社科網首頁|論壇|人文社區|客戶端|官方微博|報刊投稿|郵箱 中國社會科學網

                      Epilogue Chinese Sociology into the 21st Century: Conclusion and Prospect

                      Human history is striding into the 21st century that is promising but full of challenges. During the century, China will accomplish the transformation from traditional society to modern society and become a rich, democratic and civilized socialist strong country. The period from the opening-up after the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the CPC to the middle of the next century is crucial for the transformation. In the course of further transformation of Chinese society, such questions as “What position will Chinese sociology occupy?” “What is the tendency of Chinese sociology at the turn of the century?" etc. draw universal concern and interest. Before the discussion of these questions, however, it is necessary to sum up the 100-year history of Chinese sociology (from the end of the 19th century to the present).
                      Section l  Major Characteristics of A Hundred Years’
                      Development of Chinese Sociology

                           In recent years, some scholars have written about the characteristics of the development of Chinese sociology. Han Ming-mo, for example, concludes in his 100 Years of Chinese Sociology[1] that Chinese sociology bears the following characteristics: subjectivity for the country, the people, and the construction of socialism; applicability based upon traditional philosophical viewpoints; collectivity of research; dispersion and universality of sociological knowledge and standpoints and
                      scientism and creativeness under the guidance of Marxism and Mao Ze-dong Thought. Another scholar, Yan Peng, principally sums up the characteristics of Chinese sociology since its reconstruction in his book Sociology in China: Past, Present and Future.[2]The characteristics concluded by him include: natures of subjectivity,  practicability,  collectiveness and openness.  There is no doubt that the researches by the above scholars offer us some illumination, but at the same time we will in turn make our comment on their points of view. In our eyes, in the five characteristics given by Mr. Han, some are general conclusions of the whole development of Chinese sociology, and some only relate to Chinese sociology since its revival. On the other hand, some of the characteristics concerning Chinese sociology since its revival summed up by Mr.  Yan actually run through the entire development of Chinese sociology. By using the achievements obtained by Chinese sociologists in the reflection on the development of Chinese sociology for reference, we believe that the following characteristics of Chinese sociology are more distinctive, i.e. subjectivity, practicability, openness, tortuousness and immaturity, which we are bound to deal with next respectively.

