General Preface

to the Globalization of  Chinese Social Sciences book series

Xiangqun Chang

The phrase ‘globalization of Chinese social sciences’ came out of a discussion with Professor Stephan Feuchtwang at the London School of Economics in 2010 about the title of a book commemorating the 100th anniversary of Professor Fei Xiaotong’s birth. The first volume (in both English and Chinese) was published in 2014 by Global China Press alone and in 2015 jointly with New World Press. The dissemination of ‘Chinese social sciences’ covers a very wide range, in which the promotion of Fei Xiaotong’s work is only the first step. We therefore decided to use ‘globalization of Chinese social sciences’ as the name of a book series in order to promote representative Chinese social scientific works. Here I shall briefly outline the key developments in ‘Chinese social sciences’ after 19491. [1]

Institutions and resources

In China, the National Philosophy and Social Science Planning Group of the CPC Central Committee is the highest body in the Chinese social sciences. The group operates through the National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science. Its National Social Science Foundation is commissioned by the Department of Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education, the Research Bureau of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) and the Research Division of the Central Party School, to be in charge of universities, the institutions of CASS and the central State organs, respectively, with responsibility for the application of research projects, management of funds and evaluation of results. The National Philosophy and Social Science Planning Group also owns the National Social Sciences Database, which was established by CASS and developed by its Library in 2013. It is a national-level, open-information platform for Chinese social sciences. In 2015, the Chinese Social Sciences Year Book series (15 volumes to date) was published, representing the high standard of work in the field. CASS consists of hundreds of research institutes, centres and related professional organizations, such as the Social Sciences in China Press (SSCP), Social Sciences Academic Press (SSAP), Chinese Social Sciences Net and its blogs and the journal Social Sciences in China and its site and blogs, the English version of which is now published by the Taylor and Francis Group. In 2015, the journal Social Sciences in China Review was founded. It aims ‘to evaluate academic results based on national conditions, introduce a high standard of research results and create a system of academic discourse in contemporary China, comprehensively promoting Chinese philosophical and social scientific work in the world’. In recent years, the CASS Forum has also gained a strong reputation at home and abroad. In addition, there are a huge number of Academies of Social Sciences at province and municipality level.
        They also have their own publications on social sciences based on their work at the local level. There are about 2,500 universities of different types in China. Some belong to the Bureau of Higher Education of the Ministry of Education, some to State ministries and commissions and others to provincial and municipal governments, and more one quarter are private universities[2]. In 2001, the Department of Social Sciences, Ministry of Education, built the humanities and social sciences services professional portal, the China Academic Humanities Information Network. It became the centre of information, online publications and the dissemination, management and public enquiry services for humanities and the social sciences. All the universities have different faculties and departments and research centres for different topics. Almost all have their own publishers, which publish academic journals and books. Social scientific work will be published in philosophy and social sciences edition. It is worth mentioning a few examples of universities’ contributions to providing services or promoting Chinese social sciences at the national level.
        In 1998, Nanjing University and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University developed a Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index and the academic series of the Chinese Humanities and Social Sciences Citation index. It led to the foundation of the Chinese Social Science Research Assessment Centre in 2000.
        Tsinghua University and Tsinghua Tongfang Holding Group established China’s National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) in 1999. It was supported by the Education Ministry, Science and Technology Ministry, Propaganda Ministry and General Administration of Press and Publications, with self-developed cutting-edge Chinese digital library technologies and grid resources as a sharing platform. It built the most comprehensive system of Chinese academic knowledge resources – the China Integrated Knowledge Resources Database – covering journals, dissertations, newspapers, proceedings, year books, reference works, encyclopedias, patents, standards, S&T achievements and laws and regulations and some well-known foreign-language resources from Springer, Taylor & Francis and Wiley, forming a complete knowledge service network. The system is the core of the China knowledge resource base, encompassing a total of 101.9 million articles that include a large amount of social scientific work, some of which have been translated into English.
        Fudan University is a top-class locus for the internationalization of Chinese social sciences. It founded China’s first national institute for advanced studies of social sciences (Fudan-IAS for Social Sciences). The founding Dean, Professor Deng Zhenglai, also founded the Chinese Social Science Quarterly in Hong Kong as early as 1992, which was re-established in 2008. In the same year, he founded China’s first English-language journal on social sciences, the Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences (FJHSS). Unfortunately, Deng passed away in 2013. His successor in Fudan-IAS, Sujian Guo, Professor of the Department of Political Science at San Francisco State University, USA, also became Editor of the FJHSS, which is now published by Springer.


