德始终关心的是个人人格形成中的文化因素问题,她与本尼迪克特等人主要研究文化如何影l响个人；而林顿则从相反方向考察人格对文化产生的作用。
② FRANCIS L K HSU.Margaret Mead and Psychological Anthropology.American Anthropologist,New Series.1980,82(2):349
③博厄斯.人类学与现代生活.刘莎,谭晓勤,张卓宏,译.北京：华夏出版社,1999:4-5
④博厄斯.人类学与现代生活.刘莎,谭晓勤,张卓宏,译.北京：华夏出版社,1999:130-132
⑤米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究.周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:195
⑥米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:2
①本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:32
②林顿.人格的文化背景.于闽梅,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007:20
③本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:9
④林顿.人格的文化背景.于闽梅,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007:30
⑤本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:152
⑥本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:165
①米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:283
②本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:8
③米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究.周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:185
④米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:272
⑤米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:281
①本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990:206-208
②本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990:3
③本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990:210-214
④比较著名的研究成果包括文化人类学家戈尔的《美国人》(1948)、戈尔与里克曼(John Rickman)合著的《大俄罗斯人》(1949)、政治学家社会学家戴维·里斯曼的《孤独的人群：变动中的美国人性格的研究》(1950)等。
①LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):490
②参见贾春增.外国社会学史.第三版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008
①贾春增.外国社会学史.第三版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008:162
②库利.人类本性与社会秩序.包凡一,王湲,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
③乔治·米德指出,自我的特征在于它可成为其自身的对象。即,自我既是主体也是客体；其本质是认知的而非情感的现象；自我是一个过程,是在与他人的交往中产生的。因此,自我的起源与基础,像认知性的思维的起源与基础一样,是社会性的。乔治·米德.心灵、自我与社会.赵月瑟,译.上海：上海译文出版社,2008(米德于1931年去世,《心灵、自我与社会》由他的学生在他去世后根据他的社会心理学课程讲课笔记整理而成,出版于1934年)。
④乔治·米德.心灵、自我与社会.赵月瑟,译.上海:上海译文出版社,2008
⑤周晓虹.现代社会心理学史.北京：中国人民大学出版社,1993:141
⑥托马斯去世于1947年。
① TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):826
② TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):839
③ TALCOTT PARSONS,BERNARD BARBER.Sociology,1941-46.The American Journal of Sociology.1948, 53(4):256-257
④ TALCOTT PARSONS.The Prospects of Sociological Theory.American Sociological Review.1950,15(1):7
① TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):848
② TALCOTT PARSONS.The Prospects of Sociological Theory. American Sociological Review.1950,15(1):10
③ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):871
④帕森斯.社会行动的结构.张明德,夏遇南,彭刚,译.南京：译林出版社,2003
⑤ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):871
⑥帕森斯所构建的一般行为体系由文化、社会、心理与行为的有机体体系四个次级功能系统构成。
⑦ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):848
①古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006:66-67
②白鲁恂攻读博士学位时,师从阿尔蒙德。阿尔蒙德是拉斯韦尔的学生,而拉斯韦尔又是梅里亚姆的学生。
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Who Lost the Chicago School of Political Science?Perspective on Political Science.2004,2(1):91-92
① MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review.1921,15(2):173-185
② MERRIAM CHARLES.Progress in Political Research.The American Political Science Review.1926,20(1):1-13
③ MICHAELT HEANEY,JOHN MARK HANSEN. Building the Chicago School. The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):589-596
① ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
② ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
③ MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review.1921,15(2):180
④ MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review.1921,15(2):180
① GABRIEL A ALMOND.Separate Tables:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Political Science and Politics.1988,21(4):841
② ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
③ ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):767
④叶娟丽.行为主义政治学方法论研究.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2005:96
①古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006:97
② GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:93
①汉娜·鄂兰.极权主义的起源.林骧华,译.台北：时报文化出版企业有限公司,1975:1
②这方面的研究成果包括弗罗姆的《逃离自由》(1941)、阿道诺与其同事合著的《权力主义人格》(1950)、阿伦特的《极权主义的起源》(1951)、弗里德里奇(Carl Fredrich)与英克尔斯(Alex Inkels)的《极权主义》(1954)等。
③“公民教育”就是现在的政治社会化概念。参见GABRIEL A ALMOND.Ventures in Political Science-.Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:110
④ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:110
① DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):883
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:ix
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:xii
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:89
②1934年发表于《美国政治学评论》。
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:2
④ GABRIEL A ALMOND. The Appeals of the Communism.Princeton:Princeton University Press,1954:ⅰⅹ
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:19
② GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems. The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):391
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems. The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
④其他学者有：研究非洲的科尔曼(James Coleman)、研究印度的维勒(Myron Weiner)、研究近东(欧洲周边国家)的罗斯托(Dankwart Rustow)、研究拉美的布兰克斯坦(George Blanksten)等。
⑤《公民文化》研究小组采访了大约5000人——英国人、德国人、意大利人、墨西哥人和美国人,通过五国公民政治文化差异性的比较,讨论政治文化的各种差异对民主的稳定与发展前景的影响。参见阿尔蒙德,维巴.公民文化：五个国家的政治态度与民主制.徐湘林,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
⑥ LISA TREI.Gabriel A. Almond, Preeminent Political Scientist. http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2003/january8/obitalmond-18.html
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:93
②事实上,阿尔蒙德对白鲁恂的影响不仅限于政治文化研究,还体现在政治发展上。作为政治发展研究领域的重要学者之一,白鲁恂的政治发展研究有其独到之处,即,将研究的焦点指向政治文化的态度与实践的复杂性。参见LUCIAN W PYE.Politics, Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅵ.基于此,本文将白鲁恂的政治发展理论作为其政治文化研究的背景来处理,不对白鲁恂的政治发展理论渊源展开充分论述。
③阿尔蒙德,维巴.公民文化：五个国家的政治态度与民主制.徐湘林,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989:545-546
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
② GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:xvi
①参见GABRIEL A ALMOND.The Appeals of the Communism.Princeton:Princeton University Press,1954
② DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):883
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:xii
② GABRIEL A ALMOND.A Discipline Divided:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Newbury Park:Sage Publication,1990:293
③自1930年到50年代初,拉斯韦尔在政治心理学方面的专著主要有《精神病理学与政治》(1930)、《世界政治与个体不安全》(1935)、《政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到》(1936)、《权力与个性》(1948)等。此外,他还在《美国精神病学》、《变态心理学》、《心理分析评论》、《美国政治学评论》等刊物发表多篇有关政治心理学的论文。
④1928年,玛格丽特·米德《萨摩亚人的成年》问世。1934年,本尼迪克特《文化模式》出版。1936年,法兰克福学派心理学家阿多诺出了一本关于权威主义人格研究的著作《家庭与权威的研究》。
⑤转引自奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004:215
①拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:107
②拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:11
③拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:15
④拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:15
⑤拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:107
⑥转引自斯通.政治心理学,胡杰,译.哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1997:40
①转引自斯通.政治心理学,胡杰,译.哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1997:40
② FRED GREENSTEIN.Lasswell's Concept of Democratic Character.The Journal of Politics.1968,30(3):697
③拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:14
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. A Discipline Divided:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Newbury Park:Sage Publication,1990:292
②莱特的主要作品包括：《政治的语言》(The Language of Politics,1949)、《政治局的行动密码》(The Operation Code of the Poliburo,1951),《布尔什维主义研究》(A Study of Bolshevism,1953)、《论法兰西的政治博弈》(On the Game of Politics in France,1959)等。
③ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):883.
④1981年,这本书经略加补充与修改,并更名为《中国政治的动力》(The Dynamics of Chinese Politics)再度出版。
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅱ
① NATHAN LEITES.Psycho-Cultural Hypotheses about Political Acts. World Politics.1948,1(1):102-119
②参见LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge. Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:ⅹⅱ
③埃里克森1933年迁居美国。1939年加入美国国籍时改姓埃里克森。
④埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010:42
⑤埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010:205
①爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:8
②爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:9
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity, New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:52
①爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:11
①转引自FRED I GREENSTEIN.The Impact of Personality on Politics:An Attempt to Clear Away Underbrush.The American Political Science Review.1967,61(3):630
② LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):505
③唐光华在评论白鲁恂对中共政治派系的研究时指出其分析“有许多见人所未见之处”,并认为白鲁恂“如果晚年集中于中国政治的研究,会有很丰硕的贡献”,这个预见是不错的。参见唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化实业股份有限公司,1982:28
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction.The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):247
①诸如《中国政治的精神》(1968)、《文化与政治科学：政治文化概念评价中的问题》(1972)、《亚洲权力与政治》(1985)、《官僚与干部》(1988)、《政治科学与权威主义的危机》(1990)、《重温政治文化》(1991)、《导言：令人困惑的文化概念与清晰的人格现实》(1997)等。其中,以《官僚与干部》的阐述最直接,最具挑战性。
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:20
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):246
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):247
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre.China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor.University of Michigan Press,1988:15
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:13
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre.China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:18
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:16-20
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:20
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:20-21
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:25
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:26
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.1988:25
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):243
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):490
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:21
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:20
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:6
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:6
① LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):205
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:12
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:13
②白鲁恂此处所说的政治文化维度指政治文化分析的领导人维度、集体或者代表维度、民族认同以及对于合法性和权力与权威角色的集体期待维度。这一维度划分是白鲁恂受文化人类学家借用语言学的三个层面——语音、词汇、句法或语法结构——划分文化维度的启发而来。具体说来,指在语音层面分析领导人,词汇层面分析集体或者代表,句法或语法结构层面分析民族同一性以及对于合法性和权力与权威角色的集体期待等。参见LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8-10。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:28
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Culture and Political Science:Problems in the Evaluation of the Concept of Political Culture.Social Science Quarterly.1972,53(2):287
⑥ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W Pye.PS:Political Science and Politics.1988,21 (4):882-891
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:30
②唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982:22-28
③张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:43-46
④即50年代以来兴起的政治发展研究以及60年代末期以来美中关系的破冰等。
⑤笔者无意对白鲁恂研究视野回归中国的时间作太过生硬的界分。事实上,白鲁恂自完成对缅甸的研究以后,就开始关注中国,例如1961年发表的书评至少有三篇以中国为主题(参见附录“白鲁恂学术年表”)。以香港“中国研究大学服务中心”的组建为界,出于两个因素的考虑。其一,这是一个白鲁恂在其中扮演重要角色的标志性事件。其二,白鲁恂关于中国政治文化研究的第一项成果《中国政治文化中敌意与仇恨的动力》发表于1964年,即该中心成立后的次年。
① LUCIAN W PYE.Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1956:vii
② LUCIAN W PYE.Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1956:344
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:43
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅴ
③白鲁恂所说的合作性情感,代表与他人建立联系的能力,对现代民族国家建设至关重要。他解释说,合作性情感不只是简单地指那些在人际关系降低紧张度、寻求和谐的行动和愿望,而是一种能让人们在相互不喜欢并可以表现出相当大的敌意与进攻环境下也能使有效的组织生活得以发展繁荣的高水平的情感。因此,政治发展的真正问题在于：社会化过程在何种程度上为人们提供了合作性情感,从而保证在面对大量 冲突时不至于破坏社会的稳定性。LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:51-52
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building.Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven：Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅴ
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:53
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:288
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:121
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅵ
③唐光华将《政治、人格与民族国家建设》归入个案研究(见唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982:35),而白鲁恂自己在《政治、人格与民族国家建设》行文中,除了在“序言”中申辩这项研究不是传统意义的个案研究时使用过Case Study一词外,其他场合均用Intensive Study 。因此,如果坚持说白鲁恂对缅甸的研究是个案研究,恐怕不会得到他本人同意。
④《中国政治的精神》1992年再版。再版时删除1968年版最后两章“人民公社”和“未来的展望”,代之以“中国政治的动力”和“不安的国家,受挫的社会”。替代进去的两章分别发表于1981年和1990年。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968:viii
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:19
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:19
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics. Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:86
①必须指出,这种归类是相对的,并不意味着宏观研究中排除了中观与微观层面的内容。
② DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):885
③这方面的文章和专著包括《毛泽东的领导风格》(Mao Tsu-tung's Leadership Style),1972；《领导人毛泽东》(Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader),1976;《一个杰出的共产主义者：周恩来》(A Very Exceptional Communist),1977;《导言式侧面像：邓小平与中国的政治文化》(An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture),1993；《再度思考领导人毛泽东》(Rethinking the Man in the Leader),1996:《江泽民的治理风格》(Jiang Zemin's Style of Rule:Go for Stability,Monopolize Power and Settle for Limited Effectiveness),2001.
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:12
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:224
①萧延中.巨人的诞生.南昌：江西人民出版社,2005:324
②白鲁恂拿苏联或俄罗斯作参照的用意在于体现两个共产主义国家或曾经经历过共产主义试验的两个政治体系的不同。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:5
④ LUCIAN W PYE. Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:ix
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press，1985:56
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:59
⑦唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982:38
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:ⅹ
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968:ⅴⅲ
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968:ⅴⅲ
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:5-8
② LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):205
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:13
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:26
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity, New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:52
①爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:9
① LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):219
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:288
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:23
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:23
①白鲁恂对政治学界关于社会化过程哪一阶段更为重要的争论持批评态度。他认为,争论家庭、学校、同辈群体、工作在政治文化的社会化过程中哪一阶段更具重要性,毫无意义。有的学者对研究家庭更有兴趣,而有的人更喜欢关注学校,这是学术研究本该呈现的面貌,否认他人研究兴趣的重要性是不可取的。LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:23
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:45
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Culture and Political Science:Problems in the Evaluation of the Concept of Political Culture.Social Science Quarterly.1972,53(2):290
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8-10
①“政治发展”与“现代化”这两个概念,白鲁恂基本上作为同义语使用。本文为取得与白鲁恂在表述上的一致,也将这两个概念作为同义语互换使用。
②LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:5
③LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:5
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:1
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:2
③白鲁恂在《政治、人格与民族国家建设：寻求认同的缅甸人》第二章中详细列举了转型社会的17项特征：1)政治未与社会、个人关系领域发生明显分化；2)政党往往持一种世界性的观念,自认为代表全部生活方式；3)派系盛行；4)政治效忠的概念令政治领导人具有高度的决策自由；5)反对党和雄心勃勃的精英往往以革命者的行动露面：6)缺乏统一的沟通体系,政治参与少有整合；7)新的力量大量、迅速地承担政治角色；8)代际之间存在尖锐的政治取向分歧；9)在政治行动的合理目标与手段上缺乏共识；10)热烈而广泛的政治讨论与政治决策没有关联；11)高度的角色转换性；12)具有特定功能的、明确组织起来的利益集团很少；13)国家领导人必需面向未分化的公众；14)领导人在国际问题上的立场比在国内问题上的立场更鲜明：15)政治情感与表达的重要性胜于解决问题或公共决策；16)魅力型领导盛行；17)政治过程的运行多半未有政治掮客参与其中。LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma' s Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:15-31
④派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009:24
① LUCIAN W PYE.Traumatized Political Cultures:The After Effects of Totalitarianism in China and Russia.Japanese Journal of Political Science.2000,1(1):115
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:ⅴⅲ
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:54
②LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:55
③LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:56
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:36-37
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:49
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:49
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:57
②1966年,白鲁恂所著《政治发展面面观》出版。白鲁恂依据社会科学研究理事会
(SSRC)比较政治分委员会成员提出将政治发展概念动态性地过程化为六个危机的建议,归纳出认同危机、合法性危机、贯彻危机、参与危机、整合危机、分配危机。并指出,这些危机在政治发展的过程中会按不同次序出现,要想成为现代化的民族国家,必需成功地解决所有这些危机。派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009:80-81.
③派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009:226
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:6
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics. Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:6
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:58
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:62
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:63
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:63
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:64
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:64
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:12
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:13
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:15-16
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:16
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:16
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:24-27
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:29
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:30
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:30
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:32
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:67
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics. Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:81
③弱者通过展示自己受到的羞辱,激起群情愤怒,会让施加羞辱的强者感到难堪甚至受到打击,这就意味者弱者获得了打击强者的力量。
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:33
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:88
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:63
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:65
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:85
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:91
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:93
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:97
②关于这一点,白鲁恂在《中国政治的精神》中用墨不多,但在《亚洲权力与政治》以及其他著作与文章中做了更加具体的说明。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:86
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:34
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:97-98
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:86
③需要特别指出的是,白鲁恂不只一次地强调：中国人性格中对权威的态度与西方人的权威主义人格不完全相符。他认为,中国人既是权威主义的,又是反权威主义的。其中原因在于中国人始终保持着对权威的道德判断,以及对弹性的欣赏等。参见LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politics. Cambridge. Mass: Oelgeschlager.Gunn & Hain.Pub.Inc.,1981:187
④白鲁恂认为,尽管社会化的最终目的是成为自律的典范,但自律终究不能完全做到,对外在权威的需要因而也总是存在着。由于个人的自律非常依赖外在权威,如果出现权威的缺如,必定会危及人格自身。LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:97
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:98
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:24
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:182
①准确地说,《中国政治的动力》(The Dynamics of Chinese Politics)是集政治行为与政治文化研究于一体的著作,体现了白鲁恂通过政治文化沟通政治心理与政治行为的关系的努力。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:38
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:38-39
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:38
①1980年,白鲁恂出版The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics:A Model and Some Propositions。次年,在该书基础上略加修改与补充,并更名为The Dynamics of Chinese Politics出版。本文以后者为资料来源。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅰ
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:197
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅱ
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅰ
⑥关于服从与共识观念的形成原因,白鲁恂没有做集中性的分析,而是散见于不同著作中。
①政治派系的概念,白鲁恂做过多次界定。本文主要依据《中国政治的动力》与《中国政治的精神》(1992)第十章“中国政治的动力”归纳而来。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:8
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:207
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:140-142
①西方研究中国派系政治的学者,对于派系的形成原因,大致有五类解释：政策取向不同、意识形态分歧、官僚集团利益驱使、代际差异、地域背景不同。白鲁恂认为,虽然这些因素都对政治派系的形成产生影响,其中有些因素的影响力还相当大,但从根本性动力看,都不是中国政治派系形成的最重要因素。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:127
③在《中国政治的动力》中,白鲁恂没有对这个问题做系统深入地阐述,只是零星地提到。不过,从《中国政治的精神》以及其他著作中可以清晰地看出,白鲁恂的观点非常明确。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:128
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:129-131
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:131
④白鲁恂认为权力是派系形成各因素中最少模糊性最可预知因而也是最首要因素的结论,是在提出派系形成的心理假设之后,同时通过分析与比较形成派系的其他因素(政策取向、意识形态分歧、官僚集团利益驱使、代际差异、地域背景)而得出的。事实上,他并未对权力如何减少政治的不确定性给出清晰地解释。他一方面认为中国人权力观中含有强化政治不确定性的因素,另一方面又坚持中国人赋予权力第一重要性,因为“中国人将个人安全感的寻求与权力直接联系。为克服焦虑与不安全感,所以寻求权力的保护”(LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:137)。至于为什么中国人将个人安全感直接与权力相联系,白鲁恂认为是中国人社会化过程中对攻击性情绪的压制的结果(第三章已有相关叙述,这里不再赘说)。无需讳言,白鲁恂对权力何以能减少政治的不确定性的说明是不够充分的。
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:136
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:257
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:259-260
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:259
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:183
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:183-184
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:239
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:10
①毛的理想主义,在白鲁恂看来,以激昂的意识形态政治和对意志力的信仰为特征；邓的实用主义,以邓小平的务实哲学所主导,意识形态色彩大大弱化,并以政策上的极具弹性和适应性为特征。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:40
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:40-41
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:43
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:43
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:129-135
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:44-70.
