Dingxin Zhao is Professor of Sociology at the University of Chicago and the author of several books, including the award-winning Power of Tiananmen (University of Chicago Press, 2001).
In the The Confucian-Legalist State, Dingxin Zhao offers a radically new analysis of Chinese imperial history from the eleventh century BCE to the fall of the Qing dynasty. This study first uncovers the factors that explain how, and why, China developed into a bureaucratic empire under the Qin dynasty in 221 BCE. It then examines the political system that crystallized during the Western Han dynasty, a system that drew on China's philosophical traditions of Confucianism and Legalism. Despite great changes in China's demography, religion, technology, and socioeconomic structures, this Confucian-Legalist political system survived for over two millennia. Yet, it was precisely because of the system's resilience that China, for better or worse, did not develop industrial capitalism as Western Europe did, notwithstanding China's economic prosperity and technological sophistication beginning with the Northern Song dynasty.
In examining the nature of this political system, Zhao offers a new way of viewing Chinese history, one that emphasizes the importance of structural forces and social mechanisms in shaping historical dynamics. As a work of historical sociology, The Confucian-Legalist State aims to show how the patterns of Chinese history were not shaped by any single force, but instead by meaningful activities of social actors which were greatly constrained by, and at the same time reproduced and modified, the constellations of political, economic, military, and ideological forces. This book thus offers a startling new understanding of long-term patterns of Chinese history, one that should trigger debates for years to come among historians, political scientists, and sociologists.
【本文节选自《开放时代》2019年第4期。】 编者按 赵鼎新的英文近著《儒法国家:中国历史的新理论》(The Confucian-Legalist State:A New Theory of Chinese History)自出版以来,广受国内外学界关注,且于2016年荣获美国社会学学会政治社会学分会年度杰出专著奖。本刊曾于2...
评分美国学者从进入幼儿园到博士毕业几乎没有接触过中国历史(事实上,典型的美国学生对易洛魁人①的了解比对整个亚洲的了解还要多),这是少有例外的。这种无知导致的一个悲哀的后果便是比较历史社会学家和比较政治学家所构建的理论都不涉及中国。我们的国家形成理论与帝国比较研...
评分赵鼎新(以下简称“赵”)对中国历史的整体评价视野之广令人叹为观止,而他对历史知识传统及社会学解释传统的细致观察亦发人深省——这些传统既造就了我们今天看待中国的方式,又影响着我们对中国古代史料的运用。赵建立了一套关于中国历史的新理论,将早期帝国历史及其之前所...
评分之前觉得秦晖很有说服力,扎实、雄辩。然后看到赵鼎新,感觉好像更厉害,因为他有耀眼的理性的光辉,以及,因此而显得货真价实的正能量(这种货真价实在“御用文人”中难得一见)。但秦晖好像也没错,那这是怎么回事,为什么他们的观点如此不同?于是再回过头去把两人看了又看...
评分哲学、历史和方法 ——我的回应 开放时代2016第五期 赵鼎新 【内容提要】迈克尔•曼的社会变迁理论在西方学界被认为是宏观历史变迁理论的一个里程碑。在接受了曼的理论的一些合理要素的基础上,笔者在最近出版的《儒法国家:中国历史的新理论》这一著作中提出了一个新的宏观...
其实也没什么新观点......
评分其实也没什么新观点......
评分借标记合法性
评分读过中国工业资本主义一章。这学期大家上了赵鼎新教授的课都颇有微词。看来今天社会学的结构功能主义研究方法已经过气,火的还是后现代文化研究那一套。
评分太多熟悉套路和课堂讨论过的内容无需重复。感触最深是老赵习惯将大问题和论断裁剪成可巧妙精细论证,却坚持活在文革和广场形塑的近乎偏执的愤世嫉俗中。将简单技巧发挥到极致(如将军队征伐距离标准化再叠加地图形成战争网络观察战国时期有无五国争霸)尽显思维缜密。然文革中抓住工厂间隙和写作组机会大量辛苦读书完成原始积累,八十年代受金观涛刘青峰启发思考中国何处去,典型那一代学人思路,理工转社科具备独特的科学思维和两体系比较优势,进入美国学界却面对全然陌生且日渐僵化的知识积累机制。对文革的庆幸和恐惧,对广场从愤怒到冷静,中国、社运、历史三重学者身份纠结,铸就悲观底色:人一手创造权力社会牢笼,却困不住竞争性与动物性;历史并未命定,多重权力的无意后果却永难控制。悲剧论者最高幸运(或不幸)或在于:他完全意识到这一点。
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有