自我是人格心理学和社会心理学的重要研究主题。自文化心理学兴起以来,构建契合中国社会、历史与文化特质的自我理论,成为众多华人心理学者努力的目标。这些探讨华人自我的理论或模型可分为个体-集体、差序格局取向以及源生模型取向三类取向。厘清华人自我理论的发展轮廓和脉络,有助于多方位、立体性理解华人自我观的丰富内涵,为进一步研究华人自我奠定坚实基础。
Abstract
The self is an important concept in the research of personality psychology and social psychology. Since the rise of cultural psychology in recent decades, many Chinese indigenous psychologists are involved in constructing a Chinese self-theory that fits the characteristics of Chinese society, history, and culture. The existing Chinese self-theories or self-models can be divided into three categories, including individualism/ collectivism oriented Chinese self-theories, differential pattern oriented Chinese self-theories, and protogenetic symbol oriented Chinese self-theories.
The individualism/ collectivism oriented Chinese self-theories inherited from the individualism/collectivism dimension in culturology, in the same line with the self-construal theory that divided the cultural self-construal into the independent self and interdependent self, which emerged from the comparison with the western "mainstream modern civilization." The most representative individualism/ collectivism oriented Chinese self-theories include the “four-part theory of Chinese self” proposed by Yang Kwo-Shu, the “dual-cultural self-theory” suggested by Hong Ying-Yi, and the “composite self-theory” proposed by Lu Luo. These theories are generally nested in the individual orientation and social orientation, and the interdependent self to construct the modern Chinese self that is now expanding into a multicultural convergence theory of the self.
The differential pattern oriented Chinese self-theories developed from Fei Xiao-Tong's differential pattern theory, which described the Chinese traditional social structure. From a psychological perspective, the differential pattern of social form is considered as internalized psychological differential pattern. That is, consistent with the premise of individual-centeredness, other people around the individuals are given different values and meanings and pulled into the concentric circles of self-identity, forming a "self-centered" form with differential order. On this basis, Yang Chung-Fang, Yang Yi-Yin, Zhai Xue-Wei, and so on, made further development. These theories lean in the direction of sociological research and focus on the extrapolation of the Chinese self in the context of ethical structures and social relations.
The protogenetic symbol oriented Chinese self-theories took a different approach and tried to construct a theory or model of the Chinese self by using typical symbols or illustrations with symbolic meanings in traditional Chinese culture. Mandala model of self proposed by Hwang Kwang-Kwo and the Taiji model of self proposed by Wang Feng-Yan et al are representative of this perspective.
The theoretical research of the Chinese self has shown following features. (1) The self theories have grown from nothing and expanded from one-way to diversified; (2) The self theories have developed from imitation to innovation; and (3)The tools to research about the self are gradually diversified, but the theory and empirical studies still need to be further combined. An understanding of the outline of the developmental process of the Chinese self-theories will help to understand the rich connotation of the Chinese self-view and lay a solid foundation for further research on the Chinese self.
关键词
自我 /
华人自我 /
差序格局 /
个人主义-集体主义 /
自我模型
Key words
self /
the Chinese self /
differential pattern /
individualism/collectivism /
self-model
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 安乐哲. (2006). 自我的圆成: 中西互镜下的古典儒学与道家 (彭国翔译). 河北人民出版社.
[2] 费孝通. (2008). 乡土中国. 人民出版社..
[3] 冯友兰. (2014). 贞元六书. 中华书局.
[4] 黄光国. (2012). 跳脱“二元对立”的思维框架. 本土心理学研究, 37, 191-210.
[5] 李抗. (2020). 中国人的文化会聚性自我研究 (博士毕业论文). 南京师范大学.
[6] 李抗, 汪凤炎. (2019). 探寻中国人的多重互依自我: 理论、挑战与整合. 心理科学, 42(1), 245-250.
[7] 林崇德, 俞国良. (1996). 心理学研究的中国化: 过程和道路. 心理科学, 19(4), 193-198, 255.
[8] 陆洛. (2003). 人我关系之界定——「折衷自我」的现身. 本土心理学研究, 20, 139-207.
[9] 任孝鹏, 向媛媛, 周阳, 朱廷劭. (2017). 基于微博大数据的中国人个体主义/集体主义的心理地图. 内蒙古师范大学学报: 哲学社会科学版, 46(6), 59-64.