③白鲁恂常常以农民文化指代中国的大众文化,并认为大众文化的性质是反叛的,因此,又以反叛文化称呼大众文化。本文一般以大众文化对指精英文化,但为更好地体现上下文意图,有时采用原文用法。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:44
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:50
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:51
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:54-55
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:55-56
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:58
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:58
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre.China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:61
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:63
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:64
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:65
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:65
⑧ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:66
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:67
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:67
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:69
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:74
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:45-46
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:50
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:51
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:56
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:56
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:56
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:59
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:61
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:65
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:66
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:70
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:73
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.1988:70
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:70
① HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University,of Chicago Press,1986:1
① HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986:10
②黄希庭.人格心理学.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002:156-157
③也许值得在这里说一句,(《领导人毛泽东》)与埃里克森1969年所著《甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源》在写作意图上非常相似。埃里克森的问题是：“在甘地自身的成长中,是什么使他后来得以成为圣雄?”,白鲁恂同样问“是什么造就了毛泽东的伟大?”。埃里克森将甘地的私人生活与公共生活交织起来、相互联系的写法显然也在很大程度上为白鲁恂写毛泽东作了参考。参见埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010
④该文次年收入《精神病理学与政治学》第一章。值得指出的是,如果仅从《精神病理学与政治学》的书名推断,以为这是一本将政治人视为神经症或精神病人加以研究的著作,将会在理解上产生严重错误。事实上,这本书只是偶尔地谈到了患有心理障碍的人的政治行为。精神病理学一词更多的是作为一种方法上的主张被运用。
① HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986:6-7
② HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986:8
③爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:7
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:ix
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:x
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:8
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:x
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:6
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:5
① LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):112
①需要说明,白鲁恂后来又指出,毛泽东在这方面并没有取得彻底的成功。“文化大革命”以后,“中国公众对中国的马克思主义产生了严重的愤世嫉俗态度”,毛泽东试图以共产主义意识形态取代儒家文化的努力最终是失败的,但他作为意识形态创造者的影响力依然是世界性的。参见LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):420. LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:viii
②白鲁恂是在运用拉斯韦尔《精神病理学与政治学》中“政治人”的类型划分分析毛泽东。不过,他指出,毛泽东并不符合典型的“鼓动者”形象,因为他既没有将个人的愤怒情绪外化,也没有受极度的焦虑感的折磨。但从其目的看,依然可以将他归入“鼓动者”一类。参见LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York.Basic Books C.,1976:237
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung.The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:237
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York.Basic Books C.,1976:238
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):112
⑥白鲁恂根据与毛泽东有过接触的人留下的文字资料,认为毛泽东在声音、外形、握手(柔弱无骨)、和走路的样子等方面有些女性气质。LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:33-34.他认为,毛泽东的女性气质很可能是他在童年时期认同于母亲的结果。
①毛泽东.体育之研究.北京：人民体育出版社,1979:8-9
②LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:259
③LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:259
④白鲁恂在第六章“父亲”一章中谈到,“毛泽东的反叛热情、强烈相信意志力胜过技术的信念、对无休止的革命斗争的热爱,可能确实可以追源到他与父亲的冲突”。不过,父子间的冲突到底在多大程度上影响了毛泽东的人格发展依然值得讨论。依白鲁恂看来,从中国文化的传统看,毛顺生对儿子提出的要求并不过分,他对待毛泽东的严厉程度也没有超出大部分父亲对待儿子的态度。毛泽东在长沙求学与生活的花费由
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:80
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:306
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:86
④白鲁恂指出,历史上的反叛者有两种类型：一类是曾经受到过度压迫需要毁灭权威者,另一类是因不再享有安全感而抱着深深的不满需要改变世界者。毛泽东属于后者,这是理解他革命精神的关键。LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:307.白鲁恂还指出,毛泽东之所以对反叛者产生吸引力,并非由于他对专制的父亲怀有敌意,因为回应其反叛号召的反叛者,其中很多人都没有与父亲发生冲突,而在于毛泽东唤醒了大量深锁在人们潜意识中由于“被忽略”、“不被当作一个人来尊重”、“不能参与影响自己生活的决定”而产生的怨愤记忆。LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:11
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:87
①白鲁恂在《领导人毛泽东》列举出来被毛泽东抛弃的人包括他的妻子杨开慧与贺子珍、弟弟毛泽民与毛泽覃、妹妹毛泽建和孩子们,也包括他的同事：高岗、饶漱石、彭德怀、罗瑞卿、刘少奇、邓小平、陈伯达、林彪等。他后来在《官僚与干部》与《再度思考毛泽东》中,将周恩来与江青也算了进来。
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:311
③白鲁恂得出这一结论所引用的证据,是1919年10月8日毛泽东为缅怀母亲撰写的《祭母文》的摘录：“吾母高风,首推博爱。远近亲疏,一皆覆载。恺恻慈祥,感动庶汇。爱力所及,原本真诚。不作诳言,不存欺心。整饬成性,一丝不诡。手泽所经,皆有条理。头脑精密,劈理分情。事无遗算,物无遁形。病时揽手,酸心结肠。总兹所述,盛德所辉”(原文如此)。白鲁恂认为,毛泽东在这首诗里使用的抽象化语言“远近亲疏,一皆覆载”,想说的正是作为长子未得到母亲偏爱的不满。“不作诳言,不存欺心”,表达的是被母亲欺骗的感觉。不过,这种想法令毛泽东非常不安,以致于接下来的几句马上从情感领域回到母亲的能干上来。“病时揽手,酸心结肠”,似乎也是在潜意识里说他又得到了母亲的全部关爱和他想惩罚那些抛弃他的人的心理。参见LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:84-85
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:249
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:9-10
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:14-15
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:252
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:251
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:252
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:15
④在弗洛伊德的人格发展阶段理论中,3-8岁是为“性器期”(Phallic Stage)。这一时期,儿童会产生亲子依恋(男孩恋母,女孩恋父),亦称“俄狄浦斯情结”(the Oedipus complex),所以又叫“俄狄浦斯时期”。前俄狄浦斯时期即指3岁之前。
①莱特专门从事苏联政治精英研究,1951年,他以对列宁和斯大林的研究为基础,依据布尔什维克的文献与政治行为,对苏联共产党的政治战略作了一番总结,出版《政治局的行动密码》(The Operational Code of the Politburo),意在“发现布尔什维克为了政治行为的有效而必须采用的行动规则”(NATHAN LEITES.The Operational Code of the Politburo.New York:Rand Corporation,1951:xi)。将《领导人毛泽东》第三章“毛泽东的公众印象”(Impressions of the Public Man)与此书两相对照,可以清晰地看出,白鲁恂用以观察、分析毛泽东的政治风格的理论视角明显来自莱特的启发,比如是否注意保持政策的前后一致、对政治斗争所持的态度等。白鲁恂在前言中也明确表示,他从莱特那里受益良多。
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:43
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:50
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:55
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:60
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:62
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:62
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:66
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:66
① LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):108-109
②依据精神病理学的临床研究,自恋型人格与边缘型人格可以不同时发生在一个人身上,也可以共病(精神分析学术语,指同一人具有几种类型的人格障碍)。不过,边缘型人格往往与严重的自恋有密切关系。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):108
① OTTO F.KERNBERG.Narcissistic Personality Disorder.//JOHN F. CLARKIN,PETER FONAGY,GLEN O. GABBARD.Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders:A Clinical Handbook. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub.,2010:260-261
②参见李江雪.边缘型人格障碍的心理分析研究.广州：华南师范大学教育科学学院,2006:26
③白鲁恂认为,由于母亲的抛弃,毛泽东的本我或潜意识中潜伏着对母亲的不满、对兄弟的憎恶,以及害怕被女性抛弃的不安,但是,出于超我的压力,所有这些情感都被他以对母亲的赞美、对兄弟之“义”和忠诚的歌颂、为妇女争平等的“理想化”防御机制掩盖了。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:159-160
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):440
① LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):415-416
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):415
③ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):417
④ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):416
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):416
① LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):428-429
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):432
③ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):432
④“心理合法暂缓期”是埃里克森论述青春期人格发展的一个概念,特指年轻人在获得自我认同之前的一段时间,意味着“允许还没有准备好承担义务的人有一段拖延的时间”。参见埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:144
① LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):425
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):429
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:12
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:27
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:12
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:x
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:313
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:5
③江炳伦.亚洲政治文化个案研究.台北：五南图书出版公司,1986:4
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:72-73
①石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:7
②以问卷调查式研究方法研究中国政治文化的学者有黎安友(Andrew Nathan)、史天健(Shi Tianjian)、英格尔哈特(Ronald Ingerhart)等,文化解释学派的代表人物包括芮沃寿(Arthur F.Wright)、史华慈(Benjamin I. Schwartz)、列文森(Joseph R.Levenson)等,心理文化学派则包括白鲁恂(Lucian W.Pye)、所罗门(Richard Solomon)、刘(Alan P.L.Liu)、利夫顿(Robert Lifton)、孙隆基等。
③关于问卷调查式研究在信度与效度方面的问题,石之瑜曾有总结：“1)回答问题的情境与生活实境脱节；2)访员的训练从来没有达到专业水平,访谈资料错误极多；3)抽样的困难造成有效样本不足,或无法达到随机的要求：4)调查设计假设受访者表达的是自己的意见,这是个人主义社会的合理假设,但在人情导向的社会里,人们是以尊贤之意见为意见,则社会调查出来的结果,就不能用个人化的逻辑推论来诠释”。 石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999:31
①此处“表现”、“动力”与“发展”层面这三个概念依据格林斯坦(Fred Greestein)在《个体政治论》第一章“人格与政治”的论述发展而来。格林斯坦指出,对个体心理的分析包括三个层面：1)对显露性特点(presenting characteristics)比如个体较为稳定的可观察特质、对环境的知觉、政治倾向、行为类型的描述；2)动力层面的分析：将个体的内心过程、结构与需要与外在的显露性特点相联系,意在解释人的行为的不连贯性；3)发展层面的分析：探问个体心理与行为特质的根源。参见GREESTEIN,POSLBY.个体政治论.幼狮文化事业公司,编译.台北：幼狮文化事业公司,1983:60-62
①拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?.杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:14
①拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?.杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:3
②石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999:32
① GREESTEIN,POSLBY个体政治论.幼狮文化事业公司,编译.台北：幼狮文化事业公司,1983:62
②也许可以通过一个统计数据侧面说明白鲁恂在政治文化研究领域的影响“因子”,根据JSTOR数据库资料的搜索,由阿尔蒙德和维伯合著、在政治文化研究领域声名卓著的《公民文化》一书,评论文章为9篇,评论白鲁恂《中国政治的精神》的文章为17篇。检索日期：2009年10月26日
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:50
① RICHARD H SOLOMON. Mao's Revolution and the Chinese Political Culture.Berkeley:University of California press,1972:xvii
② RICHARD H SOLOMON. Mao's Revolution and the Chinese Political Culture.Berkeley:University of California press,1972:xiv,8
③ Alan P.L. Liu,美国加州大学圣芭芭拉分校政治学教授,主要著作：Communications and National Integration in Communist China (1971), Political Culture and Group Conflict in Communist China (1976), How China is Ruled (1985), Phoenix and the Lame Lion (1987), Mass Politics in People's Republic of China(1996)
④参见LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:xiii-xiv
⑤石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:ⅶ
①石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:145-146
②石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:7
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
②格尔茨.文化的解释.韩莉,译.南京：译林出版社,2008:5
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:71-75
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:280
⑤ LOWELL DITTMER.Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.The China Quarterly.1976(68):828
⑥ LUCCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambrige.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:45
① GORDON BENNETT.Reviewed work(s):Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1977,39(2):529
①比如穆磐石曾说白鲁恂的政治文化研究是“国民性研究的一种变体”(PETER R MOODY.Review:The "Cultures" of Asian Politics.Reviewed work(s):Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W.Pye.The Review of Politics.1987,49(1):157),笔者不同意的理由如下：国民性研究在研究文化与人格的关系时很少将社会环境与历史背景因素考虑在内；国民性研究以某一文化类型中的群体为研究对象。而白鲁恂的政治文化研究对社会环境与历史因素非常重视；研究对象有群体,也有个体。此外,白鲁恂总是将个体的行为动机与所处环境因素考虑在内,克服了国民性研究的静态性。同时还需要说明的是,笔者并不认为国民性研究没有价值,其理论与研究方向上的开创性意义是非常值得重视的,然而也不能不看到其理论预设与研究方法的缺陷。国民性研究的推进,先要克服其早期研究的缺陷。
②杨中芳.如何理解中国人,重庆：重庆大学出版社,2009:74
③ TANG TSOU.Review:Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21 (4):683
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:49
① TANG TSOU.Review:Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21(4):673
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:129
③ ANDREW J NATHAN.Is Chinese Culture Distinctive? The Journal of Asian Studies.1993,52(4):933
①伊萨克斯.美国的中国形象.于殿利,陆日宇,译.北京：时事出版社.1999:272
②转引自伊萨克斯.美国的中国形象.于殿利,陆日宇,译.北京：时事出版社.1999:272
③笔者将“父母主义情感”改为“父母主义情结”是因为“情结”一词内含着矛盾的心理,能够表现白鲁恂对中国文化既赞许又批判的矛盾情感。
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:57
①萧延中.在明澈“冰山”之下的幽暗底层/／埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010
②马起华.政治心理学.台北：台湾商务印书馆股份有限公司,1981:1
③ FRED WEINSTEIN.Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995,34(4):308
④沃拉斯.政治中的人性.朱曾汶,译.北京：商务印书馆,1995:7
⑤石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999:10
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):206
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Prcss,1962:45
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:130
②指过度追求精确、量化和可验证的实证研究。参见FRED WEINSTEIN. Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995,34(4):299-319
③马斯洛.动机与人格.许金声,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007:241
① FRED WEINSTEIN. Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995(34.4):317-318
1. LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development Cambrige.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992
2. LUCIAN W PYE.Chinese Negotiating Style:Commercial Approaches and Cultural Principles.New York:Quorum Books,1992
3. LUCIAN W PYE.China:An Introduction.4th ed.New York:1991
4. LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988
5. LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985
6. LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politics. Cambridge. Mass: Oelgeschlager.Gunn & Hain.Pub.Inc.,1981
7. LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics:A Model and Some Propositions.Santa Monica.Calif:Rand C.,1980
8. LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976
9. LUCIAN W PYE.Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China. New York:Praeger,1971
10. LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968
11. LUCIAN W P YE. Aspects of Political Development.Boston:Little Brown,c1966
12. LUCIAN W PYE,SIDNEY VERBA.Political Culture and Political Development.Princeton.N.J.:Princeton University Press,1965
13. LUCIAN W PYE.Communications and Political Development. Princeton.N.J.:Princeton University Press,1963
14. LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962
15. LUCIAN W PYE.Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1956
1.白鲁恂.中共的商业谈判作风：一个文化心理的剖析.钟祖康,译.台北：风云时代出版公司,1991
2. LUCIAN W PYE.中国政治的变与常.胡祖庆,译.台北：五南图书出版公司,1988
3.裴鲁恂.中国人的政治文化.胡祖庆,译.台北：风云论坛出版社.1992
4.裴鲁恂.中国人的政治心理.艾思明,译.台北：洞察出版社,1988
5.派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009
1. LUCIAN W PYE.Asia Studies and the Discipline.PS:Political Science and Politics.2001,34(4):805-807
2. LUCIAN W PYE.Jiang Zemin's Style of Rule:Go for Stability,Monopolize Power and Settle for Limited Effectiveness.The China Journal.2001(45):45-51
3. LUCIAN W PYE.Review:The Thin Line between Loyalty and Treachery in Mao's China.The China Journal.2000 (44):145-152
4. LUCIAN W PYE.Traumatized Political Cultures:The After Effects of Totalitarianism in China and Russia.Japanese Journal of Political Science.2000,1(1):113-128
5. LUCIAN W PYE.An Overview of 50 Years of the People's Republic of China:Some Progress,but Big Problems Remain. The China Quarterly. 1999(159):569-579
6. LUCIAN W PYE.Civility,Social Capital,and Civil Society:Three Powerful Concepts for Explaining Asia.Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 1999,29(4):763-782
7. LUCIAN W PYE.The United States and Asia in 1997:Nothing Dramatic,Just Incremental Progress.Asian Survey.1998,38(1):99-106
8. LUCIAN W PYE.Can Culture Save International Relations Theory in the Post-Cold War World? International Studies Review.1998,42(1):154-156
9. LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):241-254
10. LUCIAN W PYE.Money Politics and Transitions to Democracy in East Asia.Asian Survey.1997,37(3):213-228
11. LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):107-112
12. LUCIAN W PYE.Chinese Politics in the Late Deng Era.The China Quarterly.1995(142):573-583
13. LUCIAN W PYE.Factions and the Politics of Guanxi:Paradoxes in Chinese Administrative and Political Behaviour.The China Journal.1995(34):35-53
14. LUCIAN W PYE.How China's Nationalism was Shanghaied.The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs.1993(29):107-133
15. LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):412-443
16. WEI LI,LUCIAN W PYE.The Ubiquitous Role of the Mishu in Chinese Politics.The China Quarterly.1992(132):913-936
17. LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):487-508
18. LUCIAN W PYE.The State and the Individual:An Overview Interpretation.The China Quarterly.1991(127):443-466
19. LUCIAN W PYE.Tiananmen and Chinese Political Culture:The Escalation of Confrontation from Moralizing to Revenge.Asian Survey.1990,30(4):331-347
20. LUCIAN W PYE.Political Science and the Crisis of Authoritarianism.The American Political Science Review.1990,84(1):3-19
21. LUCIAN W PYE.Review:Enemies of the People:The Ordeal of Intellectuals in China's Great Cultural Revolution by Thurston.Journal of Asian Studies,1988,47(1):130-131
22. LUCIAN W PYE.Reassessing the Cultural Revolution.The China Quarterly.1986(108):597-612
23. LUCIAN W PYE.On Chinese Pragmatism in the 1980s.The China Quarterly. 1986(106):207-234
24. LUCIAN W PYE,NATHAN LEITES.Nuances in Chinese Political Culture Nuances in Chinese Political Culture.Asian Survey.1982,22(12):1147-1165
25. LUCIAN W PYE.Dilemmas for America in China's Modernization. International Security.1979(4.1):3-19
26. LUCIAN W PYE.The Puzzles of Chinese Pragmatism.Foreign Policy.1978(31):119-136
27. LUCIAN W PYE.Communications and Chinese Political Culture.Asian Survey.1978,18(3):221-246
28. LUCIAN W PYE.Aesopian Language in Chinese Politics.Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.1978,122(5):336-339
29. LUCIAN W PYE.A Very Exceptional Communist.Virginia Quarterly Review.1977,53(2):219-228
30. LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung's Leadership Style.Political Science Quarterly.1976,91 (2):219-235
31. LUCIAN W PYE.China after Chou En-Lai.Current History.1976,71(419):53-56
32. LUCIAN W PYE.Culture and Political Science:Problems in the Evaluation of the Concept of Political Culture.Social Science Quarterly.1972,53(2):285-296
33. LUCIAN W PYE.China in Context.Foreign Affairs.1967,45(2):229-245
34. LUCIAN W PYE.The Concept of Political Development.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1965(358):1-13LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):205-221
35. LUCIAN W PYE.Review:Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism by Lifton.Journal of Asian Studies.1961,20(4):522-523
36. LUCIAN W PYE.Administrators,Agitators,and Brokers.The Public Opinion Quarterly.1958,22(3):342-348
37. LUCIAN W PYE.The Non-Western Political Process.The Journal of Politics.1958,20(3):468-486
38. GEORGE MCT KAHIN,GUY J PAUKER,LUCIAN W PYE.Comparative Politics of Non-Western Countries.The American Political Science Review. 1955(49.4):1022-1041
1. ALAN P L LIU.Reviewed work(s):Struggle for Democracy:Sung Chiao-Jen and the 1911 Chinese Revolution by K S Liew.Warlord Politics6Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1972(403):176-177
2. ALFRED DIOMAND.Is There a Non-Western Political Process? Comments on Lucian W Pye's The Non-Western Political Process.The Journal ofPolitics.1959,21(1):123-127
