题名

“亞洲”做爲方法

并列篇名

"Asia" as Method

DOI

10.29816/TARQSS.200503.0004

作者

陳光興(Kuan-Hsing Chen)

关键词

亞洲 ; 方法 ; 民間 ; 政治社會 ; 基體 ; 脫亞入美 ; 溝口雄三 ; Asia ; method ; political society ; min-jian ; base-entity ; Partha Chatterjee ; Mizoguchi Yuzo

期刊名称

台灣社會研究季刊

卷期/出版年月

57期(2005 / 03 / 01)

页次

139 - 218

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

相對於戰後台灣知識生產不斷深化「脫亞入美」的走向,本文提出「亞洲做為方法」的命題,其目的在於自我轉化,同時轉變既有的知識結構。它根本上的意涵在於:透過亞洲視野的想像與中介,處於亞洲的各個社會能夠重新開始相互看見,彼此成為參照點,轉化對於自身的認識;在此基礎上,能夠更進一步,從亞洲的多元歷史經驗出發,提出一種重新理解世界史的視野。 本文論辯從日常生活到學術的主要參考點、參考座標及認同對象移轉的必要性,將既有的「西方」、「美國」多元化,移轉到「第三世界」,及鄰近的「亞洲」,否則我們不只沒有跳出殖民主義以降的殖民認同邏輯,也沒有辦法清楚透過座標的移轉與比較來辨識「我們」的「自我」,永遠活在我們的想像認同對象之中。 在問題意識提出後,本文分成三大部分,由三組對話組成。第一部分首先處理長期存在的所謂「西方問題」,透過近期後殖民論述中面對西方的論述姿態及策略,點出向亞洲轉向是偏執於批判西方的出路。第二部份,企圖透過具體的問題,與Partha Chatterjee在印度脈絡中提出第三世界所浮現的新的「政治社會」空間對照,尋找新的理論起點,重新發現「民間」的概念並轉化成分析概念;這個部分的目的在於透過實際參照,初步地展示對話對象的移轉會產生什麼樣的新問題與新的可能性,以做為提出亞洲/第三世界做為一種方法實際操作的例子。第三部分展開亞洲做為方法的討論,主要在方法及理論的層次操作,通過與溝口雄三「做為方法的中國」為對話的起點,將討論集中在溝口所謂的基體論上,提出要掌握歷史變動中的基體,必須能夠讓亞洲中不同的基體得以相互參照,在參照過程中相互成主體性的一部分,來自我轉化。因此,「亞洲做為方法」不再只是將亞洲當成分析的對象,而意味著知識生產轉化的媒介,同時也是「自身」再發現/轉化的動力。在以上論辯的前提下,本文的結論提出台灣主體性定位的再思考,指出兩岸關係、華文國際與亞洲區域,其實正是全球化所依循的軌跡與形成的路徑;因此,台灣必須有意識地將自身放入這些多重的網路當中來自我定位。