Some recent views need to be mentioned here. In 2011, Professor QIAO Xiaochun of the Institute of Population Research at Peking University gave a lecture entitled ‘Chinese social science: how far away from science?’ at a number of universities, including his own and Shanghai University of International Studies, China Youth University for Political Science, Huazhong University of Science and Technology and Zhongnan University of Economics and Law. He believed that Chinese social science occupies no position or status in world academia, and therefore enjoys no right of discourse. This is because methodologically Chinese social sciences have a strong speculative character, in contrast to the empirical studies on which general social sciences are based. However, in his ‘Understanding the future’ lecture in 2016, Professor Yu Xie of Princeton University and Peking University issued more balanced statements. On the one hand, he observed, scientific studies have three characteristics, namely objectivity, experience and repeatability. On the other hand, he put forward three principles, variability, social grouping and social context, which provide a methodological basis for social scientific research. Xie suggested that in today’s China it is very important ever to carry out social scientific research on China scientifically since Chinese society has been changed all round significantly and still changing[3].
        In 2014, XIONG Yihan, Associate Professor at Fudan University School of International Relations and Public Affairs, published an article entitled ‘The internationalization of social science and native language scholarly writing in China’[4]. He criticized the phenomenon of ‘academic nationalism’ that wants to boycott internationalization, but also took issue with the ‘colonial academic’ who lacks local consciousness. He thought it very important that ‘Chinese scholars should apply scientific research methods, actively participate in international academic dialogue and competition, invent dominant theoretical paradigms and set up research agendas with international colleagues. Even first-class Chinese writing with a global perspective is an integral part of the internationalization of social science in China.’
        XIANG Biao, Professor of Social Anthropology at Oxford University, who graduated from the Department of Sociology, Peking University, in the mid1990s, recently published an article on ‘The ending of the “intellectual youth” era of Chinese social sciences’.[5] Scholars born before the 1960s, who received an incomplete education but had experience in rural China, have nearly all left their leadership or teaching posts. In contrast, post-1970s scholars, who received continuous formal education but without experience outside educational institutions, became the mainstream of academia. Xiang believes that the evolution of modern Chinese social science resembles the changes that have taken place between different generations of academic practice, knowledge acquisition and accumulation. Nevertheless, as Yefu Zheng, Emeritus Professor of Sociology at Peking University, pointed out, professors in the Department of Sociology at Peking University who were born before 1960 had still not retired; scholars’ influence does not depend on their posts. Professor TIAN Song of Beijing Normal University also questioned whether the ‘intellectual youth’ era had ended. He maintained that the phenomenon of the post-1970s becoming mainstream is more of an academic management change[6].
        The methodological character of Chinese social sciences is a very large topic. Recently we found a problem with translating the phrase ‘哲学社会科学’ into English. It was in a speech at the Symposium of Philosophical Social Sciences by XI Jinping, President of China, on 17 May 2016.[7] Xi obtained a PhD from the Department of Sociology, School of Humanities and Social Science at Tsinghua University, in 2002. Our professional translator translated 哲学社会科学 into English as ‘philosophical social sciences’based on the contents of the speech. Our copy editor accepted it, as did our academic adviser, Professor Martin Albrow, a founding editor of International Sociology and former President of the British Sociological Association. Moreover, inspired by it, when writing speech notes in preparation for attending a high-end international conference on China studies on in October 2016, he titled his speech ‘Philosophical social science as a bridge from “Belt and Road” to global governance’. But, as the editor of this book series, when I was finalizing the English translation of Xi’s speech, I had to change ‘philosophical social sciences’ to ‘philosophy and social sciences’. This seemed to coincide with the letter of Xi’s speech, but from the methodological point of view, some important characteristics of Chinese social sciences were lost.