3. ANDREW J NATHAN.Is Chinese Culture Distinctive? The Journal of Asian Studies.1993,52(4):923-936
4. ARDATH W BURKS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.The Journal of Asian Studies.1988,47(4):842-843.
5. ARISTIDE R ZOLBERG.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sydney Verba The American Political Science Review.1966,60(1):119-121
6. ARTHUR HUCK.Review:China:An Introduction.Pacific Affairs. 1973,46(1):118-119
7. ARTHUR STEINER.Reviewed work(s):The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Communism in China:As Reported From Hankow in 1932 by O Edmund Clubb.The Mandate of Heaven:Record of a Civil War in China 1945-49 by John F Melby.The American Historical Review.1969,75(1):186-187
8. BRUCE J DICKSON.What Explains Chinese Political Behavior? The Debate over Structure and Culture.Comparative Politics.1992,25(1):103-118
9. CHALMERS JOHNSON.Pregnant with "Meaning!" Mao and the Revolutionary Ascetic. Journal of Interdisciplinary History.1977,7(3):499-508
10. DALE BRATTON.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Western Political Quarterly.1977,30(1):140-142
11. DAVID S G GOODMAN.Reviewed work(s):Mao Tse-tung in the Scales of History:A Preliminary Assessment Organized by The China Quarterly by Dick Wilson.Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W·Pye.International Affairs.1978,54(2):354-356
12. DAVID S G GOODMAN.Review:The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics:A Model and Some Propositions by Lucian W Pye.The China Quarterly.1081 (86):349-350
13. DAVID SHAMBAUGH.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W pye.The China Quarterly.1990(122):310-311
14. DAVID WURFEL.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sidney Verba.Midwest Journal of Political Science.1967,11(1):116-118
15. DENNIS M RAY.Reviewed work(s):Chinese Communism in Crisis:Maoism and the Cultural Revolution by Jack Gray,Patrick Cavendish.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The Western Political Quarterly.1968,21(4):741-744
16. DONALD B ROSENTHAL.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sidney Verba. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1966(365):212-213
17. EUGENE VICTOR WOLFENSTEIN.Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The American Political Science Review.1978,72(2): 758-759
18. GORDON BENNETT.Review:Mao-Tse Dung:the Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1977,39(2):527-529
19. FRANCIS L K HSU.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.American Anthropologist.1970,72(1):156-160
20. FRANZ MICHAEL.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1969,28(4):848-850
21. FREDERICK C TEIWES.Review:The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1981,54(2):347-349
22. G D LOESCHER.Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Review of Politics.1977,39(1):125-128
23. GEORGE E TAYLOR.Review:Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning by Lucian W Pye. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1957(311):210-211
24. GORDON BENNETT.Review:The Dynamic of Chinese Politics.The Journal of Politics.1983,45(2):537-538
25. GORDON BENNETT.Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1977,39(2):527-529
26. GUENTHER ROTH.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sidney Verba.Political Science Quarterly.1966,81(4):637-638
27. HAROLD Z SCHIFFRIN.Review:Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Mordenization of Republican China.Pacific Affairs.1973,46(2):317-318
28. HARRY HARDING.The Study of Chinese Politics.Toward a Third Generation of Scholarship. World Politics.1984,36(2):284-307
29. HARSH SETHI.Culture as Politics or Politics as Culture.Economic and Political Weekly.1987,22(12):497-498
30. HILARY CONROY.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1986(488):197-198
31. HLA MYINT.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1962,35(2):187-188
32. HUGH TINKER.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1963,22(3):335-337
33. JAMES COTTON.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.International Affairs.1986,62(2):431-342
34. J H BRIMMELL.Review:Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning by Lucian W Pye.International Affairs.1957,33(4):521-522
35. J BRUCE JACOBS.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1990,63(1):93-94
36. JEROME CH'EN.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1977,50(l):119-120
37. JOE C HUANG.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1969,31(1):255-256
38. JOHN BRYAN STARR.Reviewed work(s):The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Revolutionary Immortality:Mao Tse-tung and the Chinese Cultural by Robert J Lifton.American Sociological Review.1969,34(6):986-987
39. JOHN K MUSGRAVE.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.American Anthropologist.1963,65(2):491-492
40. JOYCE K KALLGREN.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The American Political Science Review.1969,63(3):930-931
41. KUE-WEI LEE.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye. Social Forces.1969,48(l):130
42. LOWELL DITTMER.Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.The China Quarterly.1976(68):822-828
43. MANNING NASH.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.The American Journal of Sociology.1962,68(2):270-271
44. MINOO ADENWALLA.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building: Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.Midwest Journal of Political Science.1963,7(3):277-279
45. MORTON H FRIED.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Political Science Quarterly.1970,85(3):535-538
46. PAUL BIXLER.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation-Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1962(343):167-168
47. PETER R MOODY.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures.The Journal of Asian Studies.1989,48(4):839-840
48. PETER R MOODY.The "Cultures" of Asian Politics.The Review of Politics.1987,49(1):157-159
49. PETER R MOODY.Reviewed work(s):Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye. The Government and Politics of Communist China by Derek J Waller.Ideology and Practice:The Evolution of Chinese Communism by James Chieh Hsiung.The Review of Politics.1973,35(4):576-581
50. R H TAYLOR.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies University of London.1987,50(3):597-598
51. RICHARD BUTWELL.Individual and Collective Identity and Nation-Building World Politics.1963,15(3):488-494
52. RICHARD BUTWELL.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation BuildingrBurma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.American Sociological Review.1964,29(4):601-602
53. RICHARD W WILSON.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development By Lucian W Pye.The American Journal of Sociology.1968,74(3):310-311
54. ROBERT A KAPP.Review:Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye. Modern Asian Studies.1974,8(2):271-273
55. RUSSELL H FIFIELD.Review:Southeast Asia's Political Systems by Lucian W Pye.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1968(377):179
56. STEPHEN R MACKINNON.Review:Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Mordenization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1972,31(4):935-936
57. TANG TSOU.Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21(4):655-691
58. TIMOTHY J LOMPERIS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1987,49(1):332-335
59. TYRENE WHITE.Reviewed work(s):Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian WPye.Children of Mao:Personality Development and Political Activism in the Red Guard Generation by Anita Chan. Political Psychology.1987,8(2):249-254
60. VERA MICHELES DEAN.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1963,25(1):175-176
61. W A C ADIE.Reviewed work(s):The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development, by Lucian W Pye.The Communists and Chinese Peasant Rebellions:A Study in the Rewriting of Chinese History by James P Harrison.Canton under Communism:Programs and Politics in a Provincial Capital(1949-1968).International Affairs.1970,46(4):878-880
62. W HOWARD WRIGGINS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.Political Science Quarterly.1987,102(2):343-344
63. W J F JENNER.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Modern Asian Studies.l971,5(1):87-88
1. ALEX INKELES, DANIEL LEVINSON.National Character:A Psycho-social Perspective. New Brunswick, NJ:Transaction Publishers,1996
2. GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003
3. GABRIEL A ALMOND.A Discipline Divided:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Newbury Park:Sage Publication,1990
4. GABRIEL A ALMOND.The Appeals of the Communism.Princeton:Princeton University Press,1954
5. HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986
6. JON ELESTER.Political Psychology.New York:Cambridge University PRESS,1993
7. JOHN F. CLARKIN,PETER FONAGY,GLEN O. GABBARD.Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders:A Clinical Handbook. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub.,2010
8. MARK IRVING LICHBACH,ALAN S ZUCKERMAN.Comparative Politics:Rationality,Culture,and Structure.New York:Cambridge University Press,1997
9. NATHAN LEITES.The Operational Code of the Politburo.New York:Rand Corporation,1951
10. RICHARD A SHWEDER,ROBERT A LEVINE.Culture Theory:Essays on Mind,Self,and Emotion.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1984
11. RICHARD H SOLOMON.Mao's Revolution and the Chinese Political Culture.Berkeley:University of California press,1972
12. RICHARD J SAMUELS,MYRON WEINER.The Political Culture of Foreign Area and International Studies:Essays in Honor of Lucian W Pye. Washington:Brassey's(US).Inc.,1992
13. RONALD INGLEHART.Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Societies. Prinston:Prinston University Press,1990
14. ANDREW J NATHAN.A Factionalism Model for CCP Politics. The China Quarterly.1973(53):34-66
15. ANDREW J NATHAN, Tianjian Shi. Cultural Requisites for Democracy in China:Findings From a Survey.:95-123
16. AVERY GOLDSTEIN.Trends in the Study of Political Elites and Institution in the PRC.The China Quarterly.1994(139):714-730
17. BRUCE MAZLISH.What Is Pshcho-History? Transanctions of the Royal Historical Society.Fifth Series.1971 (21):79-99
18. CAROLE PATEMAN.Political Culture, Political Structure and Political Change.British Journal of Political Science.1971,1(3):291-305
19. DON D SMITH.Modal Attitude Clusters:A Supplement for the Study of National Character.Social Forces.1966,44(4):526-533
20. DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W Pye.PS: Political Science and Politics.1988,21(4):882-891
21. DWAINE MARVICK.The Work of Harold D Lasswell:His Approach,Concerns,and Influence.Political Behavior.1980,2(3):219-229
22. EZRA F VOGEL.Foreword:The First Forty Years of the Universities Service Centre for China Studies.The China Journal.2005(53):1-7
23. FEDERICO NEIBURG,MARCIO GOLDMAN,PETER GOW.Anthropology and Politics in Studies of National Character.Cultural Anthropology.1998,13(1):56-81
24. FRANCIS L K HSU.Margaret Mead and Psychological Anthropology.American Anthropologist,New Series.1980,82(2):349-353
25. FRED GREENSTEIN. Can Personality and Politics Be Studied Systematically? Political Psychology.1992,13(1):105-128
26. FRED GREENSTEIN.Lasswell's Concept of Democratic Character.The Journal of Politics.1968,30(3):696-709
27. FRED GREENSTEIN.The Impact of Personality on Politics:An Attempt to Clear Away Underbrush.The American Political Science Review.1967,61(3):629-641
28. FRED GREENSTEIN.Personality and Political Socialization:The Theories of Authoritarian and Democratic Character.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1965(361):81-95
29. FRED WEINSTEIN.Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995,34(4):299-319
30. GABRIEL A ALMOND.Who Lost the Chicago School of Political Science? Perspectives on Politics.2004,2(1):91-93
31. GABRIEL A ALMOND.Separate Tables:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Political Science and Politics.1988,21(4):828-842
32. GABRIEL A ALMOND.Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.l956,18(3):391-409
33. GERHARDLOEWENBERG.The Influence of European Emigre Scholars on Comparative Politics,1925-1965.The American Political Science Review,2006,100(4):597-604.
34. HAROLD D LASSWELL.The Normative Impact of the Behavioral Sciences.Ethics.1957,67(3):1-42
35. HAROLD D LASSWELL.The Contribution of Freud's Insight Interview to the Social Sciences.The American Journal of Sociology.1939,45(3):375-390
36. HAROLD D LASSWELL.The Study of the I11 as a Method of Research into Political Personalities.The American Political Science Review.1929,23(4):996-1001
37. HAROLD D LASSWELL.Two Forgotten Studies in Political Psychology.1925,19(4):707-717
38. HARRY ECKSTEIN.A Culturalist Theory of Political Change.The American Political Science Review.1988,82(3):789-804
39. HARRY ECKSTEIN.Political Culture and Political Change.American Political Science Review.1990,84(1):249-259
40. HARRY HARDING.From China,with Disdain:New Trends in the Study of China.Asian Survey.1982,22(10):934-958
41. HOWARD F STEIN.On Professional Allegiance in the Study of Political Psycholgy.Political Psychology.1986,7(2):245-253
42. JAMES N DRUCKMAN,DONARD P GREEN, JAMES H KUKLINSKI,et al. The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science.American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):627-635
43. JOHN B WATSON.Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It. Psychological Review.1994,101 (2):248-253
44. LISA WEDEEN.Conceptualizing Culture:Possibilities for Political Science.The Americal Political Science Review.2002,96(4):713-728
45. LOWELL DITTMER,YU-SHAN WU.The Modernization of Factionalism in Chinese Politics. World Politics.1995,47(4):467-494
46. LOWELL DITTMER.Chinese Informal Politics.The China Quarterly.1995 (34):1-34
47. LOWELL DITTMER.Mao and the Politics of Revolutionary Mortality.Asian Survey.1987,27(3):316-339
48. LOWELL DITTMER.Thought Reform and Cultural Revolutio:An Analysis of the Symbolism of Chinese Polemics.The American Political Science Review.1977,71(1):67-85
49. LOWELL DITTMER.Political Culture and Political Symbolism:Toward a Theoretical Synthesis. World Politics.1977,29(4):552-583
50. LUNG-KEE SUN.Contemporary Chinese Culture:Structure and Emotionality.The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs.1991(26):1-41
51. MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics.The American Political Review.1921,15(2):173-185
52. MERRIAM CHARLES.Progress in Political Research.The American Political Science Review.1926,20(1):1-13
53. MICHAELT HEANEY,JOHN MARK HANSEN. Building the Chicago School. The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):589-596
54. MYRES S MCDOUGAL,W MICHAEL REISMAN.Harold Dwight Lasswell(1902-1978).The American Journal of International Law.1979,73(4):655-660
55. NATHAN LEITES.The "Operational Code":A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision-making. International Studies Quarterly.1969,13(2):190-222
56. NATHAN LEITES.Stalin as an Intellectual.World Politics.1953,6(1):45-66
57. NATHAN LEITES.Psycho-Cultural Hypotheses about Political Acts. World Politics.1948,1(1):102-119
58. PETER MOODY.Political Culture and the Study of Chinese Politics.Journal of Chinese Political Science.2009,14(3):253-274
59. PETER MOODY.Trends in the Study of Chinese Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1994(139):731-740
60. PETER MOODY.The Political Culture of Chinese Students and Intellectuals:A Historical Examination.Asian Survey.1988,28(11):1140-1160
61. PETER MOODY.The Romance of the Three Kingdoms and Popular Chinese Political Thought.The Review of Politics.1975,37(2):175-199
62. ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
63. ROBERT D PUTNAM.Studying Elite Political Culture:The Case of "Ideology ".The American Political Science Review.1971,65(3):651-681
64. ROBERT JAY LIFTON.Report of the Group for the Study of Psychohistorical Process.Records of the Academy(American Academy of Arts and Sciences).1968(1967-1968):26-27
65. ROBERT W JACKMAN,ROSS A MILLER.A Renaissance of Political Culture?American Journal of Political Science.1996,40(3):632-659
66. RONALD INGLEHART.The Renaissance of Political Culture. American Political Science Review.1982,82(12):1203-1230
67. RUTH BENEDICT.Margaret Mead.American Association for the Advancement of Scienc.1959,129(3362):1514
68. SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET.Sociology and Political SciencerA Bibliographical Note.American Sociological Review.1964,29(5):730-734
69. STEPHEN WHITE.Political Culture in Communist States:Some Problems of Theory and Method.Comparative Politics.1984,16(3):351-365
70. SUISHENG ZHAO.Chinese Intelletuals' Quest for Notional Greatness and Nationalistic Writing in the 1990s.The China Quarterly.1997(152):725-745
71. TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):826-881
72. TALCOTT PARSONS.The Prospects of Sociological Theory.American Sociological Review.1950,15(l):3-16
73. TALCOTT PARSONS,BERNARD BARBER.Sociology,1941-46.The American Journal of Sociology.1948,53(4):245-257
74. TANG TSOU.Chinese Politics at the Top:Factionalism or Informal Politics? Balance-of-Power Politics or a Game to Win All? The China Quarterly.1995(34):95-156
75. TANG TSOU, ANDREW J NATHAN. Prolegomenon to the Study of Informal Groups in CCP Politics.The China Quarterly,1976(65):98-117
76. TIANJIAN SHI.Cultural Values and Political Trust:A Comparison of the People's Republic of China and Taiwan.Comparative Politics.2001,33(4):401-419
77. TIANJIAN SHI.Cultural Values and Democracy in the People's Republic of ChinaThe China Quarterly.2000(162):540-559
78. THOMAS A KOHUT.Psychohistory as History.1986,91(2):336-354
79. WARD GOODENOUGH. Margaret Mead and Cultural Anthropology.Science.New Series.1983,220(4600):906-908
80. YUNG WEI.A Methodological Critique of Current Studies on Chinese Political Culture.The Journal of Politics.1976,38(1):114-140
1.阿道诺.权力主义人格.李维,译.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002
2.阿尔蒙德.比较政治学：体系、过程与政策.曹佩霖,等译.上海：上海译文出版社,1987
3.阿尔蒙德,维巴.公民文化：五个国家的政治态度与民主制.徐湘林,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
4.阿兰.政治学的视野与方法.张继武,段小光,译.南京：南京大学出版社,1988
5.阿伦森,威尔逊,阿克特.社会心理学.侯玉波,等译.北京：中国轻工业出版社,2005
6.爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990
7.埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010
8.埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机.孙名之,译.杭州：浙江教育出版社,1998
9.埃里克松.童年与社会.罗一静,徐炜铭,钱积权,编译.上海：学林出版社,1992
10.奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004
11.博厄斯.人类学与现代生活.刘莎,谭晓勤,张卓宏,译.北京：华夏出版社,1999
12.伯格.人格心理学.陈会昌,等译.北京：中国轻工业出版社,2004
13.布朗.自我.陈浩莺,薛贵,曾盼盼,译.北京：人民邮电出版社,2004
14.布罗代尔.论历史.刘北成,周立红,译.北京：北京大学出版社,2008
15.本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009
16.本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990
17.陈志让.毛泽东与中国革命.中共中央文献研究室《国外研究毛泽东思想资料选辑》编译组,编译.北京：中央文献出版社,1993.
