| The present paper is an analysis of the issues of social structure from Marxist socio-philosophical viewpoints. The issues of social structure are considered vital in the study of socio-philosophy and sociology. The theory of social structure is the fundamental basis of the theory of social development. However, for a long time, researches of social structure made in the field of philosophical sociology in China are mostly confined to their practical application and are seldom concerned with the creative theoretical researches. Up to now, many scholars in the field of China's philosophical sociology still advocate the so-called "substantial social structure". This not only lags far behind the progress of the study made by the western philosophical sociology on the problems of social structure, but also has exerted negative influences on the researches of China's social development. Therefore, it is an urgent problem for China's philosophical sociology to establish the outlook and the theory of the social structure that can keep abreast with our times. The aim of the present paper is to criticize the weakness of the substantial social structure theory, to absorb fully the achievements made by the western sociology from the horizon of Marxist theory of reality, and to establish Marxist theory of social structure based on the practical existentialism. As the first step, the present paper carries out a logical exploration following the progress of the western sociological researches on the problems of social structure. Since western philosophy corresponds to western sociology, the worldview of living also corresponds to the social structure theory of western sociology. Based on the epistemological worldview on living in western philosophy, the paper firstly examines two schools of western sociology, namely, the individualist epistemological and the structuralist epistemological theories of social structure. It shows that social unity problems, the overpowering control of society upon individuals, and the fragility of the theoretical presupposition based on "enhancing happiness", are not to be fully explained by the individualist epistemological theory of social structure. It also reveals that the individualist epistemological theory of social structure cannot explain the origin of social division of labor, or define the norms of social factors, nor can it make clear that the theoretical difficulties of the presupposition on the basis of "common belief"are nothing more than "non-positivism". Secondly, the paper examines the meaning theories of social structure in the western sociology from the worldview on living in terms of meaning in western philosophy. It shows that the theoretical hypothesis of social structure of meaning is based on understanding and mental absorption, and the theoretical difficulties it meets when explaining the relative certainty, continuity and the order of social structure----i.e., people's arbitrary spiritual manifestation and the non-definable dual uncertainties of sociologists'understanding of human objects----cannot get in touch with social structure. Hence, the present paper turns to the investigation of the theory of systematic social structure from the systematic worldview on living. It shows that, although the theory of systematic social structure synthesizes the theoretical achievements of the above mentioned two social structures and establishes complete social structure theories, it cannot explain the conflicts between dignity systems of moral quality, culture, society and behavioral organism, as well as the conflicts between different countries and social systems. Thus, our discussion turns to probe into the post-modern western sociology which holdsthat ordinary people's social structure corresponds to their worldview on living, and reveals that ordinary people's worldview on social structure virtually subverts the theory of systematic social structure. Although this will overcome such drawbacks as "cultural puppet"and "mental puppet"in the theory of systematic social structure, it still can't settle the conflicts between behavioral hegemonism and humanitarianism, or make clear the time and space distances of human objects cared about by sociologists and ordinary people, nor can it explain how activities form social structure by means of "infinite index". Neither can it settle the theoretical contradictions between pure observation and professional sociologists being ordinary people. As the inevitable outcome of logic, our examination of western sociological theory of social structure is focused on the view of communicative social structure, which observes social structure from western philosophical communicative worldview on living. Although it replaces the expedient measure of ordinary people's biased communicative ration and solves the relatively definite problems of humanitarianism and social structure, it has to face the unsolvable dogmatic issues of communicative world of living by ready means. It can't explain the changes from the shared truth to the reality of social structure, or solve the problem of collective unconsciousness and the problem of truth held by the minority. Last but not the least, the present paper explores the views of dual practical social structure of the western sociology from the angle of dual practical worldview on living, and points out that the views of dual practical social structure----though, with the action of reflectional supervision, connected with the individuals and society, the objective and the subjective as well as action and structure----have to face the following unsolved problems: the contradiction between power control of military violence and psychological mechanism of self-recognition, the existence of the self-conflict between "at one's own will"and "self-discipline", the contradictions amongconfidence, social risks and human beings'desire for a happy life. The innovative ideas in this paper lie in the claim that the shared weakness of both western sociology and social structure theory is that both are confined within the two separated worlds of epistemological living and living in relation to meaning. They both try to synthesize the dual conflicts between individual and society, the objective and the subjective as well as action and structure, but they are besieged within the epistemological world of living and the meaning world of living. Therefore, only when our view is cast on the Marxist realistic world of living, can we give the social structure a sound explanation superior to the western sociology. The most valuable part of this paper lies in its proposal of Marxist view of realistic social structure, which keeps abreast of the time. It not only enriches the original researches on the social structure theory of Marxism, but also provides a new analytical way to criticize the social structure theory in western sociology, and at the same time casts a light on the problems of social structure in China. Marxist view of realistic social structure, advocated here, refers to the fact that we should view the social structure from realistic life, which is both epistemological and meaningful. The epistemological existence of realistic living in the world determines that it is the logical existence based on concepts. The existence of meaning determines that it is reflectional to the logical existence. It is not pre-conceptual, pre-logical or pre-refectional. Instead, it is the human world after human beings became what they are. Its essence is a kind of worldview of living based on the practical theory of survival. Viewed from realistic life, social structure should be entailed in it. The formation, development and preservation of social structure are concerned with the complex relationships within and among the various kinds of systems. The location of social structure in time and space is entailed in the practicalsurvival activities of reflectional supervision. Because the practical "self-ego"is in the contradictory movement which connects knowledge and meaning, the production and reproduction of social structure are the identity enrichment of multiple contradictions. Since there exists the contradiction between the epistemological knowledge and meaning in the dignity system, the identical dignity can only be achieved by the reflectional supervision of the practical "self-ego". However, this kind of identical dignity must turn to the collective dignity system via social interactions. Thus, there exist the inter-individual contradictions of dignitary awareness. Because the action triggered by the epistemological contradiction of dignity is involved in the contradiction of nature----which means that the combination of physical action and natural environment leads to the inner epistemological contradictions of the acting organs----there exist the dual interweaved epistemological contradictions. Since human beings create their culture in the contradictory life with the nature, there also exist the epistemological contradictions between old and new culture. Therefore, in the culture system, another kind of interweaved contradiction is added. Since culture takes its effect on the social life in the form of rules, it also results in the epistemological contradiction between the new and old action rules in the social system. The identity of multiple layers forms the inner-relations between production and reproduction in the social structure. The dynamic arrangement of social action is in time and space, and the development of social structure is the new identity composition triggered by the above contradictory movements. The present paper, from the viewpoint of realistic social structure, also poses criticisms to the social structure theory in western sociology from different layers, and points out that the individualist epistemological social structure theory condenses the communicative epistemological contradiction into the individual identity between meaning and epistemological state. The...
|
PDF Full Text Request