Globalization of Chinese social sciences

The ‘globalization of Chinese social sciences’ is a live issue. The direction and outcomes of globalization of Chinese social scientific studies are neither Western nor Chinese, but add concepts, theories and methods derived from studying countries like China, which have a long history, huge population and complicated society, to the sum of human knowledge. This idea first appeared in ‘A Chinese phase in social anthropology’[8], the Malinowski Memorial Lecture by Maurice Freedman given at the London School of Economics and Political Science in 1962. Two years later, Freedman made another speech on an occasion when area studies were being discussed, with the title ‘What social science can do for Chinese studies[9], in which he distinguished sinology from Chinese studies and emphasized the need to study China social-scientifically. Both Martin Albrow and Stephan Feuchtwang were research students, respectively in the Departments of Sociology and Anthropology at LSE, under the supervision of Maurice Freedman, and this affected their academic careers throughout their lives. Martin Albrow helped many Chinese scholars to publish their articles in International Sociology in the 1980s when he was editor of the journal[10]. After 1990, he devoted himself to promoting the idea of globalization and became one of its international representatives. Nowadays, he helps promote Chinese social scientific work as part of the globalization of Chinese social sciences; at the same time, he attempts to insert the concept of transculturality into mainstream academia, as well as exploring the contributions of Chinese social sciences in the process of transculturalization. Details of this can be seen in my introductory paper launching the Journal of China in Comparative Perspective, entitled ‘Transculturality and the globalization of Chinese social sciences: vocabulary, invention and exploration’[11].
        Stephan Feuchtwang founded the China Research Unit at City University in 1973 when he worked there. It was the first organization dedicated to social scientific studies on China in the UK. Since 1998, when Feuchtwang was at the London School of Economics, he devoted himself to the creation of comparative studies of China. He appreciated Fei Xiaotong’s comparative perspectives and theoretical conceptualization of the differential mode of association and organizational mode of association (Gary G. Hamilton’s translation of 差序格局 and 团体格局[12]) and elaborated them with his own translation[13]. In 2013, after its gestation, birth and early years of growth of the China in Comparative Perspective Network (CCPN) at LSE, he supported changing its name from CCPN to CCPN Global, as CCPN completed the process of becoming independent from the LSE.
        In addition to the above, some scholars are also dedicated to Chinese social sciences in the USA. For example, Professor Daniel Little, Chancellor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, presented a paper ‘New developments in the Chinese social sciences’ at a conference Mapping Difference: Structures and Categories of Knowledge Production, 19–20 May 2006, at Duke University. As early as 1989, he published Understanding Peasant China: Case Studies in the Philosophy of Social Science, which was translated into Chinese and published in 2009[14]. In 2010, Gary Hamilton, Professor of Sociology and International Studies at the University of Washington, presented a paper entitled ‘What Western social scientists can learn from the writings of Fei Xiaotong’[15] at the international conference at LSE, Commemorating the 100th Anniversary of Professor Fei Xiaotong’s Birth. Hamilton speaks highly of Chinese social sciences’ methodological contribution to general social science methodology. A recent example was seen at the Young Scholars conference Social Sciences and China Studies, 20–21 May 2016, organized by the Fudan-UC Center on Contemporary China at the University of California, San Diego. These are joint efforts to promote Chinese social sciences from both Chinese and American scholars. All in all, a huge amount of work is being done all over the world in different disciplines studying China social-scientifically – too much to be mentioned here.
        In the Preface of this book, Feuchtwang stated that Fei Xiaotong is probably the highest-ranking policy-influencing anthropologist ever, who profoundly influenced social policies in China’s development[16]. In his speech, XI Jinping mentioned LSE graduate Fei Xiaotong’s name, which is no accident. In his Preface to Peasant Life in China, Malinowski noted that Dr Fei promised that after he returned to China he would work with Chinese colleagues to undertake the comprehensive reform of China’s economic, social, cultural, political and belief systems[17]. Now Dr XI Jinping, the highest-ranking policy-maker, in his speech on Chinese philosophy and social sciences, has promoted the all-round development of Chinese social sciences (see Appendix E). We believe that this may not only affect the process of globalization of Chinese social science but could also have far-reaching historic impact on China’s participation in global governance and society building and the sustainable development of a global society.