18.迪韦尔热.政治社会学：政治学要素.杨祖功,王大东,译.北京：东方出版社,2007
19.弗洛伊德.图腾与崇拜.赵立玮,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2005
20.弗洛伊德.一种幻想的未来：文明及其不满.严志军,张沫,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2007
21.弗洛伊德.弗洛伊德后期著作选.林尘,张唤民,陈伟奇,译.上海：上海译文出版社,1986
22.弗罗姆.健全的社会.王大庆,许旭虹,李延文,等译.北京：国际文化出版公司,2003
23.弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987
24.弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社,1986
25.弗洛姆.精神分析的危机.许俊达,许俊农,译.北京：国际文化出版公司,1988
26.弗思.人文类型.费孝通,译.北京：华夏出版社,2002
27.费正清.美国和中国.张理京,译.北京：世界知识出版社,1999
28.费正清.中国的思想与制度.郭晓兵,等译.北京：世界知识出版社,2008
29.格尔茨.文化的解释.韩莉,译.南京：译林出版社,2008
30.古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006
31.古德曼.邓小平政治评传.田酉如,等译.北京：中共中央党校出版社,1995
32. GREESTEIN,POSLBY.个体政治论.幼狮文化事业公司,编译.台北：幼狮文化事业公司,1983
33.汉娜·鄂兰.极权主义的起源.林骧华,译.台北：时报文化出版企业有限公司,1975
34.哈维兰.文化人类学.瞿铁鹏,张钰,译.上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2006
35.亨廷顿.第三波：20世纪后期民主化浪潮.刘军宁,译.上海：上海三联书店,1998
36.亨廷顿.文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建.周琪,译.北京：新华出版社.2002
37.亨廷顿.变化社会中的政治秩序.李盛平,译.北京：华夏出版社,1988
38.柯文.在中国发现历史.林同芬,译.北京：中华书局,2002
39.库利.人类本性与社会秩序.包凡一,王湲,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
40.绫部恒雄.文化人类学的十五种理论.周星,译.贵阳：贵州人民出版社,1988
41.林顿.人格的文化背景.于闽梅,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007
42.李普塞特.政治人：政治的社会基础.张绍宗,译.上海：上海人民出版社,1997
43.拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?.杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000
44.列文森.儒教中国和他的现代命运.郑大华,任菁,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2009
45.玛格丽特·米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988
46.玛格丽特·米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究.周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988
47.马凌诺斯基.文化论.费孝通,译.北京：华夏出版社,2002
48.马斯洛.动机与人格.许金声,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007
49.麦克法夸尔.文化大革命的起源.文化大革命的起源翻译组,译.石家庄：河北人民出版社,1989
50.尼斯贝特.思维的版图.李秀霞,译.北京：中信出版社,2006
51.帕森斯.社会行动的结构.张明德,夏遇南,彭刚,译.南京：译林出版社,2003
52.乔治·米德.心灵、自我与社会.赵月瑟,译.上海：上海译文出版社,2008
53.斯金纳.超越自由与尊严.陈维刚,王映桥,粟爱平,译.贵阳：贵州人民出版社,1990
54.斯通.政治心理学,胡杰,译.哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1997
55.斯诺.红星照耀中国.董乐山,译.北京：生活·读书·新知三联出版社,1979
56.孙隆基.中国文化的深层结构.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2004
57.萨义德.东方学.王宇根,译.北京：生活·读书·新知三联出版社,2007
58.山极晃.中美关系的历史性展开(1941-1979).鹿锡俊,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2001
59.施拉姆.毛泽东的思想.田松年,杨德,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005
60.史华慈.中国的共产主义与毛泽东的崛起.陈玮,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006
61.史华慈.思想的跨度与张力：中国思想史论集.王中江,编.郑州：中州古籍出版社,2009
62.特里尔.毛泽东传.胡为雄,郑玉臣,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006
63.托克维尔.论美国的民主.董果良,译.北京：商务印书馆,2002
64.泰勒.人类学：人及其文化研究.连树声,译.上海：上海文艺出版社,1993
65.汤森,沃马克.中国政治.顾速,董方,译.南京：江苏人民出版社,2003
66.沃拉斯.政治中的人性.朱曾汶,译.北京：商务印书馆,1995
67.王景伦.毛泽东的理想主义和邓小平的现实主义.北京：时事出版社,1996
68.韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神.康乐,简惠美,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007
69.韦伯.儒教与道教.王容芬,译.北京：商务印书馆,2003
70.韦伯.经济与社会.林荣远,译.北京：商务印书馆,1997
71.许娘光.美国人与中国人：两种生活方式比较.彭凯平,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
72.萧瑜.毛泽东前传(网络版)
73.伊文思.邓小平传.武市红,译.上海：上海译文出版社,1996
74.伊萨克斯.美国的中国形象.于殿利,陆日宇,译.北京：时事出版社,1999
75.英格利斯.文化.韩启群,张鲁宁,樊淑英,译.南京：南京大学出版社,2008
76.詹姆斯.心理学原理.田平,译.北京：中国城市出版社,2003
77.佐藤功.比较政治制度.刘庆林,译.北京：法律出版社,1984
78.柏维春.政治文化传统：中国和西方对比分析.长春：东北师范大学出版社,2001
79.陈明显.晚年毛泽东(1953-1976).南昌：江西人民出版社,2008
80.车文博.透视西方心理学.北京：北京师范大学出版社,2007
81.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988
82.邓小平文选.北京：人民出版社,1994
83.丁耘,陈新.思想史研究：思想史的元问题.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2005
84.费孝通.乡土中国、生育制度.北京：北京大学出版社,1998
85.高洪涛.政治文化论.北京：中国广播电视出版社,1990
86.高皋,严家其.文化大革命十年史.天津：天津人民出版社,1986
87.郭本禹.潜意识的意义：精神分析心理学.济南：山东教育出版社,2009
88.葛荃.权力宰割理性：士人、传统政治文化与中国社会.天津：南开大学出版社,2003
89.葛荃.立命与忠诚：士人政治精神的典型分析.杭州：浙江人民出版社,2000
90.葛荃.中国政治文化教程.北京：高等教育出版社,2006
91.葛兆光.思想史研究课堂讲录：视野、角度与方法.北京：三联书店,2006
92.黄进兴.历史主义与历史理论.西安：陕西师范大学出版社,2002
93.黄希庭.人格心理学.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002
94.李柄全.文化心理学.上海：上海教育出版社,2007
95.李锐.三十岁以前的毛泽东.广州：广东人民出版社,1994
96.李亦园,杨国枢.中国人的性格.南京：凤凰出版传媒集团,2006
97.刘梦溪主编.中国现代学术经典·萧公权卷.石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999
98.刘松阳,刘锋.政治心理学.郑州：河南人民出版社,1991
99.刘泽华.王权思想论.天津：天津人民出版社,2006
100.刘泽华,张分田.思想的门径：中国政治思想史研究方法论,天津：天津古籍出版社,2006
101.梁簌溟.中国文化要义.上海：上海世纪出版集团,2005
102.吕元礼.政治文化：传统与现代的会通.北京：人民出版社,2004
103.江炳伦.亚洲政治文化个案研究.台北：五南图书出版公司,1986
104.贾春增.外国社会学史.第三版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008
105.金先宏.影响白宫对华政策的“中国通”.北京：时事出版社,2003
106.毛毛.我的父亲邓小平“文革岁月”.北京：中央文献出版社,2000
107.毛毛.我的父亲邓小平.北京：中央文献出版社,1997
108.毛泽东.体育之研究.北京：人民体育出版社,1979.
109.马起华.政治心理学.台北：台湾商务印书馆股份有限公司,1981
110.马起华.政治学原理.台北：大中国图书公司,1985
111.马庆钰.告别西西弗斯——中国政治文化的分析与展望.中国社会科学出版社,2003
112.闵琦.中国政治文化：民主政治难产的社会心理因素.云南人民出版社,1989
113.潘一禾.观念与体制—政治文化的比较研究.杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003
114.石之瑜.大陆问题研究.台北：三民书局,1995
115.石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999
116.石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003
117.孙正甲.政治文化.哈尔滨：北方文艺出版社,1992
118.沙莲香.中国民族性.北京：中国人民大学出版社,1989
119.唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982
120.文崇一,萧新煌.中国人：观念与行为.台北：巨流图书公司,1988
121.王乐理.政治文化导论.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002
122.王卓君.文化视野中的政治系统：政治文化研究引论.南京：南京大学出版社,1997
123.韦政通.伦理思想的突破.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005
124.徐大同.当代西方政治思潮.天津：天津人民出版社,1991
125.萧延中.巨人的诞生.毛泽东现象”的意识起源与中国近代政治文化的发展.南昌：江西人民出版社,2005
126.萧延中.晚年毛泽东.北京：春秋出版社,1989
127.叶娟丽.行为主义政治学方法论研究.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2005
128.杨国枢,陆洛.中国人的自我：心理学的分析,重庆：重庆大学出版社,2009
129.杨国枢.文化心理学的探索.台北：桂冠图书公司,1996
130.杨国枢,余安邦.中国人的心理与行为——理念及方法篇.台北：桂冠图书公司,1993
131.杨中芳.如何理解中国人.重庆：重庆大学出版社,2009
132.余英时.重寻胡适历程.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2004
133.张分田.亦主亦奴——中国古代官僚的社会人格.杭州：浙江人民出版社,2000
134.张厚粲.行为主义心理学.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002
135.张小劲,景跃进.比较政治学导论.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001
136.张明澍.中国“政治人”——中国公民政治素质调查报告.中国社会科学出版社,1994
137.朱日耀.中国传统政治文化的现代思考.长春：吉林大学出版社,1990
138.朱日耀.论中国传统政治文化.长春：吉林大学出版社,1987
139.资中筠,陶文钊.架起理解的新桥梁——中美关系史研究回顾与展望.合肥：安徽大学出版社,1996.
140.周晓虹.现代社会心理学史.北京：中国人民大学出版社,1993
141.鲍瑞嘉.美国的中国政治研究.庞娟,编译.当代世界与社会主义.2008(2):164-167
142.董敏志.政治心理学的视野：政治行为与人格.学术月刊.1995(1):90-98
143.葛荃.拿来与创新：中国政治文化研究的回顾与创新.天津社会科学.1997(2)：59-64
144.葛荃.屈原的政治人格与心态析论.华侨大学学报(哲社版).1999(1):108-114
145.葛荃.作为政治人格的狂狷、乡愿与伪君子——以晚明东林诸君见解为据.东岳论丛.2008(6)：133-138
146.葛荃,贾乾初,刘坤.张之洞政治人格刍议——基于政治文化的视角.山东大学学报.2010(1)：1-11
147.蒋云根.我国政治学研究在当前应该着重研究的若干主题.政治学研究.1999(1)：1-8
148.李江雪.边缘型人格障碍的心理分析研究.广州：华南师范大学教育科学学院,2006
149.李见顺.历史语境主义：昆廷·斯金纳政治思想史研究方法初探.武汉：武汉大学政治与公共管理学院,2009
150.李增田.鲍大可与中美关系正常化.美国研究.2004(2):79-99
151.刘平邻.中国政治文化研究的各种方法：百花齐放,百家争鸣.何思因主编.中国大陆研究方法与成果.台北：国立政治大学国际关系研究中心,2003:1-31
152.刘宪阁.走进毛泽东的心理世界：一次重要尝试.湖南科技大学学报社科版.2004(5)：5-13
153.梅祖蓉,马敏.制度转型的多样性因素及关系分析.史学集刊.2007(2):57-64
154.牛可.白鲁恂：现代化理论家、“冷战斗士”和中国通.世界知识.2009(1):62-63
155.裴宜理.中华人民共和国和美国的中国学研究50年.黄育馥,摘译.国外社会科学.2004(2)：64-67
156.邱柏生.浅析我国政治心理学研究的现状.复旦大学学报社会科学版,1996(4)：89-91
157.王沪宁.西方政治学行为主义学派述评.复旦大学学报社科版.1985(2):93-98
158.王丽萍.政治心理学中的态度研究.北京大学学报哲学社会科学版.2006,43(1)：132-141
159.王丽萍.人格与政治：政治心理学领域核心关系分析.北京大学学报哲学社会科学版.2002,39(2)：15-23
160.王泽壮,李祖红.革命领袖何以形成——西方学者的三种方法论视角.史学集刊2007(3)：70-76
161.石之瑜.民主人格：论精神分析的政治文化局限.问题与研究.1997(5):1-12
162.沈传亮.近二十年来国内政治心理学研究进展述评.教学与研究.2007(1):57-62
163.尚庆飞.略论国外毛泽东研究领域的“心理历史学派”.学术界.2008(3):291-296
164.单伟.美国学界对中国政治精英的研究.浙江社会科学.2008(5):13-21
165.萧延中,曾子墨.探索毛泽东晚年的生命焦虑.史林.2007(4):1-12
166.萧延中.毛泽东的个性密码.报刊荟萃.2007(2):10-12
167.萧延中.论毛泽东“革命牺牲”的政治学——利夫顿《革命的永生》一书解读及其它.湖南科技大学学报社会科学版.2006,9(3):14-21
168.萧延中.试论关于晚年毛泽东的整体解读.毛泽东邓小平理论研究.2003(6)：118-125
169.张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005
170.张英魁.论白鲁恂的中国传统政治文化观.大连：辽宁师范大学政治与行政学院,2002
171.张平.国外政治心理学研究的现状与展望.心理科学.2004,27(6):1467-1469
172.张清敏.国际政治心理学流派评析.国际政治科学.2008(3):71-101
173.资中均,姬虹.美国学术界对中美关系的研究,1969-1992.美国研究.1995(1)：50-78
1. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/obit-pye-0908.html
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/us/12pye.html
3. LOYD I RUDOLPH.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultral Dimensions of Authoritarity by Lucian W Pye. http://www.nytimes.com/1986/02/09/books/the-east-psychoanalyzed.html
②这篇博士论文后来以"Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China"为名于1971年在纽约出版。
③有些图书馆的搜索结果似乎显示白鲁恂专著很多,比如MIT图书馆的搜索结果为65条,但实际上并不全是白鲁恂的专著,有很多是他发表在MIT国际研究中心出版的系列丛书上的文章。World Cat虚拟图书馆的搜索结果更是多达316条,需要仔细区分。
①这6本分别是《中国政治的变与常》(1988)、《中国人的政治心理》(1988)、《中共的商业谈判作风：一个文化心理的剖析》(1991)、《中国人的政治文化》(1992)、《东南亚政治制度》(1992)、《政治发展面面观》(2009)。前四本的译者出自台湾,后两本出自大陆。其中,《中国人的政治文化》和《中国人的政治心理》都译自"The Spirit of Chinese Politics",只是不同的译者对书名采用了不同的译法。
② http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/obit-pye-0908.html
③ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):882.
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambrige,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:7
⑤ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):891.
①这批学者包括孔杰荣(Jerome Cohen)、费正清、帕金斯(Dwight Perkins)、赖肖尔(Edwin Reischauer)、史华慈(Benjamin Schwartz)、汤姆森(James Thomson)、傅高义(Ezra Vogel)、鲍大可(A. Doak Barnett))等人。他们在哈佛大学肯尼迪政治学院主持下就美国与东亚关系进行了一年的不公开讨论之后,提出这份报告。可惜这份对美中关系发生过实质性影响的报告由于少有人提及,无论美国和中国都鲜为人知。
②转引自资中均,姬虹.美国学术界对中美关系的研究,1969-1992.美国研究.1995(1):56
③“中国研究大学服务中心”1963年组建时并不隶属于香港中文大学,是一个由“美国教育与世界事务”基金会和卡耐基基金会联合资助的独立研究机构,位于香港“亚皆老街”(Argyle Street)155号。1988年,因财政困难由香港中文大学吸收,遂搬离“亚皆老街”迁至香港中文大学。
①TANG TSOU.Review:Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21(4):653
① DAVID SHAMBAUGH.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre：China's Political Cultures by Lucian W pye.The China Quarterly.1990(122):310
①根据笔者在中国期刊全文数据库的检索,自1987年至2009年,《政治学研究》、《中国社会科学》、《北京大学学报》共刊发以“政治文化”为标题的文章17篇,其中关于当代中国政治文化研究的文章5篇,《政治学研究》3篇,1篇《论发展中国特色社会主义政治文化》,1篇《论建构社会主义和谐社会进程中的政治文化建设》,1篇讨论“商品经济与政治文化概念”；《中国社会科学》1篇,讨论“政治文化与中国当代文艺学”；《北京大学学报》1篇,讨论“政治发展进程中的中国政治文化构建”。从内容上看,关于当代中国政治文化研究的文章过于倾向一般化的讨论,不如传统中国政治文化研究有深度。笔者检索的范围虽然有限,但与美国加州大学芭芭拉分校政治学教授刘平邻关于大陆学者对中国政治文化研究方法的调查报告相比较,结论却是相似的。参见刘平邻.中国政治文化研究的各种方法：百花齐放,百家争鸣.何思因主编.中国大陆研究方法与成果.台北：国立政治大学国际关系研究中心,2003:1-31
②依据刘平邻给出的关于1994-2001年大陆学者中国政治文化研究的文章的统计数据,在90篇属于当代中国政治文化研究的文章中,一般性的研究占56%,大众研究占38%,对有权势的人和团体的研究占5.5%(其中“2篇讨论中共和毛泽东对文艺家的态度,1篇论中共党史,1篇论人民代表大会的监督作用”)。刘平邻.中国政治文化研究的各种方法：百花齐放,百家争鸣.何思因主编.中国大陆研究方法与成果.台北：国立政治大学国际关系研究中心,2003:5,16
③参见闵琦.中国政治文化：民主政治难产的社会心理因素.云南人民出版社,1989.张明澍.中国“政治人”——中国公民政治素质调查报告.中国社会科学出版社,1994.
④参见张分田《亦主亦奴：中国古代官僚的社会人格》(2000)；葛荃《立命与忠诚：士人政治精神的典型分析》(2000)、《权力宰割理性：士人、传统政治文化与中国社会》(2003)、《屈原的政治人格与心态析论》(1997)、《张之洞政治人格刍议：基于政治文化的视角》(2010)等著作与文章。
① HARRY HARDINGThe Study of Chinese politics:Toward a Third Generation of Scholarship. World Politics.1984,36(2):284-307
② PETER MOODY.Trends in the Study of Chinese Political Culture,The China Quarterly.1994(139):733
③ http://www.nytimes.eom/2008/09/12/us/12pye.html
④ LLOYDI RUDOLPH.Review.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultral Dimensions of Authoritarity by Lucian W Pye. http://www.nytimes.eom/1986/02/09/books/the-east-psychoanalyzed.html
⑤ JEROME CH'EN.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye. Pacific Affairs,1977,50(1): 120
① PETER MOODY.Review:The Cadre and Mandarine by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies,1989,48 (4):840
②LOWELL DITTMET. Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.Reviewed book(s) Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye. The China Quarterly.1976(68):822-828. JEROME CH'EN.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader.by Lucian W Pye. Pacific Affairs.1977,50(1):119-120
③HILARY CONROY.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1986(488):197
④萧公权.求学和出路.刘梦溪主编.中国现代学术经典·萧公权卷.石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999:947
①例如台湾学者马起华《政治学原理》(1988),石之瑜《政治心理学》(2003),大陆学者高洪涛《政治文化论》(1990),孙正甲《政治文化》(1992),王卓君《文化视野中的政治系统》(1997),张小劲、景跃进《比较政治学导论》(2001),潘一禾《观念与体制——政治文化的比较研究》(2003),马庆钰《告别西西弗斯——中国政治文化的分析与展望》(2003),萧延中《巨人的诞生——“毛泽东现象”的意识起源》(2005),葛荃《中国政治文化教程》(2006),王泽壮,李祖红《革命领袖何以形成——西方学者的三种方法论视角》(2007),尚庆飞《略论国外毛泽东研究领域的“心理历史学派”》(2008),单伟《美国学界对中国政治精英的研究》(2008)等。
②唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂台北：允晨文化实业股份有限公司,1982:18
③唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化实业股份有限公司,1982:36
①此外,石之瑜还指导其学生将白鲁恂对中国政治文化的研究成果运用于实证分析,比如周翊婷的硕士论文《白鲁恂对中国政治文化的心理分析——以中兴票券案为例》(2001),自己也运用精神分析理论研究政治精英的政治心理和政治行为,著有《政治文化与政治人格》(2003),体现了白鲁恂的政治文化研究方法在台湾的影响。
②笔者推测,艾思明和胡祖庆可能是同一个人。1992年,台湾风云出版社出版胡祖庆译著《中国人的政治文化》,同样是根据"The Spirit of Chinese Politics" 1968年版译出,与艾思明1988年所译《中国人的政治心理》其内容与篇幅完全相同。
③王乐理.政治文化导论.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2000:71
④就在本文撰写的过程中,张英魁的这篇博士论文于2009年10月更名为《中国传统文化及其现代价值：以白鲁恂的研究为考察中心》由中央编译出版社出版,这是中国大陆第一部研究白鲁恂的专著。
①张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:摘要页
②张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:133
③参见萧延中,曾子墨.探索毛泽东晚年的生命焦虑.史林.2007(4):1-12.萧延中.试论关于晚年毛泽东的整体解读.毛泽东邓小平理论研究.2003(6):118-125.萧延中.毛泽东的个性密码.报刊荟萃.2007(2):10-12.
④萧延中.巨人的诞生.南昌：江西人民出版社,2005:324
⑤刘宪阁.走进毛泽东的心理世界：一次重要尝试.湖南科技大学学报社科版.2004(5):5-13.尚庆飞.略论国外毛泽东研究领域的“心理历史学派”.学术界.2008(3):291-296
①参见王景伦.毛泽东的理想主义和邓小平的现实主义.北京：时事出版社,1996
② PETER MOODY.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre. China's Political Cultures by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1989,148(4):840.
① DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye,Political Science and Politics. 1988,21(4):882-891
② JEROME CH'EN. Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye. Pacific Affairs.. 1977,50(1):120
③ PETER MOODY.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1989,48(4):840
④ J BRUCE JACOBS.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W.Pye.Pacific Affairs.1990,63(1):94
⑤ HARSH SETHI. Culture as Politics or Politics as Culture.Economic and Political Weekly.1987,22 (12):497
⑥ ARDATH W BURKS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W. Pye. The Journal of Asian Studies.1988.47(4):843
⑦ BRUCE J DICKSON. What Explains Chinese Political Behavior? The Debate over Structure and Culture.Comparative Politics..1992,25(1):111
⑧ LOWELL DITTMER. Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.The China Quarterly.1976(68):826
①萨义德.东方学.王宇根,译.北京：三联书店,1999:21
②余英时.重寻胡适历程.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2004:196
③萧公权.中国政治思想史.刘梦溪主编.中国现代学术经典·萧公权卷.石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999:759
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:x
① LUCIAN W PYE.Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China. New York:Praeger,1971:vii
②张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:42
① GERHARD LOEWENBERG.The Influence of European Emigre Scholars on Comparative Politics,1925-1965.The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):597-604
①古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006:67
② GERHARD LOEWENBERG.The Influence of European Emigre Scholars on Comparative Politics,1925-1965.The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):597-604
③ TALCOTT PARSONS,BERNARD BARBER.Sociology,1941-46.The American Journal of Sociology.1948,53(4):245
④ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):871
①奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004:186(注释3)
②奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004:143
① JOHN B WATSON.Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It. Psychological Review.1994,101(2):248-253
②车文博.透视西方心理学.北京：北京师范大学出版社,2007:72-75
①弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:28
②弗洛伊德.弗洛伊德自传.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:44
③弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:568
④弗洛伊德.一个幻觉的未来.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:405
⑤弗洛伊德.图腾与禁忌.赵立玮,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2005:78
⑥弗洛伊德.图腾与禁忌.赵立玮,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2005:187
①弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:118
②车文博.透视西方心理学.北京：北京师范大学出版社,2007:121
③弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:537
①弗洛伊德.自我与本我.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:388
②弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:539
③有必要指出,不能把力比多简单地理解为通常意义的“性”。弗洛伊德所说的力比多包括所有在“爱”这个名词下的所有能量。其核心内容虽是以性结合为目的的性爱,但也包括“自爱、对双亲与子女的爱、友爱与对整个人类的爱,同样也包括对具体对象和抽象观念的爱”(弗洛伊德.群体心理学和自我的分析.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:372)。很多时候,弗洛伊德所使用“性”的概念也不等同于生殖器欲望,而是一个含义宽泛的术语,泛指一切使人愉悦的生活。
④弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:539
①弗洛伊德.图腾与禁忌.赵立玮,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2005
②弗洛伊德.精神分析纲要.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988:571
③弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:58
④郭本禹.潜意识的意义：精神分析心理学(上).济南：山东教育出版社,2009:171
①弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:68
②弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社.1986:156
③弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987:32
④埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:82
⑤爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:303
① "identity"这个词,心理学领域常译为“同一性”,在政治学里,往往译为“认同”。所谓的认同危机,其本源指的就是心理学上的同一性危机。在这里,笔者采用同一性的译法。但在后文关于政治文化的分析中,考虑到习惯用法,多数情况下采用“认同”译法。
②埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:152
③埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:9
①弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987:217
②弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987:2
①米德、本尼迪克特和林顿、卡迪纳虽同属文化与人格研究学派,但他们研究的方向是有区别的。米德始终关心的是个人人格形成中的文化因素问题,她与本尼迪克特等人主要研究文化如何影l响个人；而林顿则从相反方向考察人格对文化产生的作用。
② FRANCIS L K HSU.Margaret Mead and Psychological Anthropology.American Anthropologist,New Series.1980,82(2):349
③博厄斯.人类学与现代生活.刘莎,谭晓勤,张卓宏,译.北京：华夏出版社,1999:4-5
④博厄斯.人类学与现代生活.刘莎,谭晓勤,张卓宏,译.北京：华夏出版社,1999:130-132
⑤米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究.周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:195
⑥米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:2
①本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:32
②林顿.人格的文化背景.于闽梅,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007:20
③本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:9
④林顿.人格的文化背景.于闽梅,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007:30
⑤本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:152
⑥本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:165
①米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:283
②本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009:8
③米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究.周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:185
④米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:272
⑤米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988:281
①本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990:206-208
②本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990:3
③本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990:210-214
④比较著名的研究成果包括文化人类学家戈尔的《美国人》(1948)、戈尔与里克曼(John Rickman)合著的《大俄罗斯人》(1949)、政治学家社会学家戴维·里斯曼的《孤独的人群：变动中的美国人性格的研究》(1950)等。
①LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):490
②参见贾春增.外国社会学史.第三版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008
①贾春增.外国社会学史.第三版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008:162
②库利.人类本性与社会秩序.包凡一,王湲,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
③乔治·米德指出,自我的特征在于它可成为其自身的对象。即,自我既是主体也是客体；其本质是认知的而非情感的现象；自我是一个过程,是在与他人的交往中产生的。因此,自我的起源与基础,像认知性的思维的起源与基础一样,是社会性的。乔治·米德.心灵、自我与社会.赵月瑟,译.上海：上海译文出版社,2008(米德于1931年去世,《心灵、自我与社会》由他的学生在他去世后根据他的社会心理学课程讲课笔记整理而成,出版于1934年)。
④乔治·米德.心灵、自我与社会.赵月瑟,译.上海:上海译文出版社,2008
⑤周晓虹.现代社会心理学史.北京：中国人民大学出版社,1993:141
⑥托马斯去世于1947年。
① TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):826
② TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):839
③ TALCOTT PARSONS,BERNARD BARBER.Sociology,1941-46.The American Journal of Sociology.1948, 53(4):256-257
④ TALCOTT PARSONS.The Prospects of Sociological Theory.American Sociological Review.1950,15(1):7
① TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):848
② TALCOTT PARSONS.The Prospects of Sociological Theory. American Sociological Review.1950,15(1):10
③ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):871
④帕森斯.社会行动的结构.张明德,夏遇南,彭刚,译.南京：译林出版社,2003
⑤ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):871
⑥帕森斯所构建的一般行为体系由文化、社会、心理与行为的有机体体系四个次级功能系统构成。
⑦ TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):848
①古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006:66-67
②白鲁恂攻读博士学位时,师从阿尔蒙德。阿尔蒙德是拉斯韦尔的学生,而拉斯韦尔又是梅里亚姆的学生。
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Who Lost the Chicago School of Political Science?Perspective on Political Science.2004,2(1):91-92
① MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review.1921,15(2):173-185
② MERRIAM CHARLES.Progress in Political Research.The American Political Science Review.1926,20(1):1-13
③ MICHAELT HEANEY,JOHN MARK HANSEN. Building the Chicago School. The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):589-596
① ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
② ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
③ MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review.1921,15(2):180
④ MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review.1921,15(2):180
① GABRIEL A ALMOND.Separate Tables:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Political Science and Politics.1988,21(4):841
② ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
③ ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):767
④叶娟丽.行为主义政治学方法论研究.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2005:96
①古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006:97
② GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:93
①汉娜·鄂兰.极权主义的起源.林骧华,译.台北：时报文化出版企业有限公司,1975:1
②这方面的研究成果包括弗罗姆的《逃离自由》(1941)、阿道诺与其同事合著的《权力主义人格》(1950)、阿伦特的《极权主义的起源》(1951)、弗里德里奇(Carl Fredrich)与英克尔斯(Alex Inkels)的《极权主义》(1954)等。
③“公民教育”就是现在的政治社会化概念。参见GABRIEL A ALMOND.Ventures in Political Science-.Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:110
④ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:110
① DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):883
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:ix
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:xii
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:89
②1934年发表于《美国政治学评论》。
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:2
④ GABRIEL A ALMOND. The Appeals of the Communism.Princeton:Princeton University Press,1954:ⅰⅹ
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:19
② GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems. The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):391
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems. The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
④其他学者有：研究非洲的科尔曼(James Coleman)、研究印度的维勒(Myron Weiner)、研究近东(欧洲周边国家)的罗斯托(Dankwart Rustow)、研究拉美的布兰克斯坦(George Blanksten)等。
⑤《公民文化》研究小组采访了大约5000人——英国人、德国人、意大利人、墨西哥人和美国人,通过五国公民政治文化差异性的比较,讨论政治文化的各种差异对民主的稳定与发展前景的影响。参见阿尔蒙德,维巴.公民文化：五个国家的政治态度与民主制.徐湘林,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
⑥ LISA TREI.Gabriel A. Almond, Preeminent Political Scientist. http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2003/january8/obitalmond-18.html
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003:93
②事实上,阿尔蒙德对白鲁恂的影响不仅限于政治文化研究,还体现在政治发展上。作为政治发展研究领域的重要学者之一,白鲁恂的政治发展研究有其独到之处,即,将研究的焦点指向政治文化的态度与实践的复杂性。参见LUCIAN W PYE.Politics, Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅵ.基于此,本文将白鲁恂的政治发展理论作为其政治文化研究的背景来处理,不对白鲁恂的政治发展理论渊源展开充分论述。
③阿尔蒙德,维巴.公民文化：五个国家的政治态度与民主制.徐湘林,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989:545-546
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
② GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
③ GABRIEL A ALMOND. Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.1956,18(3):396
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:xvi
①参见GABRIEL A ALMOND.The Appeals of the Communism.Princeton:Princeton University Press,1954
② DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):883
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:xii
② GABRIEL A ALMOND.A Discipline Divided:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Newbury Park:Sage Publication,1990:293
③自1930年到50年代初,拉斯韦尔在政治心理学方面的专著主要有《精神病理学与政治》(1930)、《世界政治与个体不安全》(1935)、《政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到》(1936)、《权力与个性》(1948)等。此外,他还在《美国精神病学》、《变态心理学》、《心理分析评论》、《美国政治学评论》等刊物发表多篇有关政治心理学的论文。
④1928年,玛格丽特·米德《萨摩亚人的成年》问世。1934年,本尼迪克特《文化模式》出版。1936年,法兰克福学派心理学家阿多诺出了一本关于权威主义人格研究的著作《家庭与权威的研究》。
⑤转引自奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004:215
①拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:107
②拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:11
③拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:15
④拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:15
⑤拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:107
⑥转引自斯通.政治心理学,胡杰,译.哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1997:40
①转引自斯通.政治心理学,胡杰,译.哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1997:40
② FRED GREENSTEIN.Lasswell's Concept of Democratic Character.The Journal of Politics.1968,30(3):697
③拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:14
① GABRIEL A ALMOND. A Discipline Divided:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Newbury Park:Sage Publication,1990:292
②莱特的主要作品包括：《政治的语言》(The Language of Politics,1949)、《政治局的行动密码》(The Operation Code of the Poliburo,1951),《布尔什维主义研究》(A Study of Bolshevism,1953)、《论法兰西的政治博弈》(On the Game of Politics in France,1959)等。
③ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):883.
④1981年,这本书经略加补充与修改,并更名为《中国政治的动力》(The Dynamics of Chinese Politics)再度出版。
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅱ
① NATHAN LEITES.Psycho-Cultural Hypotheses about Political Acts. World Politics.1948,1(1):102-119
②参见LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge. Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:ⅹⅱ
③埃里克森1933年迁居美国。1939年加入美国国籍时改姓埃里克森。
④埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010:42
⑤埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010:205
①爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:8
②爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:9
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity, New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:52
①爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:11
①转引自FRED I GREENSTEIN.The Impact of Personality on Politics:An Attempt to Clear Away Underbrush.The American Political Science Review.1967,61(3):630
② LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):505
③唐光华在评论白鲁恂对中共政治派系的研究时指出其分析“有许多见人所未见之处”,并认为白鲁恂“如果晚年集中于中国政治的研究,会有很丰硕的贡献”,这个预见是不错的。参见唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化实业股份有限公司,1982:28
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction.The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):247
①诸如《中国政治的精神》(1968)、《文化与政治科学：政治文化概念评价中的问题》(1972)、《亚洲权力与政治》(1985)、《官僚与干部》(1988)、《政治科学与权威主义的危机》(1990)、《重温政治文化》(1991)、《导言：令人困惑的文化概念与清晰的人格现实》(1997)等。其中,以《官僚与干部》的阐述最直接,最具挑战性。
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:20
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):246
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):247
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre.China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor.University of Michigan Press,1988:15
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:13
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre.China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:18
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:16-20
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:20
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:20-21
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:25
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:26
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.1988:25
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):243
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):490
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:21
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:20
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:6
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:6
① LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):205
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:12
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:13
②白鲁恂此处所说的政治文化维度指政治文化分析的领导人维度、集体或者代表维度、民族认同以及对于合法性和权力与权威角色的集体期待维度。这一维度划分是白鲁恂受文化人类学家借用语言学的三个层面——语音、词汇、句法或语法结构——划分文化维度的启发而来。具体说来,指在语音层面分析领导人,词汇层面分析集体或者代表,句法或语法结构层面分析民族同一性以及对于合法性和权力与权威角色的集体期待等。参见LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8-10。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:28
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Culture and Political Science:Problems in the Evaluation of the Concept of Political Culture.Social Science Quarterly.1972,53(2):287
⑥ DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W Pye.PS:Political Science and Politics.1988,21 (4):882-891
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:30
②唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982:22-28
③张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005:43-46
④即50年代以来兴起的政治发展研究以及60年代末期以来美中关系的破冰等。
⑤笔者无意对白鲁恂研究视野回归中国的时间作太过生硬的界分。事实上,白鲁恂自完成对缅甸的研究以后,就开始关注中国,例如1961年发表的书评至少有三篇以中国为主题(参见附录“白鲁恂学术年表”)。以香港“中国研究大学服务中心”的组建为界,出于两个因素的考虑。其一,这是一个白鲁恂在其中扮演重要角色的标志性事件。其二,白鲁恂关于中国政治文化研究的第一项成果《中国政治文化中敌意与仇恨的动力》发表于1964年,即该中心成立后的次年。
① LUCIAN W PYE.Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1956:vii
② LUCIAN W PYE.Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1956:344
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:43
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅴ
③白鲁恂所说的合作性情感,代表与他人建立联系的能力,对现代民族国家建设至关重要。他解释说,合作性情感不只是简单地指那些在人际关系降低紧张度、寻求和谐的行动和愿望,而是一种能让人们在相互不喜欢并可以表现出相当大的敌意与进攻环境下也能使有效的组织生活得以发展繁荣的高水平的情感。因此,政治发展的真正问题在于：社会化过程在何种程度上为人们提供了合作性情感,从而保证在面对大量 冲突时不至于破坏社会的稳定性。LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:51-52
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building.Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven：Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅴ
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:53
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:288
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:121
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:ⅹⅵ
③唐光华将《政治、人格与民族国家建设》归入个案研究(见唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982:35),而白鲁恂自己在《政治、人格与民族国家建设》行文中,除了在“序言”中申辩这项研究不是传统意义的个案研究时使用过Case Study一词外,其他场合均用Intensive Study 。因此,如果坚持说白鲁恂对缅甸的研究是个案研究,恐怕不会得到他本人同意。
④《中国政治的精神》1992年再版。再版时删除1968年版最后两章“人民公社”和“未来的展望”,代之以“中国政治的动力”和“不安的国家,受挫的社会”。替代进去的两章分别发表于1981年和1990年。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968:viii
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:19
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:19
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics. Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:86
①必须指出,这种归类是相对的,并不意味着宏观研究中排除了中观与微观层面的内容。
② DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W.Pye.Political Science and Politics.1988, 21(4):885
③这方面的文章和专著包括《毛泽东的领导风格》(Mao Tsu-tung's Leadership Style),1972；《领导人毛泽东》(Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader),1976;《一个杰出的共产主义者：周恩来》(A Very Exceptional Communist),1977;《导言式侧面像：邓小平与中国的政治文化》(An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture),1993；《再度思考领导人毛泽东》(Rethinking the Man in the Leader),1996:《江泽民的治理风格》(Jiang Zemin's Style of Rule:Go for Stability,Monopolize Power and Settle for Limited Effectiveness),2001.
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:12
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:224
①萧延中.巨人的诞生.南昌：江西人民出版社,2005:324
②白鲁恂拿苏联或俄罗斯作参照的用意在于体现两个共产主义国家或曾经经历过共产主义试验的两个政治体系的不同。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:5
④ LUCIAN W PYE. Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:ix
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press，1985:56
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority. Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:59
⑦唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982:38
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:ⅹ
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968:ⅴⅲ
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968:ⅴⅲ
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:5-8
② LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):205
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:13
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:26
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity, New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:52
①爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:9
① LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):219
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:288
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:23
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:23
①白鲁恂对政治学界关于社会化过程哪一阶段更为重要的争论持批评态度。他认为,争论家庭、学校、同辈群体、工作在政治文化的社会化过程中哪一阶段更具重要性,毫无意义。有的学者对研究家庭更有兴趣,而有的人更喜欢关注学校,这是学术研究本该呈现的面貌,否认他人研究兴趣的重要性是不可取的。LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:23
② LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:45
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Culture and Political Science:Problems in the Evaluation of the Concept of Political Culture.Social Science Quarterly.1972,53(2):290
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:8-10
①“政治发展”与“现代化”这两个概念,白鲁恂基本上作为同义语使用。本文为取得与白鲁恂在表述上的一致,也将这两个概念作为同义语互换使用。
②LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:5
③LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:5
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:1
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:2
③白鲁恂在《政治、人格与民族国家建设：寻求认同的缅甸人》第二章中详细列举了转型社会的17项特征：1)政治未与社会、个人关系领域发生明显分化；2)政党往往持一种世界性的观念,自认为代表全部生活方式；3)派系盛行；4)政治效忠的概念令政治领导人具有高度的决策自由；5)反对党和雄心勃勃的精英往往以革命者的行动露面：6)缺乏统一的沟通体系,政治参与少有整合；7)新的力量大量、迅速地承担政治角色；8)代际之间存在尖锐的政治取向分歧；9)在政治行动的合理目标与手段上缺乏共识；10)热烈而广泛的政治讨论与政治决策没有关联；11)高度的角色转换性；12)具有特定功能的、明确组织起来的利益集团很少；13)国家领导人必需面向未分化的公众；14)领导人在国际问题上的立场比在国内问题上的立场更鲜明：15)政治情感与表达的重要性胜于解决问题或公共决策；16)魅力型领导盛行；17)政治过程的运行多半未有政治掮客参与其中。LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality, and Nation Building:Burma' s Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:15-31
④派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009:24
① LUCIAN W PYE.Traumatized Political Cultures:The After Effects of Totalitarianism in China and Russia.Japanese Journal of Political Science.2000,1(1):115
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:ⅴⅲ
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:54
②LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:55
③LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:56
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:36-37
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:49
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:49
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:57
②1966年,白鲁恂所著《政治发展面面观》出版。白鲁恂依据社会科学研究理事会
(SSRC)比较政治分委员会成员提出将政治发展概念动态性地过程化为六个危机的建议,归纳出认同危机、合法性危机、贯彻危机、参与危机、整合危机、分配危机。并指出,这些危机在政治发展的过程中会按不同次序出现,要想成为现代化的民族国家,必需成功地解决所有这些危机。派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009:80-81.