[10] 汪凤炎. (2018). 对水稻理论的质疑: 兼新论中国人偏好整体思维的内外因. 心理学报, 50(5): 572-582.
[11] 汪凤炎. (2019a). 独立自我和互依自我: 从文化历史演化看中式自我的诞生、转型与定格. 南京师大学报(社会科学版), 4, 61-77.
[12] 汪凤炎. (2019b). 中国文化心理学新论(下). 上海教育出版社..
[13] 汪凤炎. (2022). 自我的太极模型: 提出背景与核心观点. 南京师大学报(社会科学版), 2, 53-64.
[14] 夏允中, 黄光国. (2019). 开启以儒释道文化的修养谘商心理学理论与实征研究: 迈向自性觉醒的心理疗愈. 中华辅导与谘商学报, 54, 1-20.
[15] 徐晓军. (2009). 内核—外围: 传统乡土社会关系结构的变动——以鄂东乡村艾滋病人社会关系重构为例. 社会学研究, 24(1), 64-95.
[16] 杨宜音. (2008). 关系化还是类别化: 中国人"我们"概念形成的社会心理机制探讨. 中国社会科学, 4, 148-159.
[17] 杨中芳. (1991). 中国人·中国心: 人格与社会篇 . 远流出版社.
[18] 杨中芳. (2009). 如何理解中国人: 文化与个人论文集. 重庆大学出版社.
[19] 袁晓劲, 郭斯萍. (2017). 中国人人际情感的差序格局关系: 来自EAST的证据. 心理科学, 40(3), 651-656.
[20] 翟学伟. (2018). 儒家式的自我及其实践: 本土心理学的研究. 南开学报(哲学社会科学版), 5, 124-134.
[21] 朱滢, 伍锡洪. (2017). 寻找中国人的自我. 北京师范大学出版社..
[22] Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this "we"? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 83-93.
[23] Henrich J., Heine S. J., & Norenzayan A. (2010). Most people are not WEIRD. Nature, 466(7302), 29.
[24] Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture and organizations. International studies of management and organization, 10(4), 15-41.
[25] Hong Y. Y., Morris M. W., Chiu C. Y., & Benet-Martínez V. (2000). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55(7), 709-720.
[26] Hwang, K. K. (2011). The mandala model of self. Psychological Studies, 56(4), Article 329.
[27] Hwang, K. K. (2018). A psychodynamic model of Self-nature. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 32(3-4), 285-306.
[28] James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Henry Holt and Company.
[29] Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2): 224-253.
[30] Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (2010). Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 420-430.
[31] Sedikides C., Gaertner L., & O’Mara E. M. (2011). Individual self, relational self, collective self: Hierarchical ordering of the tripartite self. Psychological Studies, 56(1), 98-107.
[32] Shweder R. A., Goodnow J. J., Hatano G., LeVine R., Markus H., & Miller P. J. (1998). The cultural psychology of development: One mind, many mentalities. In W. Damon (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 865-937). John Wiley & Sons.
[33] Talhelm T., Zhang X., Oishi S., Shimin C., Duan D., Lan X., & Kitayama S. (2014). Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice versus wheat agriculture. Science, 344(6184), 603-608.
[34] Triandis, H. C., & Gelfand, M. J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 118-128.
[35] Wang F. Y., Wang Z. D., & Wang R. J. (2019). The Taiji model of self. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1443.
[36] Wang, Z. D., & Wang, F, Y. (2020). The Taiji model of self II: Developing self models and self-cultivation theories based on the Chinese cultural traditions of Taoism and Buddhism. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 540074.
[37] Wang, Z. D., & Wang, F. Y. (2021). Ternary Taiji models of the traditional Chinese self: Centered on Confucian, Taoist, and Buddhist cultures. Journal of Humanistic Psychology. Advance online Pnblication.
[38] Yang, C. F. (2006). The Chinese conception of the self. In U. Kim, K. S. Yang, & K. K. Hwang (Eds.), Indigenous and cultural psychology: Understanding people in context (pp. 327-356). Springer.
[39] Zhu Y., Zhang L., Fan J., & Han S. H. (2007). Neural basis of cultural influence on self-representation. NeuroImage, 34(3), 1310-1316.
基金
*本研究得到上海中医药大学预算内科研项目（2021WK132）、国家自然科学基金（31971014）和2020年度江苏省第五期“333高层次人才培养工程”科研资助项目“文化对个体智慧表现的影响及机制”的资助
PDF(1028 KB)