[1] Before 1949 see: Social Engineering and the Social Sciences in China, 1919-1949, Yung-chen Chiang, (Cambridge University Press, 2006).
[2] see: The 2015 National Education Statistics Bulletin, Ministry of education of China), 2016-07-06. A03/s180/moe_633/201607/t20160706_270976.html (见:《2015年全国教育事业发展统计公报》,中国教育部).
[3] XIE YU, Today it is so important and so lucky to conduct social scientific research in China (a speech at the Future Forum, Beijing), Scientific American, 2016-07-26, detail/1102356(谢宇:今天在中国做社会科学太重要了,也太幸运了,环球科学(“未来科学”论坛演讲). 
[4] XIONG Yihan. The Internationalization of Social Science and Native Language Scholarly Writing in China, Fudan Journal (Social Sciences), No. 4, 2014. [熊易寒, 中国社会科学的国际化与母语写作, 《复旦学报(社会科学版)》, 2014年第4 期。]
[5]XIANG Biao. The ending of ‘Intellectual youth’ era of Chinese social sciences, Beijing Cultural Review, No.12, 2015 [项飙, 中国社会科学“知青时代”的终结,《文化纵横》, 2015年第12期。]
[6] Tian Song. Is generational change or institutional change? Social Science Weekly, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, 10th March 2016, p10.
[7] 习近平, 《在哲学社会科学工作座谈会上的讲话》, 2016年5月18日, 新华网 [XI Jinping,  Speech at the Symposium of Philosophical Social Sciences, 18th May 2016. Xinhua Net. http://].
[8] Maurice Freedman, A Chinese Phase in Social Anthropology, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1963. 
[9] Maurice Freedman. What social science can do for Chinese studies, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 23, No. 4, 1964.
[10] Martin Albrow. A Chinese Episode in the Globalization of Sociology, Journal of China in Comparative Perspective, Vol.1 No.2, 2015. Its Chinese version see: 马丁·阿尔布劳, 社会学全 球化过程中的中国片段, 《中国比较研究》, 2015年第1卷第2期。
[11] Xiangqun Chang. Transculturality and the Globalization of Chinese Social Sciences: Vocabulary, Invention and Exploration, Journal of China in Comparative Perspective, Vol.1 No. 1, 2015. [ 常向群,文化与中国社会全球化:词汇的发明与发掘《中超文化国比较研究》, 2015年第 1卷第2期]。
[12] Xiaotong Fei. From the Soil: The Foundations of Chinese Society, A translation of Fei Xiaotong’s Xiangtu Zhongguo, by Gary Hamilton and WANG Zheng.  University of California Press, 1992.
[13] Stephan Feuchtwang. Social egoism and individualism: surprises and questions from a Western anthropologist of China – Reading Fei Xiaotong’s contrast between China and the West, Journal of China in Comparative Perspective, Vol.1 No. 1, 2015. Its Chinese version see: 王斯福, 社会自 我主义与个体主义 — 一位西方的汉学人类学家阅读费孝通“中西对比”观念的惊讶与问题, 《中国比较研究》, 2015年第1卷第1期。
[14] Daniel Little. Understanding Peasant China: Case Studies in the Philosophy of Social Science. (Yale University Press, 1989). Chinese version: 李丹《理解农民中国——社会科学哲学的案 例研究》,江苏人民出版社2009年.
[15] Gary Hamilton. What Western social scientists can learn from the writings of Fei Xiaotong, Journal of China in Comparative Perspective, Vol.1 No. 1, 2015. Chinese version: 韩格理 (Gary G. Hamilton), 费孝通著作对西方社会科学家的启示, 《中国比较研究》, 2015年第1卷第1 期。
[16] Stephan Feuchtwang. Preface, Journal of China in Comparative Perspective, Vol.1 No. 1, 2015.
[17] Bronislaw Malinowski. Preface, in Hsiao-Tung Fei (Fei Xiaotong), Peasant life in China, London: Routledge, 1939.