③派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009:226
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:6
①LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics. Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:6
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:58
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:62
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:63
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:63
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:64
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:64
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:12
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:13
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:15-16
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:16
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:16
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:24-27
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:29
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:30
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:30
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:32
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:67
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics. Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:81
③弱者通过展示自己受到的羞辱,激起群情愤怒,会让施加羞辱的强者感到难堪甚至受到打击,这就意味者弱者获得了打击强者的力量。
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:33
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:88
② LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:63
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:65
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:85
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:91
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:93
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:97
②关于这一点,白鲁恂在《中国政治的精神》中用墨不多,但在《亚洲权力与政治》以及其他著作与文章中做了更加具体的说明。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:86
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:34
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:97-98
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:86
③需要特别指出的是,白鲁恂不只一次地强调：中国人性格中对权威的态度与西方人的权威主义人格不完全相符。他认为,中国人既是权威主义的,又是反权威主义的。其中原因在于中国人始终保持着对权威的道德判断,以及对弹性的欣赏等。参见LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politics. Cambridge. Mass: Oelgeschlager.Gunn & Hain.Pub.Inc.,1981:187
④白鲁恂认为,尽管社会化的最终目的是成为自律的典范,但自律终究不能完全做到,对外在权威的需要因而也总是存在着。由于个人的自律非常依赖外在权威,如果出现权威的缺如,必定会危及人格自身。LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:97
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:98
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:24
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:182
①准确地说,《中国政治的动力》(The Dynamics of Chinese Politics)是集政治行为与政治文化研究于一体的著作,体现了白鲁恂通过政治文化沟通政治心理与政治行为的关系的努力。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:38
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:38-39
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:38
①1980年,白鲁恂出版The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics:A Model and Some Propositions。次年,在该书基础上略加修改与补充,并更名为The Dynamics of Chinese Politics出版。本文以后者为资料来源。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅰ
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:197
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅱ
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:ⅹⅰ
⑥关于服从与共识观念的形成原因,白鲁恂没有做集中性的分析,而是散见于不同著作中。
①政治派系的概念,白鲁恂做过多次界定。本文主要依据《中国政治的动力》与《中国政治的精神》(1992)第十章“中国政治的动力”归纳而来。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:8
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:207
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:140-142
①西方研究中国派系政治的学者,对于派系的形成原因,大致有五类解释：政策取向不同、意识形态分歧、官僚集团利益驱使、代际差异、地域背景不同。白鲁恂认为,虽然这些因素都对政治派系的形成产生影响,其中有些因素的影响力还相当大,但从根本性动力看,都不是中国政治派系形成的最重要因素。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:127
③在《中国政治的动力》中,白鲁恂没有对这个问题做系统深入地阐述,只是零星地提到。不过,从《中国政治的精神》以及其他著作中可以清晰地看出,白鲁恂的观点非常明确。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:128
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:129-131
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:131
④白鲁恂认为权力是派系形成各因素中最少模糊性最可预知因而也是最首要因素的结论,是在提出派系形成的心理假设之后,同时通过分析与比较形成派系的其他因素(政策取向、意识形态分歧、官僚集团利益驱使、代际差异、地域背景)而得出的。事实上,他并未对权力如何减少政治的不确定性给出清晰地解释。他一方面认为中国人权力观中含有强化政治不确定性的因素,另一方面又坚持中国人赋予权力第一重要性,因为“中国人将个人安全感的寻求与权力直接联系。为克服焦虑与不安全感,所以寻求权力的保护”(LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:137)。至于为什么中国人将个人安全感直接与权力相联系,白鲁恂认为是中国人社会化过程中对攻击性情绪的压制的结果(第三章已有相关叙述,这里不再赘说)。无需讳言,白鲁恂对权力何以能减少政治的不确定性的说明是不够充分的。
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:136
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:257
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:259-260
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:259
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:183
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:183-184
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:239
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:10
①毛的理想主义,在白鲁恂看来,以激昂的意识形态政治和对意志力的信仰为特征；邓的实用主义,以邓小平的务实哲学所主导,意识形态色彩大大弱化,并以政策上的极具弹性和适应性为特征。
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:40
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:40-41
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:43
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:43
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:129-135
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:44-70.
③白鲁恂常常以农民文化指代中国的大众文化,并认为大众文化的性质是反叛的,因此,又以反叛文化称呼大众文化。本文一般以大众文化对指精英文化,但为更好地体现上下文意图,有时采用原文用法。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:44
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:50
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:51
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:54-55
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:55-56
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:58
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:58
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre.China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:61
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:63
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:64
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:65
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:65
⑧ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:66
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:67
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:67
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:69
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:74
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:42
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:45-46
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:50
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:51
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:56
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:56
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:56
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:59
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:61
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:65
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:66
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:70
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:73
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.1988:70
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:70
① HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University,of Chicago Press,1986:1
① HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986:10
②黄希庭.人格心理学.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002:156-157
③也许值得在这里说一句,(《领导人毛泽东》)与埃里克森1969年所著《甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源》在写作意图上非常相似。埃里克森的问题是：“在甘地自身的成长中,是什么使他后来得以成为圣雄?”,白鲁恂同样问“是什么造就了毛泽东的伟大?”。埃里克森将甘地的私人生活与公共生活交织起来、相互联系的写法显然也在很大程度上为白鲁恂写毛泽东作了参考。参见埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010
④该文次年收入《精神病理学与政治学》第一章。值得指出的是,如果仅从《精神病理学与政治学》的书名推断,以为这是一本将政治人视为神经症或精神病人加以研究的著作,将会在理解上产生严重错误。事实上,这本书只是偶尔地谈到了患有心理障碍的人的政治行为。精神病理学一词更多的是作为一种方法上的主张被运用。
① HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986:6-7
② HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986:8
③爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990:7
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:ix
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:x
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:8
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:x
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:6
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:5
① LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):112
①需要说明,白鲁恂后来又指出,毛泽东在这方面并没有取得彻底的成功。“文化大革命”以后,“中国公众对中国的马克思主义产生了严重的愤世嫉俗态度”,毛泽东试图以共产主义意识形态取代儒家文化的努力最终是失败的,但他作为意识形态创造者的影响力依然是世界性的。参见LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):420. LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:viii
②白鲁恂是在运用拉斯韦尔《精神病理学与政治学》中“政治人”的类型划分分析毛泽东。不过,他指出,毛泽东并不符合典型的“鼓动者”形象,因为他既没有将个人的愤怒情绪外化,也没有受极度的焦虑感的折磨。但从其目的看,依然可以将他归入“鼓动者”一类。参见LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York.Basic Books C.,1976:237
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung.The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:237
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York.Basic Books C.,1976:238
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):112
⑥白鲁恂根据与毛泽东有过接触的人留下的文字资料,认为毛泽东在声音、外形、握手(柔弱无骨)、和走路的样子等方面有些女性气质。LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:33-34.他认为,毛泽东的女性气质很可能是他在童年时期认同于母亲的结果。
①毛泽东.体育之研究.北京：人民体育出版社,1979:8-9
②LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:259
③LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:259
④白鲁恂在第六章“父亲”一章中谈到,“毛泽东的反叛热情、强烈相信意志力胜过技术的信念、对无休止的革命斗争的热爱,可能确实可以追源到他与父亲的冲突”。不过,父子间的冲突到底在多大程度上影响了毛泽东的人格发展依然值得讨论。依白鲁恂看来,从中国文化的传统看,毛顺生对儿子提出的要求并不过分,他对待毛泽东的严厉程度也没有超出大部分父亲对待儿子的态度。毛泽东在长沙求学与生活的花费由
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:80
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:306
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:86
④白鲁恂指出,历史上的反叛者有两种类型：一类是曾经受到过度压迫需要毁灭权威者,另一类是因不再享有安全感而抱着深深的不满需要改变世界者。毛泽东属于后者,这是理解他革命精神的关键。LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:307.白鲁恂还指出,毛泽东之所以对反叛者产生吸引力,并非由于他对专制的父亲怀有敌意,因为回应其反叛号召的反叛者,其中很多人都没有与父亲发生冲突,而在于毛泽东唤醒了大量深锁在人们潜意识中由于“被忽略”、“不被当作一个人来尊重”、“不能参与影响自己生活的决定”而产生的怨愤记忆。LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:11
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:87
①白鲁恂在《领导人毛泽东》列举出来被毛泽东抛弃的人包括他的妻子杨开慧与贺子珍、弟弟毛泽民与毛泽覃、妹妹毛泽建和孩子们,也包括他的同事：高岗、饶漱石、彭德怀、罗瑞卿、刘少奇、邓小平、陈伯达、林彪等。他后来在《官僚与干部》与《再度思考毛泽东》中,将周恩来与江青也算了进来。
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:311
③白鲁恂得出这一结论所引用的证据,是1919年10月8日毛泽东为缅怀母亲撰写的《祭母文》的摘录：“吾母高风,首推博爱。远近亲疏,一皆覆载。恺恻慈祥,感动庶汇。爱力所及,原本真诚。不作诳言,不存欺心。整饬成性,一丝不诡。手泽所经,皆有条理。头脑精密,劈理分情。事无遗算,物无遁形。病时揽手,酸心结肠。总兹所述,盛德所辉”(原文如此)。白鲁恂认为,毛泽东在这首诗里使用的抽象化语言“远近亲疏,一皆覆载”,想说的正是作为长子未得到母亲偏爱的不满。“不作诳言,不存欺心”,表达的是被母亲欺骗的感觉。不过,这种想法令毛泽东非常不安,以致于接下来的几句马上从情感领域回到母亲的能干上来。“病时揽手,酸心结肠”,似乎也是在潜意识里说他又得到了母亲的全部关爱和他想惩罚那些抛弃他的人的心理。参见LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:84-85
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:249
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:9-10
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:14-15
⑦ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:252
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:251
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:252
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:15
④在弗洛伊德的人格发展阶段理论中,3-8岁是为“性器期”(Phallic Stage)。这一时期,儿童会产生亲子依恋(男孩恋母,女孩恋父),亦称“俄狄浦斯情结”(the Oedipus complex),所以又叫“俄狄浦斯时期”。前俄狄浦斯时期即指3岁之前。
①莱特专门从事苏联政治精英研究,1951年,他以对列宁和斯大林的研究为基础,依据布尔什维克的文献与政治行为,对苏联共产党的政治战略作了一番总结,出版《政治局的行动密码》(The Operational Code of the Politburo),意在“发现布尔什维克为了政治行为的有效而必须采用的行动规则”(NATHAN LEITES.The Operational Code of the Politburo.New York:Rand Corporation,1951:xi)。将《领导人毛泽东》第三章“毛泽东的公众印象”(Impressions of the Public Man)与此书两相对照,可以清晰地看出,白鲁恂用以观察、分析毛泽东的政治风格的理论视角明显来自莱特的启发,比如是否注意保持政策的前后一致、对政治斗争所持的态度等。白鲁恂在前言中也明确表示,他从莱特那里受益良多。
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:43
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:50
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:55
② LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:60
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:62
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:62
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:66
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:66
① LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):108-109
②依据精神病理学的临床研究,自恋型人格与边缘型人格可以不同时发生在一个人身上,也可以共病(精神分析学术语,指同一人具有几种类型的人格障碍)。不过,边缘型人格往往与严重的自恋有密切关系。
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):108
① OTTO F.KERNBERG.Narcissistic Personality Disorder.//JOHN F. CLARKIN,PETER FONAGY,GLEN O. GABBARD.Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders:A Clinical Handbook. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub.,2010:260-261
②参见李江雪.边缘型人格障碍的心理分析研究.广州：华南师范大学教育科学学院,2006:26
③白鲁恂认为,由于母亲的抛弃,毛泽东的本我或潜意识中潜伏着对母亲的不满、对兄弟的憎恶,以及害怕被女性抛弃的不安,但是,出于超我的压力,所有这些情感都被他以对母亲的赞美、对兄弟之“义”和忠诚的歌颂、为妇女争平等的“理想化”防御机制掩盖了。
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:159-160
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):440
① LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):415-416
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):415
③ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):417
④ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):416
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):416
① LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):428-429
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):432
③ LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):432
④“心理合法暂缓期”是埃里克森论述青春期人格发展的一个概念,特指年轻人在获得自我认同之前的一段时间,意味着“允许还没有准备好承担义务的人有一段拖延的时间”。参见埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机,孙名之,译.杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998:144
① LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):425
② LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):429
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:12
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:27
③ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:12
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
⑤ LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:x
① LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:313
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:5
③江炳伦.亚洲政治文化个案研究.台北：五南图书出版公司,1986:4
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:72-73
①石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:7
②以问卷调查式研究方法研究中国政治文化的学者有黎安友(Andrew Nathan)、史天健(Shi Tianjian)、英格尔哈特(Ronald Ingerhart)等,文化解释学派的代表人物包括芮沃寿(Arthur F.Wright)、史华慈(Benjamin I. Schwartz)、列文森(Joseph R.Levenson)等,心理文化学派则包括白鲁恂(Lucian W.Pye)、所罗门(Richard Solomon)、刘(Alan P.L.Liu)、利夫顿(Robert Lifton)、孙隆基等。
③关于问卷调查式研究在信度与效度方面的问题,石之瑜曾有总结：“1)回答问题的情境与生活实境脱节；2)访员的训练从来没有达到专业水平,访谈资料错误极多；3)抽样的困难造成有效样本不足,或无法达到随机的要求：4)调查设计假设受访者表达的是自己的意见,这是个人主义社会的合理假设,但在人情导向的社会里,人们是以尊贤之意见为意见,则社会调查出来的结果,就不能用个人化的逻辑推论来诠释”。 石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999:31
①此处“表现”、“动力”与“发展”层面这三个概念依据格林斯坦(Fred Greestein)在《个体政治论》第一章“人格与政治”的论述发展而来。格林斯坦指出,对个体心理的分析包括三个层面：1)对显露性特点(presenting characteristics)比如个体较为稳定的可观察特质、对环境的知觉、政治倾向、行为类型的描述；2)动力层面的分析：将个体的内心过程、结构与需要与外在的显露性特点相联系,意在解释人的行为的不连贯性；3)发展层面的分析：探问个体心理与行为特质的根源。参见GREESTEIN,POSLBY.个体政治论.幼狮文化事业公司,编译.台北：幼狮文化事业公司,1983:60-62
①拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?.杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:14
①拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?.杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000:3
②石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999:32
① GREESTEIN,POSLBY个体政治论.幼狮文化事业公司,编译.台北：幼狮文化事业公司,1983:62
②也许可以通过一个统计数据侧面说明白鲁恂在政治文化研究领域的影响“因子”,根据JSTOR数据库资料的搜索,由阿尔蒙德和维伯合著、在政治文化研究领域声名卓著的《公民文化》一书,评论文章为9篇,评论白鲁恂《中国政治的精神》的文章为17篇。检索日期：2009年10月26日
① LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:50
① RICHARD H SOLOMON. Mao's Revolution and the Chinese Political Culture.Berkeley:University of California press,1972:xvii
② RICHARD H SOLOMON. Mao's Revolution and the Chinese Political Culture.Berkeley:University of California press,1972:xiv,8
③ Alan P.L. Liu,美国加州大学圣芭芭拉分校政治学教授,主要著作：Communications and National Integration in Communist China (1971), Political Culture and Group Conflict in Communist China (1976), How China is Ruled (1985), Phoenix and the Lame Lion (1987), Mass Politics in People's Republic of China(1996)
④参见LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:xiii-xiv
⑤石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:ⅶ
①石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:145-146
②石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003:7
① LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988:11
②格尔茨.文化的解释.韩莉,译.南京：译林出版社,2008:5
③ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:71-75
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976:280
⑤ LOWELL DITTMER.Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.The China Quarterly.1976(68):828
⑥ LUCCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambrige.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:45
① GORDON BENNETT.Reviewed work(s):Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1977,39(2):529
①比如穆磐石曾说白鲁恂的政治文化研究是“国民性研究的一种变体”(PETER R MOODY.Review:The "Cultures" of Asian Politics.Reviewed work(s):Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W.Pye.The Review of Politics.1987,49(1):157),笔者不同意的理由如下：国民性研究在研究文化与人格的关系时很少将社会环境与历史背景因素考虑在内；国民性研究以某一文化类型中的群体为研究对象。而白鲁恂的政治文化研究对社会环境与历史因素非常重视；研究对象有群体,也有个体。此外,白鲁恂总是将个体的行为动机与所处环境因素考虑在内,克服了国民性研究的静态性。同时还需要说明的是,笔者并不认为国民性研究没有价值,其理论与研究方向上的开创性意义是非常值得重视的,然而也不能不看到其理论预设与研究方法的缺陷。国民性研究的推进,先要克服其早期研究的缺陷。
②杨中芳.如何理解中国人,重庆：重庆大学出版社,2009:74
③ TANG TSOU.Review:Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21 (4):683
④ LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics.Cambridge.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992:49
① TANG TSOU.Review:Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21(4):673
② LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politic, Cambridge,Mass.:Oelgeschlager, Gunn& Hain, Publishers, Inc.1981:129
③ ANDREW J NATHAN.Is Chinese Culture Distinctive? The Journal of Asian Studies.1993,52(4):933
①伊萨克斯.美国的中国形象.于殿利,陆日宇,译.北京：时事出版社.1999:272
②转引自伊萨克斯.美国的中国形象.于殿利,陆日宇,译.北京：时事出版社.1999:272
③笔者将“父母主义情感”改为“父母主义情结”是因为“情结”一词内含着矛盾的心理,能够表现白鲁恂对中国文化既赞许又批判的矛盾情感。
④ LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985:57
①萧延中.在明澈“冰山”之下的幽暗底层/／埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010
②马起华.政治心理学.台北：台湾商务印书馆股份有限公司,1981:1
③ FRED WEINSTEIN.Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995,34(4):308
④沃拉斯.政治中的人性.朱曾汶,译.北京：商务印书馆,1995:7
⑤石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999:10
⑥ LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):206
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Prcss,1962:45
① LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962:130
②指过度追求精确、量化和可验证的实证研究。参见FRED WEINSTEIN. Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995,34(4):299-319
③马斯洛.动机与人格.许金声,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007:241
① FRED WEINSTEIN. Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995(34.4):317-318
1. LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development Cambrige.Mass.:Harvard University Press,1992
2. LUCIAN W PYE.Chinese Negotiating Style:Commercial Approaches and Cultural Principles.New York:Quorum Books,1992
3. LUCIAN W PYE.China:An Introduction.4th ed.New York:1991
4. LUCIAN W PYE.The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1988
5. LUCIAN W PYE.Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.Cambridge.Mass.:Belknap Press,1985
6. LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Chinese Politics. Cambridge. Mass: Oelgeschlager.Gunn & Hain.Pub.Inc.,1981
7. LUCIAN W PYE.The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics:A Model and Some Propositions.Santa Monica.Calif:Rand C.,1980
8. LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader.New York:Basic Books C.,1976
9. LUCIAN W PYE.Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China. New York:Praeger,1971
10. LUCIAN W PYE.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development.London:M.I.T. Press,1968
11. LUCIAN W P YE. Aspects of Political Development.Boston:Little Brown,c1966
12. LUCIAN W PYE,SIDNEY VERBA.Political Culture and Political Development.Princeton.N.J.:Princeton University Press,1965
13. LUCIAN W PYE.Communications and Political Development. Princeton.N.J.:Princeton University Press,1963
14. LUCIAN W PYE.Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity,New Haven:Yale University Press,1962
15. LUCIAN W PYE.Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1956
1.白鲁恂.中共的商业谈判作风：一个文化心理的剖析.钟祖康,译.台北：风云时代出版公司,1991
2. LUCIAN W PYE.中国政治的变与常.胡祖庆,译.台北：五南图书出版公司,1988
3.裴鲁恂.中国人的政治文化.胡祖庆,译.台北：风云论坛出版社.1992
4.裴鲁恂.中国人的政治心理.艾思明,译.台北：洞察出版社,1988
5.派伊.政治发展面面观.任晓,王元,译.天津：天津人民出版社,2009
1. LUCIAN W PYE.Asia Studies and the Discipline.PS:Political Science and Politics.2001,34(4):805-807
2. LUCIAN W PYE.Jiang Zemin's Style of Rule:Go for Stability,Monopolize Power and Settle for Limited Effectiveness.The China Journal.2001(45):45-51
3. LUCIAN W PYE.Review:The Thin Line between Loyalty and Treachery in Mao's China.The China Journal.2000 (44):145-152
4. LUCIAN W PYE.Traumatized Political Cultures:The After Effects of Totalitarianism in China and Russia.Japanese Journal of Political Science.2000,1(1):113-128
5. LUCIAN W PYE.An Overview of 50 Years of the People's Republic of China:Some Progress,but Big Problems Remain. The China Quarterly. 1999(159):569-579
6. LUCIAN W PYE.Civility,Social Capital,and Civil Society:Three Powerful Concepts for Explaining Asia.Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 1999,29(4):763-782
7. LUCIAN W PYE.The United States and Asia in 1997:Nothing Dramatic,Just Incremental Progress.Asian Survey.1998,38(1):99-106
8. LUCIAN W PYE.Can Culture Save International Relations Theory in the Post-Cold War World? International Studies Review.1998,42(1):154-156
9. LUCIAN W PYE.Introduction:The Elusive Concept of Culture and the Vivid Reality of Personality.Political Psychology.1997,18(2):241-254
10. LUCIAN W PYE.Money Politics and Transitions to Democracy in East Asia.Asian Survey.1997,37(3):213-228
11. LUCIAN W PYE.Rethinking the Man in the Leader.The China Journal.1996(35):107-112
12. LUCIAN W PYE.Chinese Politics in the Late Deng Era.The China Quarterly.1995(142):573-583
13. LUCIAN W PYE.Factions and the Politics of Guanxi:Paradoxes in Chinese Administrative and Political Behaviour.The China Journal.1995(34):35-53
14. LUCIAN W PYE.How China's Nationalism was Shanghaied.The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs.1993(29):107-133
15. LUCIAN W PYE.An Introductory Profile:Deng Xiaoping and China's Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1993(135):412-443
16. WEI LI,LUCIAN W PYE.The Ubiquitous Role of the Mishu in Chinese Politics.The China Quarterly.1992(132):913-936
17. LUCIAN W PYE.Political Culture Revisited.Political Psychology.1991,12(3):487-508
18. LUCIAN W PYE.The State and the Individual:An Overview Interpretation.The China Quarterly.1991(127):443-466
19. LUCIAN W PYE.Tiananmen and Chinese Political Culture:The Escalation of Confrontation from Moralizing to Revenge.Asian Survey.1990,30(4):331-347
20. LUCIAN W PYE.Political Science and the Crisis of Authoritarianism.The American Political Science Review.1990,84(1):3-19
21. LUCIAN W PYE.Review:Enemies of the People:The Ordeal of Intellectuals in China's Great Cultural Revolution by Thurston.Journal of Asian Studies,1988,47(1):130-131
22. LUCIAN W PYE.Reassessing the Cultural Revolution.The China Quarterly.1986(108):597-612
23. LUCIAN W PYE.On Chinese Pragmatism in the 1980s.The China Quarterly. 1986(106):207-234
24. LUCIAN W PYE,NATHAN LEITES.Nuances in Chinese Political Culture Nuances in Chinese Political Culture.Asian Survey.1982,22(12):1147-1165
25. LUCIAN W PYE.Dilemmas for America in China's Modernization. International Security.1979(4.1):3-19
26. LUCIAN W PYE.The Puzzles of Chinese Pragmatism.Foreign Policy.1978(31):119-136
27. LUCIAN W PYE.Communications and Chinese Political Culture.Asian Survey.1978,18(3):221-246
28. LUCIAN W PYE.Aesopian Language in Chinese Politics.Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.1978,122(5):336-339
29. LUCIAN W PYE.A Very Exceptional Communist.Virginia Quarterly Review.1977,53(2):219-228
30. LUCIAN W PYE.Mao Tse-tung's Leadership Style.Political Science Quarterly.1976,91 (2):219-235
31. LUCIAN W PYE.China after Chou En-Lai.Current History.1976,71(419):53-56
32. LUCIAN W PYE.Culture and Political Science:Problems in the Evaluation of the Concept of Political Culture.Social Science Quarterly.1972,53(2):285-296
33. LUCIAN W PYE.China in Context.Foreign Affairs.1967,45(2):229-245
34. LUCIAN W PYE.The Concept of Political Development.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1965(358):1-13LUCIAN W PYE.Personal Identity and Political Ideology.Behavioral Science.1961,6(3):205-221
35. LUCIAN W PYE.Review:Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism by Lifton.Journal of Asian Studies.1961,20(4):522-523
36. LUCIAN W PYE.Administrators,Agitators,and Brokers.The Public Opinion Quarterly.1958,22(3):342-348
37. LUCIAN W PYE.The Non-Western Political Process.The Journal of Politics.1958,20(3):468-486
38. GEORGE MCT KAHIN,GUY J PAUKER,LUCIAN W PYE.Comparative Politics of Non-Western Countries.The American Political Science Review. 1955(49.4):1022-1041
1. ALAN P L LIU.Reviewed work(s):Struggle for Democracy:Sung Chiao-Jen and the 1911 Chinese Revolution by K S Liew.Warlord Politics6Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1972(403):176-177
2. ALFRED DIOMAND.Is There a Non-Western Political Process? Comments on Lucian W Pye's The Non-Western Political Process.The Journal ofPolitics.1959,21(1):123-127
