如何构建切合中国社会的社会科学形态?——以韦伯、许茨和马克思的“理念型”为中心  

How to Construct the Model of Social Sciences in Accordance with Chinese Society: Centering on the “Ideal-Type” of Weber,Schutz and Marx

作　　者：王时中[1] WANG Shi-zhong

机构地区：[1]南开大学哲学院

出　　处：《南京大学学报（哲学．人文科学．社会科学）》2019年第5期34-41,158,共9页Journal of Nanjing University(Philosophy,Humanities and Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目(16ZDA097)

摘　　要：韦伯沿着新康德主义的区分框架,在自然科学、历史科学与社会科学的比较中,试图通过“理念型”的构建,为“社会”进入“科学”确立方法论前提;许茨将现象学引入社会学,将韦伯的“理念型”纳入到“共同世界”与“周遭世界”、“行动者”与“匿名者”的区分中,大大地拓展了“理念型”的内涵;马克思援引黑格尔辩证法所构造的“具体的总体”,既不同于韦伯的“康德式理念型”,也不同于许茨的“现象学理念型”,而是一种“辩证的理念型”。如何限定马克思“辩证的理念型”的边界,进而处理其与“康德式理念型”“现象学理念型”之间的关系,以为“中国社会”的“科学”化确立方法论前提,应是当前哲学界与社会学界的共同努力方向。Based on Neo-Kantianism, Weber tried to make the ideal type construct a precondition for the establishment of social science, which was different from both natural science and historical science. Schetz took phenomenology into the social science and elucidated the ideal type in the framework of actor and the spectator. Different from Weber's Kantianism and Schutz's phenomenology ,Marx invoked the concrete totality, a concept originated in Hegel's dialectics. It is important to demarcate Marx' s dialectical ideal type, so as to deal appropriately with the relation between three ideal types mentioned, so as to pave the way for the development of Chinese Social Science.

关 键 词：理念型 马克思 韦伯 许茨 现象学社会学 

分 类 号：C12[社会学]