                      I . Subjectivity
                      "Subjectivity" is the opposite of "dependence" and "transplantation". Sociology originated in Europe and later spread into America, which took the place of Europe as the center of sociological research all over the world. Considerably influenced by American sociology, sociology in a number of developing countries and even in several developed countries is characterized by "transplantation". Even American sociologists basically transplanted sociology from Europe in the 1920s. Afterwards, promoted by "Chicago School", American sociology accomplished "indigenization" by degrees. Sociology established in the middle of this century in Hong Kong, particularly in Taiwan of China, was also "transplanted" from the West, especially from America,  although at times there have been arguments over "sociology of Chinese indigenization" in these regions. It is beneficial for the countries in which sociology was not initiated there to introduce and use the concepts, systems and methods in relation to sociology for reference, but people must put another complexion on this, or the subject of sociology will not successfully exist or develop. 
                      The nature of "transplantation" of Chinese sociology was still quite obvious before the 1930s, when sociology was absorbed in the curriculum of numerous universities, but what teachers taught was basically copied from European and American models and in a few schools even both teachers and textbooks came from the western countries directly. Few people combined sociological teaching and study with the practice of Chinese society then, 1et alone of sociology with Chinese characteristics [3] Justly, this situation was reasonable in some degree. Neverth-less, great disadvantages had appeared by the end of the 1930s, which drew attention of some people of insight in the circle of sociology, who by some means or other woke up the "consciousness of subjectivity" of Chinese sociologists in order to shake off the dependence of Chinese sociology on European and American sociology. The previously mentioned painstaking advocacy of "sociology of Chinese indigenization" by Wu Wen-zao and the consequent efforts made by Wu himself, Fei Xiao-tong and others to found sociology of Chinese indigenization with the research on community as the breakthrough serve as good examples. Marxist sociologists them made their own contributions to this sphere and even the school of "Rural Construction" did something worthy of praise to indigenize sociology. But as these have already been involved earlier, we will not give unnecessary details here. At the end of his book Contemporary Chinese Sociology, Mr. Sun Ben-wen advances a considerate plan including the following three essential points for the establishment of sociology with Chinese characteristics:  
                      1) The establishment of Chinese theoretical sociology, including items such as sorting out the existing historical social materials in China, making an on-the spot study of the features of Chinese society,  systematically editing primary books of the sociological subject, etc. .
                      2) The establishment of Chinese applied sociology, including detailed study of, Chinese social problems, pressing on with the research into Chinese sociobusiness and social administration, earnestly working out projects for Chinese social construction, etc. .
                      3) Training of qualified sociological personnel.[4] 
                      The efforts made by early Chinese sociologists undoubtedly played an important part in the promotion of sociological indigenization in China and in the attempts to cast off the over-dependence of early Chinese sociology on European and American sociology.“But by right of the historical circumstances, there was a universal lack of Marxist guidance for the subject of sociology in universities and therefore it was impossible to lay a strong foundation for sociology capable of reflecting the realities of Chinese society. " [5]
                      The change of this complexion came in 1979, when sociology was restored and reconstructed in China.  The guiding ideology fixed then— "to establish a subject of sociology that is guided by Marxism and Mao Ze-dong Thought, combined with Chinese practice and intended to serve socialist construction" —charts clearly the direction for the development of sociology,  which will be essentially different from the one in old China as well as in western countries.  Under the guidance of the ideology and in the background of rapid transformation of Chinese society from traditional type to modern type, Chinese sociologists have launched a series of fruitful theoretical and applied researches with the principles, theories and methods of sociology, adding an illustrious chapter to the annals of establishing sociology with Chinese characteristics. While admitting these achievements, we should notice that the realization of subjectivity of Chinese sociology will take a course that cannot be accomplished in one move. We must soberly realize that there is still much hard work in store for us.