3. ANDREW J NATHAN.Is Chinese Culture Distinctive? The Journal of Asian Studies.1993,52(4):923-936
4. ARDATH W BURKS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.The Journal of Asian Studies.1988,47(4):842-843.
5. ARISTIDE R ZOLBERG.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sydney Verba The American Political Science Review.1966,60(1):119-121
6. ARTHUR HUCK.Review:China:An Introduction.Pacific Affairs. 1973,46(1):118-119
7. ARTHUR STEINER.Reviewed work(s):The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Communism in China:As Reported From Hankow in 1932 by O Edmund Clubb.The Mandate of Heaven:Record of a Civil War in China 1945-49 by John F Melby.The American Historical Review.1969,75(1):186-187
8. BRUCE J DICKSON.What Explains Chinese Political Behavior? The Debate over Structure and Culture.Comparative Politics.1992,25(1):103-118
9. CHALMERS JOHNSON.Pregnant with "Meaning!" Mao and the Revolutionary Ascetic. Journal of Interdisciplinary History.1977,7(3):499-508
10. DALE BRATTON.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Western Political Quarterly.1977,30(1):140-142
11. DAVID S G GOODMAN.Reviewed work(s):Mao Tse-tung in the Scales of History:A Preliminary Assessment Organized by The China Quarterly by Dick Wilson.Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W·Pye.International Affairs.1978,54(2):354-356
12. DAVID S G GOODMAN.Review:The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics:A Model and Some Propositions by Lucian W Pye.The China Quarterly.1081 (86):349-350
13. DAVID SHAMBAUGH.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W pye.The China Quarterly.1990(122):310-311
14. DAVID WURFEL.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sidney Verba.Midwest Journal of Political Science.1967,11(1):116-118
15. DENNIS M RAY.Reviewed work(s):Chinese Communism in Crisis:Maoism and the Cultural Revolution by Jack Gray,Patrick Cavendish.The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The Western Political Quarterly.1968,21(4):741-744
16. DONALD B ROSENTHAL.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sidney Verba. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1966(365):212-213
17. EUGENE VICTOR WOLFENSTEIN.Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The American Political Science Review.1978,72(2): 758-759
18. GORDON BENNETT.Review:Mao-Tse Dung:the Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1977,39(2):527-529
19. FRANCIS L K HSU.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.American Anthropologist.1970,72(1):156-160
20. FRANZ MICHAEL.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1969,28(4):848-850
21. FREDERICK C TEIWES.Review:The Dynamics of Factions and Consensus in Chinese Politics by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1981,54(2):347-349
22. G D LOESCHER.Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Review of Politics.1977,39(1):125-128
23. GEORGE E TAYLOR.Review:Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning by Lucian W Pye. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1957(311):210-211
24. GORDON BENNETT.Review:The Dynamic of Chinese Politics.The Journal of Politics.1983,45(2):537-538
25. GORDON BENNETT.Review:Mao Tse-tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1977,39(2):527-529
26. GUENTHER ROTH.Review:Political Culture and Political Development by Lucian W Pye,Sidney Verba.Political Science Quarterly.1966,81(4):637-638
27. HAROLD Z SCHIFFRIN.Review:Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Mordenization of Republican China.Pacific Affairs.1973,46(2):317-318
28. HARRY HARDING.The Study of Chinese Politics.Toward a Third Generation of Scholarship. World Politics.1984,36(2):284-307
29. HARSH SETHI.Culture as Politics or Politics as Culture.Economic and Political Weekly.1987,22(12):497-498
30. HILARY CONROY.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1986(488):197-198
31. HLA MYINT.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1962,35(2):187-188
32. HUGH TINKER.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1963,22(3):335-337
33. JAMES COTTON.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.International Affairs.1986,62(2):431-342
34. J H BRIMMELL.Review:Guerrilla Communism in Malaya:Its Social and Political Meaning by Lucian W Pye.International Affairs.1957,33(4):521-522
35. J BRUCE JACOBS.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1990,63(1):93-94
36. JEROME CH'EN.Review:Mao Tse-Tung:The Man in the Leader by Lucian W Pye.Pacific Affairs.1977,50(l):119-120
37. JOE C HUANG.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1969,31(1):255-256
38. JOHN BRYAN STARR.Reviewed work(s):The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Revolutionary Immortality:Mao Tse-tung and the Chinese Cultural by Robert J Lifton.American Sociological Review.1969,34(6):986-987
39. JOHN K MUSGRAVE.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.American Anthropologist.1963,65(2):491-492
40. JOYCE K KALLGREN.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.The American Political Science Review.1969,63(3):930-931
41. KUE-WEI LEE.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye. Social Forces.1969,48(l):130
42. LOWELL DITTMER.Mao Tse-tung:The Man and the Symbol.The China Quarterly.1976(68):822-828
43. MANNING NASH.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.The American Journal of Sociology.1962,68(2):270-271
44. MINOO ADENWALLA.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building: Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.Midwest Journal of Political Science.1963,7(3):277-279
45. MORTON H FRIED.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Political Science Quarterly.1970,85(3):535-538
46. PAUL BIXLER.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation-Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1962(343):167-168
47. PETER R MOODY.Review:The Mandarin and the Cadre:China's Political Cultures.The Journal of Asian Studies.1989,48(4):839-840
48. PETER R MOODY.The "Cultures" of Asian Politics.The Review of Politics.1987,49(1):157-159
49. PETER R MOODY.Reviewed work(s):Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye. The Government and Politics of Communist China by Derek J Waller.Ideology and Practice:The Evolution of Chinese Communism by James Chieh Hsiung.The Review of Politics.1973,35(4):576-581
50. R H TAYLOR.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies University of London.1987,50(3):597-598
51. RICHARD BUTWELL.Individual and Collective Identity and Nation-Building World Politics.1963,15(3):488-494
52. RICHARD BUTWELL.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation BuildingrBurma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.American Sociological Review.1964,29(4):601-602
53. RICHARD W WILSON.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development By Lucian W Pye.The American Journal of Sociology.1968,74(3):310-311
54. ROBERT A KAPP.Review:Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Modernization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye. Modern Asian Studies.1974,8(2):271-273
55. RUSSELL H FIFIELD.Review:Southeast Asia's Political Systems by Lucian W Pye.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1968(377):179
56. STEPHEN R MACKINNON.Review:Warlord Politics:Conflict and Coalition in the Mordenization of Republican China by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Asian Studies.1972,31(4):935-936
57. TANG TSOU.Western Concepts and China's Historical Experience.World Politics.1969,21(4):655-691
58. TIMOTHY J LOMPERIS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1987,49(1):332-335
59. TYRENE WHITE.Reviewed work(s):Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian WPye.Children of Mao:Personality Development and Political Activism in the Red Guard Generation by Anita Chan. Political Psychology.1987,8(2):249-254
60. VERA MICHELES DEAN.Review:Politics,Personality,and Nation Building:Burma's Search for Identity by Lucian W Pye.The Journal of Politics.1963,25(1):175-176
61. W A C ADIE.Reviewed work(s):The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development, by Lucian W Pye.The Communists and Chinese Peasant Rebellions:A Study in the Rewriting of Chinese History by James P Harrison.Canton under Communism:Programs and Politics in a Provincial Capital(1949-1968).International Affairs.1970,46(4):878-880
62. W HOWARD WRIGGINS.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultural Dimensions of Authority by Lucian W Pye.Political Science Quarterly.1987,102(2):343-344
63. W J F JENNER.Review:The Spirit of Chinese Politics:A Psychocultural Study of the Authority Crisis in Political Development by Lucian W Pye.Modern Asian Studies.l971,5(1):87-88
1. ALEX INKELES, DANIEL LEVINSON.National Character:A Psycho-social Perspective. New Brunswick, NJ:Transaction Publishers,1996
2. GABRIEL A ALMOND. Ventures in Political Science:Narrative and Reflections.Colorado:Lynne Rienner Publishers,2003
3. GABRIEL A ALMOND.A Discipline Divided:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Newbury Park:Sage Publication,1990
4. GABRIEL A ALMOND.The Appeals of the Communism.Princeton:Princeton University Press,1954
5. HAROLD D LASSWELL.Psychopathology and Politics.London:University of Chicago Press,1986
6. JON ELESTER.Political Psychology.New York:Cambridge University PRESS,1993
7. JOHN F. CLARKIN,PETER FONAGY,GLEN O. GABBARD.Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders:A Clinical Handbook. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub.,2010
8. MARK IRVING LICHBACH,ALAN S ZUCKERMAN.Comparative Politics:Rationality,Culture,and Structure.New York:Cambridge University Press,1997
9. NATHAN LEITES.The Operational Code of the Politburo.New York:Rand Corporation,1951
10. RICHARD A SHWEDER,ROBERT A LEVINE.Culture Theory:Essays on Mind,Self,and Emotion.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1984
11. RICHARD H SOLOMON.Mao's Revolution and the Chinese Political Culture.Berkeley:University of California press,1972
12. RICHARD J SAMUELS,MYRON WEINER.The Political Culture of Foreign Area and International Studies:Essays in Honor of Lucian W Pye. Washington:Brassey's(US).Inc.,1992
13. RONALD INGLEHART.Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Societies. Prinston:Prinston University Press,1990
14. ANDREW J NATHAN.A Factionalism Model for CCP Politics. The China Quarterly.1973(53):34-66
15. ANDREW J NATHAN, Tianjian Shi. Cultural Requisites for Democracy in China:Findings From a Survey.:95-123
16. AVERY GOLDSTEIN.Trends in the Study of Political Elites and Institution in the PRC.The China Quarterly.1994(139):714-730
17. BRUCE MAZLISH.What Is Pshcho-History? Transanctions of the Royal Historical Society.Fifth Series.1971 (21):79-99
18. CAROLE PATEMAN.Political Culture, Political Structure and Political Change.British Journal of Political Science.1971,1(3):291-305
19. DON D SMITH.Modal Attitude Clusters:A Supplement for the Study of National Character.Social Forces.1966,44(4):526-533
20. DONALD L M BLACKMER.The Contributions of President Lucian W Pye.PS: Political Science and Politics.1988,21(4):882-891
21. DWAINE MARVICK.The Work of Harold D Lasswell:His Approach,Concerns,and Influence.Political Behavior.1980,2(3):219-229
22. EZRA F VOGEL.Foreword:The First Forty Years of the Universities Service Centre for China Studies.The China Journal.2005(53):1-7
23. FEDERICO NEIBURG,MARCIO GOLDMAN,PETER GOW.Anthropology and Politics in Studies of National Character.Cultural Anthropology.1998,13(1):56-81
24. FRANCIS L K HSU.Margaret Mead and Psychological Anthropology.American Anthropologist,New Series.1980,82(2):349-353
25. FRED GREENSTEIN. Can Personality and Politics Be Studied Systematically? Political Psychology.1992,13(1):105-128
26. FRED GREENSTEIN.Lasswell's Concept of Democratic Character.The Journal of Politics.1968,30(3):696-709
27. FRED GREENSTEIN.The Impact of Personality on Politics:An Attempt to Clear Away Underbrush.The American Political Science Review.1967,61(3):629-641
28. FRED GREENSTEIN.Personality and Political Socialization:The Theories of Authoritarian and Democratic Character.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.1965(361):81-95
29. FRED WEINSTEIN.Psychohistory and the Crisis of the Social Sciences.History and Theory.1995,34(4):299-319
30. GABRIEL A ALMOND.Who Lost the Chicago School of Political Science? Perspectives on Politics.2004,2(1):91-93
31. GABRIEL A ALMOND.Separate Tables:Schools and Sects in Political Science.Political Science and Politics.1988,21(4):828-842
32. GABRIEL A ALMOND.Comparative Political Systems.The Journal of Politics.l956,18(3):391-409
33. GERHARDLOEWENBERG.The Influence of European Emigre Scholars on Comparative Politics,1925-1965.The American Political Science Review,2006,100(4):597-604.