        “中国社会科学全球化”这一概念来自与王斯福(Stephan Feuchtwang)教授的讨论,当时是为了用于我们于2010年在伦敦经济学院举办的中国社会学和人类学家费孝通先生诞辰100周年纪念文集的书名。该书的第一卷(英汉双语)已于2014年由全球中国出版社和新世界出版社分别并合作出版。鉴于“中国社会科学”涵盖极广,我们对费孝通研究的推介只是第一步,于是我们决定将“中国社会科学全球化”理念作为系列丛书的命名,便于以后在此框架下陆续推出关于中国社会科学的代表性作品。这里说的“中国社会科学”主要指1949年行中国成立以后的[1],仅从以下几点作一简单的梳理。


        在中国,中共中央全国哲学社会科学规划领导小组是中国社会科学的最高领导机构,该小组下设全国哲学社会科学规划办公室(National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science)。它对“国家社会科学基金”(National Social Science Foundation)委托教育部社会科学司、中国社会科学院科研局、中央党校科研部分别管理高等院校、中国社会科学院和中央国家机关的课题申报、项目和经费管理以及成果鉴定工作。全国哲学社会科学规划领导小组还拥有国家哲学社会科学学术期刊数据库(National Social Sciences Database),由中国社会科学院承建的、该院图书馆(调查与数据信息中心)开发的、于2013年开通的国家级、开放型、公益性哲学社会科学信息平台。2015年,代表中国社会科学成果的权威性的《中国社会科学年鉴系列(15部)》在北京发布。
       中国社会科学院下设近百个研究所、中心和相关职能部门,如:中国社会科学出版社、社科文献出版社、中国社会科学网及其微博、《中国社会科学报》、《中国社会科学》杂志社及其期刊网和博客、还有由Taylor & Francis Group 出版《中国社会科学》英文版(Social Sciences in China)。此外,2015年还创刊了  《中国社会科学评价》(Social Sciences in China Review ),“立足国情开展有的放矢的学术评价,推出能够体现时代思想高度的研究成果,创建当代中国学术话语体系,全面推进中国哲学社会科学走向世界”。近年来,中国社会科学论坛(CASS Forum)在国内外也有一些影响。此外,全国各省市也有社科院和社科联合会等,各自也有其刊物。做了大量的中国社会科学的研究。
       南京大学于1998年与香港理工大学合作研制开发“中文社会科学引文索引”数据库(英文名为:Chinese Social Science Citation Index,简称“CSSCI”),出版了《中文社会科学引文索引》和《中文人文社会科学学术集刊引文索引》等,并于2000年成立了中国社会科学研究评价中心 (Chinese Social Science Research Assessment Centre)。
       清华大学和清华同方于1999年开创了中国知网(China’s National Knowledge Infrastructure,CNKI)工程,以实现全社会知识资源传播共享与增值利用为目标的信息化建设项目,目前已经建成了完整的以学术研究成果为核心的中国信息资源体系--《中国知识资源总库》,《中国学术期刊(光盘版)》,收集的文献总量达10190万篇,主且的题目和提要翻译成英文,其中有大量的社会科学资源。       复旦大学可谓是致力于中国社会科学研究和国际化的重镇。该校于2007年创办了中国第一个国家社会科学高等研究院,该院创院院长邓正来教授,早在1992年在香港创刊了《中国社会科学季刊》,于2008年复刊时更名为《中国社会科学辑刊》,同年又创刊了中国首家关于社会科学的英文期刊《复旦人文社会科学论丛》(Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences (FJHSS)。不幸的是,2013年邓正来因病逝世。从2014年起,美国旧金山州立大学政治学系教授郭苏建接任复旦高研院院长和FJHSS主编,该刊成为施普林格(Springer)旗下的全英文的人文社会科学综合性学术季刊。