英文摘要

In confronting the long lasting impacts of ”leaving Asia for America” (tuo-ya ru-mei) in the Post World War II Taiwan, this essay puts forward ”Asia as method” as a critical proposition to transform the existing knowledge structure and to transform ourselves. Its bottom line implication is that, mediating through the horizon of ”Asia” as an imaginary anchoring point, societies in Asia could begin to mutually see the existence of one another and become one another's reference points, so that the understanding of the self can he transformed, anti subjectivity rebuilt. On this basis, to push one step further, historical experiences and practices in Asia can he developed as an alternative horizon or perspective, and seen as method to advance a different understanding of world history. The argument must be placed in the context of a new global order after the 911 Incident. Various regional mechanisms have gradually emerged to counter US imperialism and global hegemony. In this process, the integration of Asia remains slow and informal. ”Asia as method” is then a call for regional integration in Asia as a necessary mechanism to maintain global peace. The paper is organized in the form of a series of dialogues. The first part deals with the question of the 'West', as it is rehearsed again in the postcolonial discursive strategies. Here, the essay confronts the historical question of the West and to pinpoint understandable but unnecessary obsession with the question of the west, and then point towards the imaginary Asia as a possibility to shift its referent point. In the second part, the essay tries to demonstrate what can be gained from this shift by engaging dialogue with Partha Chatterjee's recent proposed theory of 'political society', with reference to practices emerging in India, in that the analytical notion of 'min-jian', which was a ”pre-modern” term and is still operating in the mandarin Chinese speaking places, was rediscovered as a contemporary living space, intersecting but somehow excluded by the imposed concept of 'civil society'. By analyzing how civil society has been ”translated” as min-jian society, it argues that ”translation” provides a means to conduct the re-investigation so that the organic shape and characteristics of local society and modernity can begin to emerge. The third part comes to the theoretical formulation of 'Asia as method', through dialogue with Misogugi Yozo's ”China as method”, by focusing on his historical-ontological claim of a theory of 'base-entity' (ji-ti), which is closer to my own earlier attempt to work and rework a 'geo-colonial historical materialism', in that we argue the necessity to capture the constantly changing base-entity, through which different base-entity in different locales in Asia could become the referent point of each other and become part of each other's subjectivity, so that the 'self' can be transformed. Therefore, 'Asia as method' ceases to look at Asia as object of analysis, but actually means medium to transform knowledge production, and the driving force of the rediscover and transforming of the self. The conclusion section comes back to the ”leaving Asia for America” problematic and teases out the implication of Asia as method for ”Taiwan” to reposition itself so as to reconstitute a critical subjectivity. It argues that Cross-Strait relation, Chinese International and Asia Regional are in fact the trajectories and routes of globalization, and Taiwan has to self-consciously place itself within these network of relations as its own self-positioning.