34. HAROLD D LASSWELL.The Normative Impact of the Behavioral Sciences.Ethics.1957,67(3):1-42
35. HAROLD D LASSWELL.The Contribution of Freud's Insight Interview to the Social Sciences.The American Journal of Sociology.1939,45(3):375-390
36. HAROLD D LASSWELL.The Study of the I11 as a Method of Research into Political Personalities.The American Political Science Review.1929,23(4):996-1001
37. HAROLD D LASSWELL.Two Forgotten Studies in Political Psychology.1925,19(4):707-717
38. HARRY ECKSTEIN.A Culturalist Theory of Political Change.The American Political Science Review.1988,82(3):789-804
39. HARRY ECKSTEIN.Political Culture and Political Change.American Political Science Review.1990,84(1):249-259
40. HARRY HARDING.From China,with Disdain:New Trends in the Study of China.Asian Survey.1982,22(10):934-958
41. HOWARD F STEIN.On Professional Allegiance in the Study of Political Psycholgy.Political Psychology.1986,7(2):245-253
42. JAMES N DRUCKMAN,DONARD P GREEN, JAMES H KUKLINSKI,et al. The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science.American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):627-635
43. JOHN B WATSON.Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It. Psychological Review.1994,101 (2):248-253
44. LISA WEDEEN.Conceptualizing Culture:Possibilities for Political Science.The Americal Political Science Review.2002,96(4):713-728
45. LOWELL DITTMER,YU-SHAN WU.The Modernization of Factionalism in Chinese Politics. World Politics.1995,47(4):467-494
46. LOWELL DITTMER.Chinese Informal Politics.The China Quarterly.1995 (34):1-34
47. LOWELL DITTMER.Mao and the Politics of Revolutionary Mortality.Asian Survey.1987,27(3):316-339
48. LOWELL DITTMER.Thought Reform and Cultural Revolutio:An Analysis of the Symbolism of Chinese Polemics.The American Political Science Review.1977,71(1):67-85
49. LOWELL DITTMER.Political Culture and Political Symbolism:Toward a Theoretical Synthesis. World Politics.1977,29(4):552-583
50. LUNG-KEE SUN.Contemporary Chinese Culture:Structure and Emotionality.The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs.1991(26):1-41
51. MERRIAM CHARLES.The Present State of the Study of Politics.The American Political Review.1921,15(2):173-185
52. MERRIAM CHARLES.Progress in Political Research.The American Political Science Review.1926,20(1):1-13
53. MICHAELT HEANEY,JOHN MARK HANSEN. Building the Chicago School. The American Political Science Review.2006,100(4):589-596
54. MYRES S MCDOUGAL,W MICHAEL REISMAN.Harold Dwight Lasswell(1902-1978).The American Journal of International Law.1979,73(4):655-660
55. NATHAN LEITES.The "Operational Code":A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision-making. International Studies Quarterly.1969,13(2):190-222
56. NATHAN LEITES.Stalin as an Intellectual.World Politics.1953,6(1):45-66
57. NATHAN LEITES.Psycho-Cultural Hypotheses about Political Acts. World Politics.1948,1(1):102-119
58. PETER MOODY.Political Culture and the Study of Chinese Politics.Journal of Chinese Political Science.2009,14(3):253-274
59. PETER MOODY.Trends in the Study of Chinese Political Culture.The China Quarterly.1994(139):731-740
60. PETER MOODY.The Political Culture of Chinese Students and Intellectuals:A Historical Examination.Asian Survey.1988,28(11):1140-1160
61. PETER MOODY.The Romance of the Three Kingdoms and Popular Chinese Political Thought.The Review of Politics.1975,37(2):175-199
62. ROBERT A DAHL.The Behavioral Approach in Political Science:Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.The American Political Science Review.1961,55(4):763-772
63. ROBERT D PUTNAM.Studying Elite Political Culture:The Case of "Ideology ".The American Political Science Review.1971,65(3):651-681
64. ROBERT JAY LIFTON.Report of the Group for the Study of Psychohistorical Process.Records of the Academy(American Academy of Arts and Sciences).1968(1967-1968):26-27
65. ROBERT W JACKMAN,ROSS A MILLER.A Renaissance of Political Culture?American Journal of Political Science.1996,40(3):632-659
66. RONALD INGLEHART.The Renaissance of Political Culture. American Political Science Review.1982,82(12):1203-1230
67. RUTH BENEDICT.Margaret Mead.American Association for the Advancement of Scienc.1959,129(3362):1514
68. SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET.Sociology and Political SciencerA Bibliographical Note.American Sociological Review.1964,29(5):730-734
69. STEPHEN WHITE.Political Culture in Communist States:Some Problems of Theory and Method.Comparative Politics.1984,16(3):351-365
70. SUISHENG ZHAO.Chinese Intelletuals' Quest for Notional Greatness and Nationalistic Writing in the 1990s.The China Quarterly.1997(152):725-745
71. TALCOTT PARSONS.On Building Social System Theory:A Personal History.The Making of Modern Science:Biographical Studies.1970,99(4):826-881
72. TALCOTT PARSONS.The Prospects of Sociological Theory.American Sociological Review.1950,15(l):3-16
73. TALCOTT PARSONS,BERNARD BARBER.Sociology,1941-46.The American Journal of Sociology.1948,53(4):245-257
74. TANG TSOU.Chinese Politics at the Top:Factionalism or Informal Politics? Balance-of-Power Politics or a Game to Win All? The China Quarterly.1995(34):95-156
75. TANG TSOU, ANDREW J NATHAN. Prolegomenon to the Study of Informal Groups in CCP Politics.The China Quarterly,1976(65):98-117
76. TIANJIAN SHI.Cultural Values and Political Trust:A Comparison of the People's Republic of China and Taiwan.Comparative Politics.2001,33(4):401-419
77. TIANJIAN SHI.Cultural Values and Democracy in the People's Republic of ChinaThe China Quarterly.2000(162):540-559
78. THOMAS A KOHUT.Psychohistory as History.1986,91(2):336-354
79. WARD GOODENOUGH. Margaret Mead and Cultural Anthropology.Science.New Series.1983,220(4600):906-908
80. YUNG WEI.A Methodological Critique of Current Studies on Chinese Political Culture.The Journal of Politics.1976,38(1):114-140
1.阿道诺.权力主义人格.李维,译.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002
2.阿尔蒙德.比较政治学：体系、过程与政策.曹佩霖,等译.上海：上海译文出版社,1987
3.阿尔蒙德,维巴.公民文化：五个国家的政治态度与民主制.徐湘林,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
4.阿兰.政治学的视野与方法.张继武,段小光,译.南京：南京大学出版社,1988
5.阿伦森,威尔逊,阿克特.社会心理学.侯玉波,等译.北京：中国轻工业出版社,2005
6.爱力克森.青年路德.康绿岛,译.台北：远流出版事业公司,1990
7.埃里克森.甘地的真理：好战的非暴力起源.吕文江,田嵩燕,译.北京：中央编译出版社,2010
8.埃里克森.同一性：青少年与危机.孙名之,译.杭州：浙江教育出版社,1998
9.埃里克松.童年与社会.罗一静,徐炜铭,钱积权,编译.上海：学林出版社,1992
10.奥伦.美国和美国的敌人.唐小松,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2004
11.博厄斯.人类学与现代生活.刘莎,谭晓勤,张卓宏,译.北京：华夏出版社,1999
12.伯格.人格心理学.陈会昌,等译.北京：中国轻工业出版社,2004
13.布朗.自我.陈浩莺,薛贵,曾盼盼,译.北京：人民邮电出版社,2004
14.布罗代尔.论历史.刘北成,周立红,译.北京：北京大学出版社,2008
15.本尼迪克特.文化模式.王炜,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009
16.本尼迪克特.菊与刀：日本文化的类型.李万和,熊达云,王智新,译.北京：商务印书馆,1990
17.陈志让.毛泽东与中国革命.中共中央文献研究室《国外研究毛泽东思想资料选辑》编译组,编译.北京：中央文献出版社,1993.
18.迪韦尔热.政治社会学：政治学要素.杨祖功,王大东,译.北京：东方出版社,2007
19.弗洛伊德.图腾与崇拜.赵立玮,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2005
20.弗洛伊德.一种幻想的未来：文明及其不满.严志军,张沫,译.上海：上海人民出版社,2007
21.弗洛伊德.弗洛伊德后期著作选.林尘,张唤民,陈伟奇,译.上海：上海译文出版社,1986
22.弗罗姆.健全的社会.王大庆,许旭虹,李延文,等译.北京：国际文化出版公司,2003
23.弗罗姆.逃避自由.陈学明,译.北京：工人出版社,1987
24.弗洛姆.弗洛伊德思想的贡献与局限.申荷永,译.长沙：湖南人民出版社,1986
25.弗洛姆.精神分析的危机.许俊达,许俊农,译.北京：国际文化出版公司,1988
26.弗思.人文类型.费孝通,译.北京：华夏出版社,2002
27.费正清.美国和中国.张理京,译.北京：世界知识出版社,1999
28.费正清.中国的思想与制度.郭晓兵,等译.北京：世界知识出版社,2008
29.格尔茨.文化的解释.韩莉,译.南京：译林出版社,2008
30.古丁,克林格曼.政治科学新手册.钟开斌,王乐钟,任炳强,等译.北京：三联书店,2006
31.古德曼.邓小平政治评传.田酉如,等译.北京：中共中央党校出版社,1995
32. GREESTEIN,POSLBY.个体政治论.幼狮文化事业公司,编译.台北：幼狮文化事业公司,1983
33.汉娜·鄂兰.极权主义的起源.林骧华,译.台北：时报文化出版企业有限公司,1975
34.哈维兰.文化人类学.瞿铁鹏,张钰,译.上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2006
35.亨廷顿.第三波：20世纪后期民主化浪潮.刘军宁,译.上海：上海三联书店,1998
36.亨廷顿.文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建.周琪,译.北京：新华出版社.2002
37.亨廷顿.变化社会中的政治秩序.李盛平,译.北京：华夏出版社,1988
38.柯文.在中国发现历史.林同芬,译.北京：中华书局,2002
39.库利.人类本性与社会秩序.包凡一,王湲,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
40.绫部恒雄.文化人类学的十五种理论.周星,译.贵阳：贵州人民出版社,1988
41.林顿.人格的文化背景.于闽梅,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007
42.李普塞特.政治人：政治的社会基础.张绍宗,译.上海：上海人民出版社,1997
43.拉斯韦尔.政治学：谁得到什么?何时和如何得到?.杨昌裕,译.北京：商务印书馆,2000
44.列文森.儒教中国和他的现代命运.郑大华,任菁,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2009
45.玛格丽特·米德.三个原始部落的性别与气质.宋践,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988
46.玛格丽特·米德.萨摩亚人的成年：为西方文明所作的原始人类的青年心理研究.周晓红,李姚军,译.杭州：浙江人民出版社,1988
47.马凌诺斯基.文化论.费孝通,译.北京：华夏出版社,2002
48.马斯洛.动机与人格.许金声,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007
49.麦克法夸尔.文化大革命的起源.文化大革命的起源翻译组,译.石家庄：河北人民出版社,1989
50.尼斯贝特.思维的版图.李秀霞,译.北京：中信出版社,2006
51.帕森斯.社会行动的结构.张明德,夏遇南,彭刚,译.南京：译林出版社,2003
52.乔治·米德.心灵、自我与社会.赵月瑟,译.上海：上海译文出版社,2008
53.斯金纳.超越自由与尊严.陈维刚,王映桥,粟爱平,译.贵阳：贵州人民出版社,1990
54.斯通.政治心理学,胡杰,译.哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1997
55.斯诺.红星照耀中国.董乐山,译.北京：生活·读书·新知三联出版社,1979
56.孙隆基.中国文化的深层结构.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2004
57.萨义德.东方学.王宇根,译.北京：生活·读书·新知三联出版社,2007
58.山极晃.中美关系的历史性展开(1941-1979).鹿锡俊,译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2001
59.施拉姆.毛泽东的思想.田松年,杨德,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005
60.史华慈.中国的共产主义与毛泽东的崛起.陈玮,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006
61.史华慈.思想的跨度与张力：中国思想史论集.王中江,编.郑州：中州古籍出版社,2009
62.特里尔.毛泽东传.胡为雄,郑玉臣,译.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006
63.托克维尔.论美国的民主.董果良,译.北京：商务印书馆,2002
64.泰勒.人类学：人及其文化研究.连树声,译.上海：上海文艺出版社,1993
65.汤森,沃马克.中国政治.顾速,董方,译.南京：江苏人民出版社,2003
66.沃拉斯.政治中的人性.朱曾汶,译.北京：商务印书馆,1995
67.王景伦.毛泽东的理想主义和邓小平的现实主义.北京：时事出版社,1996
68.韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神.康乐,简惠美,译.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007
69.韦伯.儒教与道教.王容芬,译.北京：商务印书馆,2003
70.韦伯.经济与社会.林荣远,译.北京：商务印书馆,1997
71.许娘光.美国人与中国人：两种生活方式比较.彭凯平,译.北京：华夏出版社,1989
72.萧瑜.毛泽东前传(网络版)
73.伊文思.邓小平传.武市红,译.上海：上海译文出版社,1996
74.伊萨克斯.美国的中国形象.于殿利,陆日宇,译.北京：时事出版社,1999
75.英格利斯.文化.韩启群,张鲁宁,樊淑英,译.南京：南京大学出版社,2008
76.詹姆斯.心理学原理.田平,译.北京：中国城市出版社,2003
77.佐藤功.比较政治制度.刘庆林,译.北京：法律出版社,1984
78.柏维春.政治文化传统：中国和西方对比分析.长春：东北师范大学出版社,2001
79.陈明显.晚年毛泽东(1953-1976).南昌：江西人民出版社,2008
80.车文博.透视西方心理学.北京：北京师范大学出版社,2007
81.车文博主编.弗洛伊德主义原著选辑.沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1988
82.邓小平文选.北京：人民出版社,1994
83.丁耘,陈新.思想史研究：思想史的元问题.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2005
84.费孝通.乡土中国、生育制度.北京：北京大学出版社,1998
85.高洪涛.政治文化论.北京：中国广播电视出版社,1990
86.高皋,严家其.文化大革命十年史.天津：天津人民出版社,1986
87.郭本禹.潜意识的意义：精神分析心理学.济南：山东教育出版社,2009
88.葛荃.权力宰割理性：士人、传统政治文化与中国社会.天津：南开大学出版社,2003
89.葛荃.立命与忠诚：士人政治精神的典型分析.杭州：浙江人民出版社,2000
90.葛荃.中国政治文化教程.北京：高等教育出版社,2006
91.葛兆光.思想史研究课堂讲录：视野、角度与方法.北京：三联书店,2006
92.黄进兴.历史主义与历史理论.西安：陕西师范大学出版社,2002
93.黄希庭.人格心理学.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002
94.李柄全.文化心理学.上海：上海教育出版社,2007
95.李锐.三十岁以前的毛泽东.广州：广东人民出版社,1994
96.李亦园,杨国枢.中国人的性格.南京：凤凰出版传媒集团,2006
97.刘梦溪主编.中国现代学术经典·萧公权卷.石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999
98.刘松阳,刘锋.政治心理学.郑州：河南人民出版社,1991
99.刘泽华.王权思想论.天津：天津人民出版社,2006
100.刘泽华,张分田.思想的门径：中国政治思想史研究方法论,天津：天津古籍出版社,2006
101.梁簌溟.中国文化要义.上海：上海世纪出版集团,2005
102.吕元礼.政治文化：传统与现代的会通.北京：人民出版社,2004
103.江炳伦.亚洲政治文化个案研究.台北：五南图书出版公司,1986
104.贾春增.外国社会学史.第三版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008
105.金先宏.影响白宫对华政策的“中国通”.北京：时事出版社,2003
106.毛毛.我的父亲邓小平“文革岁月”.北京：中央文献出版社,2000
107.毛毛.我的父亲邓小平.北京：中央文献出版社,1997
108.毛泽东.体育之研究.北京：人民体育出版社,1979.
109.马起华.政治心理学.台北：台湾商务印书馆股份有限公司,1981
110.马起华.政治学原理.台北：大中国图书公司,1985
111.马庆钰.告别西西弗斯——中国政治文化的分析与展望.中国社会科学出版社,2003
112.闵琦.中国政治文化：民主政治难产的社会心理因素.云南人民出版社,1989
113.潘一禾.观念与体制—政治文化的比较研究.杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003
114.石之瑜.大陆问题研究.台北：三民书局,1995
115.石之瑜.政治心理学.台北：五南图书出版公司,1999
116.石之瑜.政治文化与政治人格.台北：扬智文化事业股份有限公司,2003
117.孙正甲.政治文化.哈尔滨：北方文艺出版社,1992
118.沙莲香.中国民族性.北京：中国人民大学出版社,1989
119.唐光华.政治文化的沉思者：白鲁恂.台北：允晨文化事业股份有限公司,1982
120.文崇一,萧新煌.中国人：观念与行为.台北：巨流图书公司,1988
121.王乐理.政治文化导论.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002
122.王卓君.文化视野中的政治系统：政治文化研究引论.南京：南京大学出版社,1997
123.韦政通.伦理思想的突破.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005
124.徐大同.当代西方政治思潮.天津：天津人民出版社,1991
125.萧延中.巨人的诞生.毛泽东现象”的意识起源与中国近代政治文化的发展.南昌：江西人民出版社,2005
126.萧延中.晚年毛泽东.北京：春秋出版社,1989
127.叶娟丽.行为主义政治学方法论研究.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2005
128.杨国枢,陆洛.中国人的自我：心理学的分析,重庆：重庆大学出版社,2009
129.杨国枢.文化心理学的探索.台北：桂冠图书公司,1996
130.杨国枢,余安邦.中国人的心理与行为——理念及方法篇.台北：桂冠图书公司,1993
131.杨中芳.如何理解中国人.重庆：重庆大学出版社,2009
132.余英时.重寻胡适历程.桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2004
133.张分田.亦主亦奴——中国古代官僚的社会人格.杭州：浙江人民出版社,2000
134.张厚粲.行为主义心理学.杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002
135.张小劲,景跃进.比较政治学导论.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001
136.张明澍.中国“政治人”——中国公民政治素质调查报告.中国社会科学出版社,1994
137.朱日耀.中国传统政治文化的现代思考.长春：吉林大学出版社,1990
138.朱日耀.论中国传统政治文化.长春：吉林大学出版社,1987
139.资中筠,陶文钊.架起理解的新桥梁——中美关系史研究回顾与展望.合肥：安徽大学出版社,1996.
140.周晓虹.现代社会心理学史.北京：中国人民大学出版社,1993
141.鲍瑞嘉.美国的中国政治研究.庞娟,编译.当代世界与社会主义.2008(2):164-167
142.董敏志.政治心理学的视野：政治行为与人格.学术月刊.1995(1):90-98
143.葛荃.拿来与创新：中国政治文化研究的回顾与创新.天津社会科学.1997(2)：59-64
144.葛荃.屈原的政治人格与心态析论.华侨大学学报(哲社版).1999(1):108-114
145.葛荃.作为政治人格的狂狷、乡愿与伪君子——以晚明东林诸君见解为据.东岳论丛.2008(6)：133-138
146.葛荃,贾乾初,刘坤.张之洞政治人格刍议——基于政治文化的视角.山东大学学报.2010(1)：1-11
147.蒋云根.我国政治学研究在当前应该着重研究的若干主题.政治学研究.1999(1)：1-8
148.李江雪.边缘型人格障碍的心理分析研究.广州：华南师范大学教育科学学院,2006
149.李见顺.历史语境主义：昆廷·斯金纳政治思想史研究方法初探.武汉：武汉大学政治与公共管理学院,2009
150.李增田.鲍大可与中美关系正常化.美国研究.2004(2):79-99
151.刘平邻.中国政治文化研究的各种方法：百花齐放,百家争鸣.何思因主编.中国大陆研究方法与成果.台北：国立政治大学国际关系研究中心,2003:1-31
152.刘宪阁.走进毛泽东的心理世界：一次重要尝试.湖南科技大学学报社科版.2004(5)：5-13
153.梅祖蓉,马敏.制度转型的多样性因素及关系分析.史学集刊.2007(2):57-64
154.牛可.白鲁恂：现代化理论家、“冷战斗士”和中国通.世界知识.2009(1):62-63
155.裴宜理.中华人民共和国和美国的中国学研究50年.黄育馥,摘译.国外社会科学.2004(2)：64-67
156.邱柏生.浅析我国政治心理学研究的现状.复旦大学学报社会科学版,1996(4)：89-91
157.王沪宁.西方政治学行为主义学派述评.复旦大学学报社科版.1985(2):93-98
158.王丽萍.政治心理学中的态度研究.北京大学学报哲学社会科学版.2006,43(1)：132-141
159.王丽萍.人格与政治：政治心理学领域核心关系分析.北京大学学报哲学社会科学版.2002,39(2)：15-23
160.王泽壮,李祖红.革命领袖何以形成——西方学者的三种方法论视角.史学集刊2007(3)：70-76
161.石之瑜.民主人格：论精神分析的政治文化局限.问题与研究.1997(5):1-12
162.沈传亮.近二十年来国内政治心理学研究进展述评.教学与研究.2007(1):57-62
163.尚庆飞.略论国外毛泽东研究领域的“心理历史学派”.学术界.2008(3):291-296
164.单伟.美国学界对中国政治精英的研究.浙江社会科学.2008(5):13-21
165.萧延中,曾子墨.探索毛泽东晚年的生命焦虑.史林.2007(4):1-12
166.萧延中.毛泽东的个性密码.报刊荟萃.2007(2):10-12
167.萧延中.论毛泽东“革命牺牲”的政治学——利夫顿《革命的永生》一书解读及其它.湖南科技大学学报社会科学版.2006,9(3):14-21
168.萧延中.试论关于晚年毛泽东的整体解读.毛泽东邓小平理论研究.2003(6)：118-125
169.张英魁.白鲁恂中国传统政治文化观研究.天津：南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,2005
170.张英魁.论白鲁恂的中国传统政治文化观.大连：辽宁师范大学政治与行政学院,2002
171.张平.国外政治心理学研究的现状与展望.心理科学.2004,27(6):1467-1469
172.张清敏.国际政治心理学流派评析.国际政治科学.2008(3):71-101
173.资中均,姬虹.美国学术界对中美关系的研究,1969-1992.美国研究.1995(1)：50-78
1. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/obit-pye-0908.html
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/us/12pye.html
3. LOYD I RUDOLPH.Review:Asian Power and Politics:The Cultral Dimensions of Authoritarity by Lucian W Pye. http://www.nytimes.com/1986/02/09/books/the-east-psychoanalyzed.html