                      . Practicability
                      As early as 1891, when Kang You-wei set up "Changxing School" at Wanmu Thatched Hall in Changxingli, Guangzhou, he put "Qunxue" (science of the masses) taught by him into the category of  "Learning of Administrating Society", in which it is as important as subjects like Political Principia, Evolution, Success and Failure of Chinese Politics, Evolution, Success and Failure of Countries' Politics, and Applied Politics.  Although there is still a divergence of opinions about whether Kang's "Qunxue" is just what was called "sociology" later (The compilers of this book, for example, hold different points of view on that),  the two are related to each other at least. What is more, "To make administration of society applicable" has been a major tradition of Chinese sociology.  At the very beginning, it was for the purpose of learning the western ideology and culture in order to save the nation from subjugation and ensuring its survival that Yan Fu and Zhang Tai-yan translated and introduced western sociology.  During the 50 years after the introduction of sociology and before the founding of PRC, cherishing the ambition of resisting imperialism and feudalism and saving the nation and the people, one and after another batch of sociological workers carried out a series of thorough and deep-going investigations and researches into the realities and problems of Chinese society then with the theories and methods of sociology. For example, investigations and researches into the life of rickshaw men in Beijing by Tao Meng-he, into the general state of Dingxian County by Li Jing-han, into population, labor,  poverty and rural areas by Chen Da, Chen Chang-heng, Wu Jing-chao, Yang Kai-dao, Ke Xiang-feng and Yan Xin-zhe, and into communities by Wu Wen-zao, Fei Xiao-tong, Lin Yao-hua and Zhang Zhi-yi, are all practically valuable.  And investigations into the rural areas under KMT's rule and at revolutionary bases by Chen Han-sheng, Mao Ze-dong and others from early Marxist school of sociology even more directly met the demand for Chinese revolutionary realities. Finally, the practice of rural reforms undertaken by James Yen and Liang Shu-ming from Rural Construction also achieved some practical result.  Naturally, in the background of old China, only the social investigation by Marxist-Leninist sociological school assorted with the revolutionary practice, and the countermeasures and advice obtained by the other sociologists after painstaking investigation, research and practical work had little chance of being adopted and applied, which largely confined the application of sociology. 
                      After sociology was restored and reconstructed in 1979 in China, its feature of practicability has been fully displayed. The investigation and research into communities by Fei Xiao-tong and others, the study of marriage and families by Lei Jie-qiong and others, and the research by a number of sociological workers into different social problems emerging during the transformation of Chinese society, such'as population, employment, housing, crime, social ethos, unjust social distribution and poverty, pollution of the environment, religious superstition, patriarchal clan, etc. have brought about corresponding countermeasures and advice which have been soon adopted by governments at all levels as the important basis for their policy-making. Relevant departments of the government not only collaborate on study with units of sociological education and research,  but have set up special advisory organs in close relation to sociology (In State Planning Commission, for example, there is Institute of Social Development) , bringing the practicability of sociology into more immediate play. Besides its important impact on policy-making, reconstructed Chinese sociology is playing a greater and greater role in people's daily life and work, thanks to the hard work done by the sociologists in every way.
                      Of course, while carrying out the investigation and research into social actualities and problems, Chinese sociological workers have also made arduous theoretical exploration without discontinuation either before the founding of PRC or since the reconstruction of sociology. It is just to say that theoretical and applied studies of sociology are not mutually exclusive but complementary. We must make applied studies under the guidance of sociological theories and methodology, and on the other we must sum up the achievements in applied studies in time in order to raise them to the level of theory which may revise and complement the old theory, thus directing applied studies at a higher level. While serving as a conclusion of the progress in applied studies, the exploration of the theories about "social operation" and "social transformation" by Zheng Hang-sheng and others in recent years, for instance, will certainly make an important impact on the present social operation and transformation in China. And what we are faced with at present is just the fact that our theoretical studies are still comparatively weak, which restrains applied studies from advancing further.

                      Ⅲ. Openness 
                      It is one of the most obvious features of Chinese sociology. As is known, sociology originated in Europe, spread later into America and rapidly grew there. Sociology in the other regions and countries was set up under the influence of European and American tradition, and so was Chinese sociology. Since most early Chinese sociologists first studied in Europe and America and then came back to go in for sociological education and research, their ideological system was undoubtedly influenced by the western sociological tradition. Even until the eve of the founding of new China, certain European or American sociologists directly gave lectures on sociology. After the 1930s, with the increased sense of subjectivity in Chinese sociologists, there appeared a tendency towards "indigenizing sociology" and even some fruit had been achieved, but the influence from European and American sociology was still overwhelming, which was shown in all aspects of both education and research. Additionally, Chinese sociologists maintained close ties with their European and American counterparts.
                      Shortly after the founding of PRC, Chinese sociological circle was isolated from the outside world for 30 years because of the abolition of sociology. People did raise the issue and arrive at an agreement until 1979, right after the restoration of the subject. Wang Kang wrote in The Reconstruction of Sociology on Chinese Mainland:                                                                                                    
                      Chinese sociologists mainly study Chinese society and Chinese social problems, but with the development of modern science and technology and increasingly frequent international communication, the state of isolation is bound to change and it is necessary to know something about foreign society. We will study foreign countries, not only because their sociology is more advanced then ours, but also because we must suit the circumstances of modernization and promote international intercourse and academic exchange. During our stay at a standstill, a great deal of knowledge and theories about modern sociology was accumulated both in the East and West and research methods developed at the same time. Without an earnest study, we will not be able to see its true colors. Owing to the long isolation, we do not know or know little about the origin and development of this discipline. Therefore, in order to rank among the world's academic circles, we must know ourselves as well as our foreign counterparts, endeavor to master the achievements in modern sociology and enable Chinese sociology to not only have a foothold on the homeland but also use foreign fruits of research for reference, thus setting up  sociology with Chinese characteristics by learning from others' strong points to offset our weaknesses. [6]
                      In the light of the above view, we have strengthened the contact with foreign and American associates, especially with European and American sociologists since the restoration of Chinese sociology. Besides frequent academic exchange, we opened Chinese and foreign joint training classes in which a great number of brilliant Chinese students acquired a supreme command of the theories and methods of modern and contemporary sociology. Most of the students became the backbone of sociological education and research in China afterwards.  Meanwhile, we have sent quite a few young students abroad to study sociology. With the further practice of the open policy and increasing “craze for studying abroad", to learn sociology abroad has become one of the major ambitions of more and more students who major in sociology, which deserves applause, of course. However, there is a hidden inclination noticeable, which is just what Mr. Fei Xiao-tong referred to as “outward center", which means that some people think sociology can only be studied abroad. Putting forward the issue at the forum for sociological teaching reform sponsored by Ministry of Education as early as 1985, Mr. Fei is indeed foresighted.
                      With the joint efforts made by Chinese sociologists, while having a foothold on homeland, we have achieved great success in making a relatively thorough analysis, criticism and use of foreign, particularly western sociology so that it can serve our work on the establishment of sociology with Chinese characteristics, under the guidance of Marxism-Leninism, Mao Ze-dong Thought and Deng Xiao Ping Theory formed and developed in the tide of the reform and opening-up.

