跳到主要內容 :::
:::

孫中山科學思想與中共「科學發展觀」的對話 detail

:::

孫中山科學思想與中共「科學發展觀」的對話

學習筆記 勘誤意見
下載
0 次數
點擊
158 次數
詮釋資料說明
文件類型

本館出版品

題名

孫中山科學思想與中共「科學發展觀」的對話

題名(英)

A Dialogue between Dr. Sun Yat-sen's Scientific Thoughts and the Scientific Outlook on Development of the P.R.C.

作者
歐陽新宜
期刊

孫學研究

ISSN

1996-265-7

出版頻率

半年刊

出版西元年月日

2010/05/16

卷期

第08期

頁次

P065-093

關鍵詞
發展模式科學思想中山思想科學發展觀科學社會主義馬克思主義
關鍵詞(英)
development modelscientific thought of Sun Yat-senThe Scientific Outlook on Developmentscientific socialismMarxism
全文內容

  中共在2007年「十七大」 之後提出了一個新的發展理論─科學發展觀,作為當前國家政策施行的主要指導思想。基於社會主義國家發展思維的共同架構,本文藉由中山思想和馬克思主義原始文件以及大陸學者和中共官方文件之間的對話,試圖從論述文獻和經驗數據兩方面來探索「科學發展觀」的政治、經濟、社會和哲學意義。
  雖然中共官方和大陸學者普遍高度評價「科學發展觀」的典範地位,認為是中共見政以來的第四代發展模式,具有以人為本、可持續、全面、協調發展的時代特性。然而對於科學發展觀本身的科學性質及其科學目標的達成,卻沒有太多的評論。尤其對於如何解決因為之前盲目發展所造成的貧富差距、環境破壞以及貪污腐敗等等社會問題,並沒有提出明確的科學測量指標以及達成該目標的科學判準。
  本文重點比較了孫中山和馬克思在「以人為本」觀念上的差異。孫中山的人道主義思想與馬克思的「階級人道論」相較,毋寧是相對具有普世性和全球性的。也正是因為對於人性的看法不同,中國大陸在對「人」的定義上,有更強的階級性、種族性、地域性與國別性,以致於在對不同屬性的人的保障上出現了落差。
  為了避免科學發展觀成為另一次政治口號,本文呼應大陸學者和孫中山實事求是的科學觀點,認為「科學發展觀」的階段性任務既是糾正過去盲目發展所造成的貧富差距和社會動亂,其目標就必須以解決社會矛盾和減緩社會抗議作為其科學成效的判準。

全文內容

  This article is searching for essence of China's on-going development model which is under a name of "The Scientific Outlook on Development". By tracing back academic origin of Marxist thoughts on scientific socialism and Dr. Sun Yat-sen's scientific thoughts on national development as a scheme for comparison, similarities and differences of their scientific thoughts on development model were presented by a form of dialogue employed methods of analysis as well as synthesis. Accordingly, China's policy-oriented development model has been examined contextually and empirically.
  The result is mixed. Although "The Scientific Outlook on Development" has been highly appraised as the fourth generation of China's development model by Chinese scholars and officials, its practical goal and the ideologically ethics remain unclear and unfaithful. Not only that China's new policy did not show scientific measures to reduce the main problem of social inequality caused by previous development model, it did not clarify clearly its theoretical significance which is superior to its predecessors either. The model's major claim for "development for the people" is also failed by the inconsistency of defining "people" and "citizen" within the territory.
  As Mainland Chinese scholars criticized, the outlook is more of political slogan than of policy implications. At the maximum, it is a prospect for rectifying problems caused by the previous model; it is not expected to solve the social problem efficiently, nor it is truly of scientific itself.

出版者

國立國父紀念館

出版地

臺北市

備註

GPN:2009503228