《解读艾森斯塔德的东亚发展观.docVIP

解读艾森斯塔德的东亚发展观 Interpret eisen stade of east Asian development outlook S.N.艾森斯塔德（Shmuel N.Eisenstadt），当代社会学家，政治学家，现代化问题专家，以色列希伯莱大学教授，著有《社会的进化与开展》（1966）、《现代化：抗拒与变化》（1966）、《帝国的政治体系》、《轴心文化的源头与分殊》等。他在《传统、革新与现代化——对中国经历的深思》（1968）一文里以为，现代化并不需求消灭传统，也不可能消灭传统，需求讨论的是应该如何让传统顺应或顺应现代化，即让传统为现代化所吸收和整合，从这个意义上说，传统就是现代性的一局部。他对中国现代化过程中传统的限制和影响提出了共同的见地，并与日本和泰国作了比拟研讨，得出了新传统主义与现代化能够相容的结论，这与他主张的“多重现代性”理论是分歧的。 Stade S.N. eisen (Shmuel N.E isenstadt), contemporary sociologists, political scientists, modern expert, Israeli Hebrew university professor, author of social evolution and development of (1966), modernization: resist and change (1966), the empires political system, the source of the axis of the culture and divided different , etc. In the tradition, innovation and modernization -- thinking of China (1968) thought in the article, does not need to eliminate the traditional modernization, it is impossible to eliminate traditional, needs to discuss is how to make traditional comply with or conform to the modernization, which absorbed by the tradition to modernization, and integration, in this sense, the tradition is a local modernity. His influence on China modernization process of traditional restrictions and puts forward the common ground, and also compared with Japan and Thailand, reached the new tradition with modern to compatibility, this and he advocated the theory of multiple modernity is divided. 艾森斯塔德反对“经典”现代化理论把“传统”与“现代性”两极化的做法，主张两者在一定意义上能够以多种不同的方式共存，“现代性”实践上在不同的水平上是从传统中开展（传统的创新）而来的。“传统”中具有能够现代化的“潜质”。从“传统”向“现代性”演进的过程是连续性与断裂性的统一。胜利的“现代化”过程不是简单丢弃“传统”的过程，而是把“传统”不时转移和整合到“现代性”中去的过程。因而，需求对“传统”与“现代性”的关系停止重新定位。 Eisen, opposed to the classic modernization theory traditional and modernity polarisation, claims in a sense both can coexist in a variety of different ways, modernity in practice in different level from the traditional (traditional innovation). In traditional to modern potential. Evolution from traditional to modernity is the process of continuity and integrity of fra