                      . Tortuousness
                      The development of Chinese sociology in the 100 years is tortuous and full of hardships. Before the founding of PRC, Chinese sociology ran into one obstacle after another due to the imperialist invasion and the suspicions and jealousy from the KMT government. Judging from the scope of development, there were no more than 20 departments and majors of sociology in Chinese universities of different types until the end of the forties, which differed little from the end of the twenties. And the number of students then was small. There were only dozens of students even in the Departments of Sociology of Yanjing and Tsinghua Universities mentioned early in this book, with a dozen graduates every year. At the end of the forties, there were 143 teachers who had the professional titles of lecturer and above. Judged by the scale, Chinese sociology actually came to a halt during the dozens of years in old China. In academic research, sociologists met across numerous difficulties when they tried to go down to the grass-roots units for investigation under the circumstances of KMT's rule. Authentic information was not at all easy of access, as at that time the people who were investigated were afraid of being persecuted and showed distrust of the investigators. On the other hand, when the investigators tried to approach the masses and win the masses' trust, they were likely to be suspected and begrudged by the KMT governments at the basic level. Mr. Wang Kang once talked about this with deep feeling. [7JConsequently, although some scholars appealed to "sociology of Chinese indigenization" as early as the beginning of the thirties, the work was far from satisfaction until the eve of new China.
                      Foreign, particularly Japanese aggression against China produced the external cause of the tortuous experience of Chinese sociology then.  After the Lugouqiao Incident in 1937, Japan spread an all-out invasion of China and large areas of the country fell into the invaders' hands. Under the circumstances, the departments (majors) of sociology in a number of universities were forced to close down or stop enrolling students, and some moved to the boundaries in the southwest for successive teaching but was similarly affected. A large amount of investigation, research and practical reform starting before the Anti-Japanese War had to be stopped. Certainly, as has been already pointed out, we cannot neglect the fairly fruitful on-the-spot investigations made in the boundary areas in the southwest.
                      The internal cause, as has been discussed previously in the book, was that KIVIT authorities had various misunderstandings of sociology, among which seeing sociology as socialism and historical materialism was the greatest. So they inevitably imposed this or that interference and restrict on sociology. After the victory over Japanese invaders, due to KMT's preoccupation with the civil war and the upswing of intellectual democratic movement, they strengthened the suspicion about and control over sociology, restraining it from developing and spreading.
                      The most severe setback Chinese sociology met with during its evolution in 100 years was the abolition of its legal place when universities and departments in China were rearranged in 1952. We will not give unnecessary explanations here about the reasons for it, as similar topic has been touched already. The practice of banning sociology has been proved rude and wrong, and it led to a nearly 30-year unreasonable discontinuity in the history of Chinese sociology.
                      From its restoration to the present day, sociology has been developing fast with outstanding achievements, but the course it went through is not smooth, either. In the early years of the eighties and around the year 1989, some people mistook sociology for one of the representatives of "bourgeois liberal tendencies". Even now, there are still misunderstandings of sociology. Regarding sociology as the so-called sensitive discipline is just one of the examples. Because of effects of multiple factors, it can be predicted that the future development of Chinese sociology will not be plain sailing.

