儒家伦理与“亚洲四龙”——“儒学复兴说”驳议

THE CONFUCIAN DOCTRINE & THE FOUR ’DRAGONS’ IN ASIA——A CRITICISM ON THE CONFUCIAN REVIVALISM

台湾、南朝鲜、香港、新加坡在六十年代经济起飞以后,被称之为"亚洲四龙",引起国际经济学界、社会学界和文化学界的普遍关注。围绕"亚洲四龙"经济起飞的原因,出现了两派说法:一派强调社会结构和政治制度、经济政策的作用,称为"制度论派";一派主张制度与政策只有在特定的文化环境中才能发挥有效作用,认为儒家传统才是东亚经济发展的动因,这是"文化论派"。海外新儒家学派则更以此作为儒学复兴的理由,有的还把它们称为"新儒教国家"。本文着重对"文化论派"的观点,提出不同意见。文章认为,这些国家和地区的经济发展,其政治制度、生产资料所有制、经营方式、法律、教育等,都是受西方文化影响,并不是本土文化,历史上所谓儒家文化圈已发生了深刻变化。文中还引用海外学者一些调查、统计资料,说明这些国家和地区人们心理和行为的变化,说明儒家传统影响已与历史上大不相同。文章认为,儒家传统和现代化不相适应,儒家体系所代表的价值系统,与现代化是一逆向的精神力量。有的学者列举了香港、台湾等地留存的一些传统文化现象。并不能作为儒家体系和现代化不冲突的理由。如果离开了国际经济环境,"亚洲四龙"的经济起飞是不可能的。文章还对"文化论派"曲解马克斯·韦伯儒家伦理命题作了剖析,认为韦伯讨论的是资本主义兴起的文化原因,儒家伦理与"亚洲四龙"经济起飞不论是什么关系,都与韦伯的命题不相干。文章最后提出对传统文化和现代化关系几个值得思考的问题,认为如果摆脱中心化的心理,那韦伯的研究会为我们解决这些问题提供理论的架构,东亚工业文明的发展则提供许多值得探讨的经验事实,我们从中会得到有益的启示。

Since the economy in 1960s began taking off in Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore now called the four 'dragons' in Asia, it has attracted common attention of the international circles of economics, sociology, and cultural studies. People in these circles interested in the reason of the 'take-off', divide into two major schools. One stresses the functions of social structure, political system and economic policies, called 'the school of system'. The other thinks that these functions can only be effected under particular cultural conditions, and that the economic growth in eastern Asia is caused by no other than the Confucian tradition, called 'the school of culture'. The new Confucians overseas take the economic growth there as a reason to grow new Confucianism, and even some of them name the four the 'newly Confucian countries'.The author purposely emphasizes his opinions opposite to what 'the school of culture' holds, says that the economic breakthrough, political system, ownership of production means, laws and education in these countries and regions are all influenced by those either of England or of America, simply by the Western culture, not by the local culture. The so-called Confucian cultural circle once existed in history but has profoundly changed at present.The surviving phenomena of the tranditional culture in Hong Kong and Taiwan cannot be explained for the sake of a harmony of the Confucian system and modernization. Without the international economic environment, the economic take-off couldn't have come true. The author also analyzes how 'the school of culture' misinterprets the study subject of Mr Max Weber on morality, and further points out that what Mr Max Weber discusses in his study is how the culture has caused the growth of capitalism. No matter what kind of relation there is between the Confucian doctrine and the dragons' economic take-off, it has nothing to do with the subject of Weber's.Finally the author suggests ponderations on the connexion of the traditional culture and modernization. We'll come to see that Mr Weber has already offered us the key to these problems in his study as a theoretical framework, if we cast off the 'centring culture' psychologically. And if we want to acquire a better understanding of the development and experiences of the eastern Asian civilization, a careful study is needed.