       近年来有几种观点需要提及。2011年以来,北京大学人口研究所乔晓春教授分别在北京大学、上海外国语大学、中国青年政治学院、华中科技大学和中南财经政法大学等多所大学,做了题为“中国社会科学,离科学还有多远?”的讲座,认为中国的社会科学在国际上没有自己的位子、没有地位、更无话语权。因为中国社会科学是走“思辨”路线,而国外走的是“实证”路线。  然而,普林斯顿大学和北京大学教授谢宇在2016年的“理解未来”讲座的观点则更为平衡。他一方面阐明科学性体现在客观性、经验性和重复性的特征,另方面又提出了三个基本原理:变异性原理(variability principle)、社会分组原理(social grouping principle)、社会情境原理(social context principle),认为它们为社会科学研究提供了方法论基础。
       牛津大学社会人类学教授项飙曾于1990年代就读于北京大学社会学系,他最近发表的文章《中国社会科学“知青时代”的终结》[3]引起了加大的反响。他指出,出生于1960年以前、所接受的教育不完整不连贯、有过上山下乡经历的学者全面退出领导岗位,大部分人停止教学工作,同时,接受了完整的正规教育、几乎没有学院之外的生命经历的“70后”成为学界的主流。认为,中国现代社会科学的演进,可能更多的是不同代际之间学术实践方式、知识的习得和积累方式上的变化。 对此,北京大学社会学系荣休教授郑也夫指出,北大社会学系做过知青的教授有一半都没有退休,学者的影响力并不依赖于职务岗位。北京师范大学哲学与社会学学院教授田松在《社会科学报》发表的文章, 问道:“知青时代”真的终结了么?并明确指出,70后成为学术主流的现象更多的是学术管理方式的变更[4]。
       中国社会科学在方法论的特征是一个很大的题目。最近我们在把清华大学社会学博士、中国国家主席习近平于2016年4月在全国哲学社会科学工作会议上的讲话[5]翻译成英文时,发现了一个如何把“哲学社会科学”翻译成英文的问题。我们的专业翻译根据讲话的内容翻成“philosophical social sciences”(哲学的社会科学),我们的英文审校接受了这一译法,我们的学术指导、《国际社会学》创刊主编、英国社会学会前主席马丁·阿尔布劳(Martin Albrow)教授更是从这一译法中获得了灵感,将他正在准备的到中国参加一个中国研究的国际大会的文章的题目定为:哲学的社会科学是从“一带一路”到全球治理之间的桥梁(Philosophical Social Science as a Bridge from "Belt and Road" to Global Governance)。作为总编,我在定稿时把该讲话中的“哲学社会科学”英译改为philosophy and social sciences。这一译法,从表面上看似乎与该讲话的用法相吻合,但是从方法论上看,丢掉了中国社会科学的某些特质。


        这个问题实际上是“中国社会科学全球化”的问题,这种全球化的方向和结果既不是西方化也不是中国化,而是把对中国这样的有悠久的历史、众多的人口的复杂的社会的研究的所提炼出来的概念工具、理论和方法等融入于人类的知识大厦。这个意思的表达最早出现在英国人类学家莫里斯·弗里德曼(Maurice Freedman)的讲话中,是在伦敦经济学院著名的人类学家布罗尼斯拉夫·马林诺夫斯基(Bronislaw Malinowski)的纪念演讲里说的,该演讲的题目是“社会人类学的中国时代”[6]。两年后,弗里德曼在关于区域研究的讲话中,以“社会科学能为中国研究做什么”[7]为题,把汉学(sinology)与中国研究(Chinese Studies)加以区分,强调要用社会科学的方法做中国研究。上面提到的阿尔布劳和本序言开篇提到的王斯福于1962年分别为伦敦经济学院社会学系和人类学系的研究生,对他们的导师弗里德曼的上述演讲印象深刻并践行毕生。
       阿尔布劳于1980年代在他主编的《国际社会学》上发表了许多中国学者的文章,作为帮助中国社会会科学国际化的举措[8]。1990年代以后,他致力于推动全球化思潮并成为其代表人之一。现在,他一方面在帮助进一步推介中国社会科学的研究成果,使之成为中国社会科学全球化的一部分;另方面,他在帮助把超文化 (transculturality) 的理念推向主流话语,同时发掘中国社会科学的独特贡献并建构进来。关于这方面的内容详见本书的“代前言:超文化与中国社会科学全球化—— 词汇的发明与发掘” [9]。
      王斯福于1973年在他早年供职的伦敦城市大学成立了中国研究组织(China Research Unit),这是英国第一个致力于用社会科学研究中国的学术组织。1998年,王斯福到伦敦经济学院工作以来,他致力于中国比较研究的创设。他对费孝通的“差序格局”和“团体格局”[10]的比较视野和理论抽象等都非常赞赏[11]。2013年,当中国比较研究网完成了其在伦敦经济学院孕育、诞辰和早年的成长之后,他建议把“伦敦经济学院中国比较研究网”更名为“全球中国比较研究会”,把中国比较研究的理念和体制从伦敦经济学院全球化了。
      此外,美国也有社会科学家致力于中国的社会科学的研究,如2006年5月20-21日美国杜克大学举办了题为“描绘差异:知识产品的结构与分类”的学术会议,密西根大学迪尔本分校校长李丹 (Daniel Little) 教授发表了“中国社会科学的新发展”一文。早在1989年他发表的关于中国农民的社会科学哲学(Philosophy of Social Science)的著作的中文版于2009年出版。[12] 2010年,韩格理(Gary G. Hamilton)在纪念费孝通百年诞辰的大会上, 发表了题为“费孝通著作对西方社会科学家的启示”,以费孝通为例从一般社会科学方法论的高度评价了中国社会科学方法论意义[13]。2016年5月20-21日,复旦-加大当代中国研究中心在美国加利福尼亚大学圣地亚哥分校分校举办了“社会科学与中国研究”的青年学者大会。这是中美双方学者共同推动中国社会科学的范例。总之,世界各地无数的学者从社会科学的不同的学科对中国的社会科学的研究在此不赘。