                      Ⅴ. Immaturity
                      The problem of immaturity can be seen both in sociology in old China and in sociology after the revival. There were obviously two major traditions in sociology in the old days, i.e. tradition of Comtian sociology and tradition of Marxist sociology. In the social conditions then, sociologists of both traditions launched social investigations and collected certain materials by overcoming one difficulty after another. But clearly there was a lack of theoretical summation. Among the sociologists referred to before, only IN/Ir. Fei Xiao-tong made some preliminary attempts at this in the forties, and the other ones almost did not do the work at all. Furthermore, as these sociologists had not received the guidance from Marxism, they showed considerable limitations in their understanding of Chinese society. At the same time, the theoretical research made by sociologists of the Marxist school also displayed a serious infantile disorder: it did not properly treat the relationships between sociology and historical materialism, between the revolutionarily critical form and protectively constructive form of Marxist sociology, and between Marxist and Comtian sociologies. The founding of new China provided sociologists of both traditions with a golden chance for them to learn from each other and set up a new sociology needed by socialism under the guidance of Marxism. However, the chance soon disappeared once sociology was banned.
                      Chinese sociology is advancing towards a clear direction since its reconstruction and sociological workers have started fruitful theoretical and applied researches. Nevertheless, we have to realize that immaturity can be found in every field due to the fact that this discipline had been discontinued for too long arid that it was reconstructed only a short time ago. About this, sociological researchers have drawn many conclusions. Zheng Hang-sheng maintains that immaturity of Chinese sociology after its revival has been reflected in multitudinous aspects such as theories, methods and application: comparatively weak study of basic sociological theories, lower level of research, abundant descriptive but scarce exploring studies, more positive studies but with outmoded resorts, insufficient and imperfect evolution of sociological branches, and a proportion of sociology workers' unconscious awareness that there is an attribute of unity of sociological scientism and value. [8JBut Sun Li-ping- suggests that the present immaturity of Chinese sociology is mainly found in three aspects.
                      1) As a comprehensive science, sociology has not been able to give a reaction tallying with its disciplinary place to relatively macroscopic and momentous social phenomena and reforms.
                      2) Sociology lacks a sort of ability to communicate with the other disciplines.
                      3)In sociology, there is not a mechanism for accumulating the knowledge within its own scope. E9JThere is still a long way for sociology to go towards a mature discipline.
                      We have just had a brief conclusive discussion over the common features demonstrated during the 100 years' development of Chinese sociology. In effect, the restored sociology differs largely from the one in old China. Some of the differences have been talked about, while the others have not. In all, there are three evident dissimilarities. First, the reconstructed sociology is definitely orientated; namely, it will serve socialist construction under the guidance of Marxism, Leninism and Mao Ze-dong Thought. Secondly, the research in the reconstructed sociology is clearly characterized by "collectivism". The studies of small towns and communities by Fei Xiao-tong, of marriage and families by Lei Jie-qiong, and of theories about social operation and transformation by Zheng Hang-sheng, all were unfolded and accomplished by means of collective cooperation. Thirdly, the research in the reconstructed sociology is closely related to the actual departments of the Party and the government and there are many cooperative research projects, which ensures that the research achievements can be soon turned into policies and play a practical role in society.

                      (From “A History of Chinese Sociology (Newly-compiled)”, Zheng Hang-sheng)