主题分类 社會科學 > 社會學
参考文献
  1. (2002)。近代中國民族主義的發展:兼論民族主義的兩個問題。政治與社會哲學評論,3,49-119。
    連結:
  2. 永祥(2000)。現代性業已耗盡了批判意義嗎?汪暉論現代性讀後有感。台灣社會研究季刊,37,75-90。
    連結:
  3. 直樹(1998)。現代性與其批判:普遍主義與特殊主義的問題。台灣社會研究季刊,30,205-236。
    連結:
  4. 孫歌(1999)。亞洲意味著什麼?。台灣社會研究季刊,33,1-64。
    連結:
  5. 陳光興(2001)。為什麼大和解不/可能?。台灣社會研究季刊,43,41-110。
    連結:
  6. 編委會(2004)。邁向公共化、超克後威權----民主左派論述的初構。台灣社會研究季刊,53,1-28。
    連結:
  7. (2002)。亞洲想像的譜系。視界,8,44-208。
  8. (1999)。想像的共同體:民族主義的起源與散布。台北:時報文化出版公司。
  9. (2000)。Partha Chatterje講座發現政治社會:現代性、國家暴力與後殖民民主。台北:巨流。
  10. (1989)。人民民主是什麼?。自立早報。
  11. Chatterjee, Partha(1999).Wages of Freedom: Fifty Years of the Indian Nation-State.New Delhi:Oxford University Press.
  12. Chatterjee, Partha(2004).The Politics of the Governed: Reflections on Popular Politics in Most of the World.Delhi:Permanent Black.
  13. Chatterjee, Partha(2000).Locating Political Society: Modernity, State Violence and Postcolonial Democracies.Taipei:
  14. Chatterjee, Partha(1984).Subaltern Studies III: Writings on South Asian History and Society.Delhi:Oxford University Press.
  15. Chatterjee, Partha(1998).Community in the East.Economic and Political Weekly,33(6),277-282.
  16. Chatterjee, Partha(1993).Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
  17. Chatterjee, Partha(2001).Democracy and the Violence of the State: a Political Negotiation of Death.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,2(1),7-22.
  18. Chen, Kuan-Hsing(1994).Positioning positions: A New Internationalist Localism.Positions: East Asia Cultures Critiques,3(3),680-710.
  19. Chen, Kuan-Hsing(2001).America in East Asia: The Club 51 Syndrome.New Left Review,12,73-87.
  20. Chen, Kuan-Hsing(2001).Intellectual/Political Commitments: an Interview with Partha Chatterjee.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,2(1),23-34.
  21. Chen, Kuan-Hsing(2003).International Conference on Peace arter Firty Years of the Armistice of the Korean War: From the Armistice to the Peace Regime.Seoul:Korean Progressive Academy Council and Munhwa Daily News.
  22. Cho, Han Haejoang(2000).You are entrapped in an imaginary well: the Formation of Subjectivity within Compressed Development - A Feminist Critique of Modernity and Korean Culture.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,1(1),49-70.
  23. Cho, Hee-yeon(2000).Democratic Transition and Social Movement Change in South Korea.The Journal of Sungkonghoe University,15,9-48.
  24. Cho, Hee-yeon(2000).The structure of the South Korean developmental regime and its transformation: statist mobilization and authoritarian integration in the anticommunist regimentation.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,1(3),408-426.
  25. Cho, Hee-yeon,Park Won-soon(2002).Democratic Reform and Civic Movements in South Korea.Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies,12(2),81-102.
  26. Chua, Beng Huat(1998).Trajectories: Inter-Asia Cultural Studies.London:Routledge.
  27. Chun, Alien,A.B. Shamsul(2001).Other -routes': The critical challenges for Asian academia.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,2(2),167-176.
  28. Desphande, Satish(2001).Disciplinary Predicaments: Sociology and Anthropology in Post-colonial India.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,2(2),247-260.
  29. Ding, Naifei(2000).Prostitutes, parasites and the house of state feminism.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,1(2),97-108.
  30. Dirlik, Arif(1997).Colonialism and Its Discontents Conference.Taipei:Academia Sinica.
  31. Garcia, Neil(1996).The Philippines Gay Culture: the Past 30 Year-sbinabae to bakla. silahis to MSM.Diliman, Quezon City:University of the Philippines Press.
  32. Hall, Stuart(1992).Stuart Hall and Bram Gieben.Formations of Modernity, Polity Press and Open University.
  33. Hamashita. Takeshi(2003).The Resurgence of East Asia: 500, 150, 50 year perspective.London:Routledge.
  34. Hamilton, Gary G.,Wei-An Chang(2003).The Resurgence of East Asia: 500, 150, 50 year perspective.London:Routledge.
  35. Ho, Josephine(2000).Professionalization and Self-empowerment: Conversations with Taiwanese Sex Workers.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,1(2),97-108.