[1] 新中国成立以前的中国社会科学的研究,比较有代表性的著作为:Social Engineering and the Social Sciences in China, 1919-1949, Yung-chen Chiang,  Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[2] 熊易寒,中国社会科学的国际化与母语写作,《复旦学报( 社会科学版) 》,2014 年第 4 期。
[3] 项飙,中国社会科学“知青时代”的终结,《文化纵横》,2015年第12期。
[4] 田松,是代价替换,还是制度变更?《社会科学报》2016年3月10日第8版。
[5] 习近平,《在哲学社会科学工作座谈会上的讲话》,2016年5月18日,新华网: 
[6] Maurice Freedman, A Chinese Phase in Social Anthropology, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1963.
[7] Maurice Freedman, What Social Science Can Do for Chinese Studies, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 23, No. 4, 1964.
[8] 马丁·阿尔布劳(Martin Albrow), 社会学全球化过程中的中国片段, 《中国比较研究》,2015年第1卷第2期。
[9] 又见:常向群,  超文化与中国社会科学全球化—— 词汇的发明与发掘,《中国比较研究》,2015年第1卷第1期。英文版见:Xiangqun Chang, Transculturality and the Globalization of Chinese Social Sciences: Vocabulary, Invention and Exploration, Journal of China in Comparative Perspective, Vol.1 No. 1, 2015.
[10] 即费孝通《乡土中国》的英译本Xiaotong Fei, From the Soil: The Foundations of Chinese Society, A translation of Fei Xiaotong's Xiangtu Zhongguo, by Gary Hamilton and WANG Zheng.  University of California Press, 1992.
[11] 王斯福 (Stephan Feuchewang), 社会自我主义与个体主义— 一位西方的汉学人类学家阅读费孝通“中西对比”观念的惊讶与问题, 《中国比较研究》,2015年第1卷第1期。
[12] 【美】李丹《理解农民中国——社会科学哲学的案例研究》,江苏人民出版社2009年。
[13] 韩格理 (Gary G. Hamilton), 费孝通著作对西方社会科学家的启示, 《中国比较研究》,2015年第1卷第1期。
[14] 王斯福 (Stephan Feuchewang), 序言, 《中国比较研究》,2015年第1卷第1期。
[15] Bronislaw Malinowski, Preface, Peasants life in China, London: Routledge, 1939.

The websites and blogs are in use while they are being built 本网站和博客均在'边建设边使用' 中

The above title is adapted from the China's development style in order for you to share our resources in a timely fashion. There is still a huge amount of work to be done. Your understanding, participation and generous support are highly appreciated!

为了与您及时分享我们的资源, 我们采纳中国发展的'边建设边使用'的做法,尚有大量的工作待做, 真诚地感谢您的理解、参与和慷慨赞助!

Click the button below to:

Download Gif aid form ( UK )


Registered Charity No.: 1154640

公益组织注册号: 1154640

WeChat QR code

: 4th Floor, Cannongate House,
64 Cannon Street, London, EC4N 6AE, UK