“定义”性与“注释”性——文化思维模式与人类学实践模式关系试析

“ Definition”and“Annotation”: An Analysis of the Relationship between the Mode of Cultural Thinking and Anthropological Practice

本文从利奇与费孝通关于中国人类学研究的论辩出发,尝试性地分析了现代西方文化的"定义"性特征和中国传统文化的"注释"性特征对西方人类学与中国早期人类学的不同影响,认为中国早期人类学家即便曾采用西方人类学的某些研究方法或理论模式,由于在对待这门学科的前在立场及思维模式上存在差异,在人类学的学科实践上走向了不同的方向,即中国早期人类学家把西方社会科学知识作为一种认知手段来重新注释、解释整体性观念下的"中国"——此"中国"并非仅仅是民族国家系列中"一国"的政治地理概念,它还包含着从自身历史与文明中承继而来的对生命及世界的整体性看法。

This paper starts from the controversy between Fei Xiaotong and Edmund Leach,and tries to analyze the different modes of thinking of anthropologists who have grown up in different cultural backgrounds. Different cultural thinking modes not only affect anthropologists＇ research positions,attitudes and methods,but also affect the anthropological models of practice,is even related to the issue of ＂Sinicized＂Anthropology.Ⅰ. ＂Exotic Culture＂and ＂Local Culture＂：the Debate between Fei Xiaotong and Leach In ＂Rereading ‘Peasant Life in China · Preface ＇＂（ 1997）,Fei Xiaotong explored the question raised by British anthropologist Edmund Leach in his Social Anthropology（ 1982） namely,is it possible, like Chinese anthropologists do, to study one＇s own society？（ Leach,1982 ： 124-125）Leach＇s point of view relates to a basic concept in anthropology,that is,in order to minimize bias or prejudice,anthropologists in contact with an unfamiliar culture should try to use the ＂eyes of the other＂in order to see their world. This idea is based upon the differences between ＂self ＂ and＂other＂,＂native culture＂and ＂exotic culture＂;and it means that the anthropologist must maintain both positions of ＂himself ＂ and the ＂other ＂,keeping the necessary balance,and then,within the tension of the two,carry out his research. Although later Western anthropologists continued to develop more complex theoretical systems, they never departed from this original concept.However,Fei viewed cultural similarities and differences as an ambiguous body,saying ＂I am part of you and you are part of me ＂,analyzing it from a holistic concept and position. Divergence lies within the differing motives and positions of different modes of cultural thinking.Ⅱ. Definition and Annotation Fei once explained Chinese-style ＂annotation＂as a way ＂to maintain the form of the power of the elders while injecting contents of change …as long as this form is recognized on the surface,the content can be changed by annotation. ＂（ Fei,1998 ： 79-80） Both Chinese ancient culture and social structure are characterized by ＂annotation＂.＂Tao（ Dao） ＂is synonymous with the highest domain of ancient Chinese theory, the highest standard of consciousness and behavior, starting from which,either moving inward or downward,to the next level,all other ideas appear. People and their moral norms just practice it. As a cultural characteristic,＂annotation ＂ is closely linked to practice, taking the overall pattern implied in＂Tao＂as the edge of understanding and practice,and within it, making relevant explanations and partial changes. The idea of ＂annotation ＂,which seeks the way from the whole,had a profound impact on traditional Chinese intellectuals.In contrast,Western modern culture and society are characterized by a feature which can be called ＂definition ＂. ＂Definition ＂ emphasizes the clarity and accuracy of concepts and, through a detailed description of the characteristics and attributes of things,defines and classifies them. It finds the rules,and establishes different classification systems. In a social culture characterized by＂definition ＂,people often make social planning based on the idea or concept through rational judg-ments,and some important features,such as the separation of power, ＂democracy ＂, and so on,have these characteristics. Whether a culture is characterized by ＂annotation ＂ or ＂definition ＂ results in different cultural patterns,and it creates different ways of thinking.Ⅲ. Summary Western contemporary anthropology can be regarded as an extension of the contemporary Western focus on ＂definition ＂,which emphasizes the scientific method as the way to study human beings and their society; it is one whose academic position is a kind of rational and logical binary. It is a good starting position from which to observe and experience the culture of others,and constantly improve their understanding of their own self-knowledge.Marshall Sahlins＇ The Sadness of Sweetness is an illustration of this.The ＂annotation＂aspect of Chinese traditional culture is,not only a stable psychological structure,reflected in cultural patterns which remain until now,but it is also a way of thinking that continues throughout the various social science practices. Thus, many intellectuals, including Fei,have emphasized Western social science knowledge as a cognitive means to re-annotate ＂China＂in the holistic concept — this ＂China＂is not just a political and geographic idea as a nation-state,but also is one which contains a holistic view of life and the world. This holistic concept does not have an apriori dualistic,pluralistic position,nor does it have a duality. So,even if early Chinese anthropologists employed some western anthropological research methods,they still moved in different directions within the practice of the discipline. This is because of the large differences found within apriori positions and mode of thinking.