  36. ighi, Giovanni,Po-Keung, Ho-fung Hung,Mark Selden(2003).The Resurgence of East Asia: 500, 150, 50 year perspective.London:Routledge.
  37. ighi. Giovanni,Takeshi Hamashita,Mark Selden(2003).The Resurgence of East Asia: 500, 150, 50 year perspective.London:Routledge.
  38. krabarty, Dipesh(2000).Provincial zing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference.Princeton University Press.
  39. krabarty, Dipesh(1992).Provincializing Europe: Postcoloniality and the Critique of History.Cultural Studies,6(3),337-357.
  40. krabarty, Dipesh(2000)."We Asians": between Past and Future-A Millennium Regional Conference.Singapore:Singapore Heritage Society.
  41. Liu, Lydia H.(1994).Translingual Practices.Stanford University Press.
  42. Nandy, Ashis(1983).The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self Under Colonialism.Delhi:Oxford University Press.
  43. Nh-anjana, Tejaswini(2000).Alternative Frames? Questions for Comparative Research in the Third World.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,1(1),97-108.
  44. Nh-anjana, Tejaswini(1992).Siting Translation: History, Post-structuralism and the Colonial Context.Berkeley:University of California Press.
  45. Sakai, Noaki(1997).Translation and Subjectivity: On "Japan" and Cultural Nationalism.University of Minnesota Press.
  46. Shamsul A.B.(1999).State Fictions, Postnational Realities: Cultural Perspectives on Institutions and Violence Conference.Academia Sinica.
  47. Shamsul, A.B.(2001).Social Science in Southeast Asia Observed: A Malaysian Viewpoint.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,2(2),177-198.
  48. Shen, Sung-chiao,Chien Yung-xking(1999).the Conference on Nationalism: East Asia Experience.Taipei:Academia Sinica.
  49. Shin, Gi-wook(2002).Asian Marxisms.Durham:Duke University Press.
  50. Sun, Ge.(2001).Globalization and Cultural Difference: Thoughts on the Situation of Trans-cultural Knowledge.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,2(2),261-276.
  51. Vivek Dhareshwar(1998).Valorizing the Present: Orientalism, Postcoloniality and the Human Sciences.Cultural Dynamics,10(2),99-100.
  52. Vivek Dhareshwar(1998).India: Theorizing the Present.Cultural Dynamics,10(2),211-232.
  53. Yoo, Sun-young(2001).Embodiment of American Modernity in Colonial Korea.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies: Movements,2(3),423-442.
  54. Young-seo(2002).InterAsia Cultural Studies: Movements.
  55. 丁偉志、陳崧(1995)。中西體用之間。北京:中國社會科學出版社。
  56. 正來編(1999)。國家與市民市吐會:一種社會埋論的研究路徑。北京:中央編譯出版社。
  57. 白永瑞(2000)。在中國有亞洲嗎?韓國人的視覺。東方文化,4,99-106。
  58. 奷(1966)。日本與亞細亞。東京:筑摩書房。
  59. 奷(1999)。後殖民文化理論
  60. 志田(1988)。民族主義與近代中國思想。台北:東大。
  61. 門(1989)。反共二民主。自立早報。
  62. 虹(1989)。人民主義:超越國家/民間社會的新焦點。中國論壇,623,34-42。
  63. 陳光興(1996)。去殖民的文化研究。台灣社會研究季刊,21,73-140。
  64. 陳光興(1992)。戰爭機器叢刊。台北:唐山出版社。
  65. 陳光興(2001)。美國想像的轉化。讀書,11,24-30。
  66. 陳光興(2000)。Partha Chatterjee講座發現政冶社會:現代性、國家暴力與後殖民民主。台北:巨流。
  67. 陳光興(2003)。片刻濃妝:檳榔西施影像輯。台北:桂冠。
  68. 陳光興(2003)。戰爭沒有發生?2003年美英出兵伊拉克評論與紀實。台北:唐山。
  69. 陳思和(1997)。陳思和自選集。廣西師範大學出版社。
  70. 新煌、王振寰、卡維波、南方朔(1989)。座談會:如何看待民間社會。中國論壇,336,7-22。
  71. 溝口雄三(1999)。做為「方法」的中國。台灣:國立編譯館。
  72. 溝口雄三(1995)。中國的思想。北京:中國人民大學出版社。
  73. 溝口雄三(1996)。日本人視野中的中國學。北京:中國人民大學出版社。
  74. 榮渠(1990)。從「西化」到現代化----五四以來有關中國的文化趨向與發----展道路爭論文選。北京:北京大學出版社。
  75. 趙剛(1998)。台灣社會研究叢刊06。台北:唐山出版社。
  76. 器戰警編、何方、王大衛、無向、林威、蔡普(1991)。台灣的新反對運動----新民主之路「邊緣癲ㄈㄨˋ中心」的戰鬥與遊戲。台北:唐山。
被引用次数
  1. 曾倚萃、石之瑜(2008)。亞洲的超克?戰後日本近代思想中的時間與空間問題。政治科學論叢,36,33-65。
  2. 劉世鼎(2015)。「中國」如何作為方法?。臺灣社會研究季刊,99,231-241。
  3. 邱德亮(2008)。從局限經濟到普遍經濟:鴉片消費的東方語藝?。臺灣社會研究季刊,69,1-55。
  4. 唐慧宇(2019)。鄙民的政治:從文化解殖到陳界仁的感性生產。中外文學,48(1),47-86。
  5. 王晴佳(2006)。解構與重構─近二十年來臺灣歷史意識變化的主要趨勢。漢學研究通訊,25(4),13-32。
  6. 王妍(2022)。對京都學派「一元論」文化史觀的反思。漢學研究通訊,41(2),13-24。
  7. 王智明(2009)。翻譯的生命:容閎、留學與跨國主體性。歐美研究,39(3),455-488。
  8. 吳永毅(2009)。無HOME可歸:公私反轉與外籍家勞所受之時空排斥的個案研究。臺灣社會研究季刊,66,1-74。
  9. 辛翠玲、吳珮蒨(2008)。竹內好的「自我介紹」:對抗亞洲內部的西方。東亞研究,39(2),33-69。
  10. 張馨文(2018)。何謂台灣的「主體性/subjectivity」?一個在亞洲「之間」的方法論的實踐。臺灣社會研究季刊,111,7-57。
  11. (2023)。理想主義中的「控/空白」。台灣社會研究季刊,124,231-237。