Page 9 - 《社会》2021年第2期

社会·2021·2

the needs of humanity. The other view sees the technological progress，social education
and institutional innovation as the main driving forces of the “individualization of
family”. Therefore，for individuals，“individualization” constitutes constraints and even
a cause for further stratification，ethnic division and mental illness of the society. The
queries and debates between the two camps reflect two problems: First，in reality，even
though individual are increasingly able to pursue their own identity，they can still be
judged critically by the collective socio鄄cultural environment in France. Second，the
long鄄standing dualistic thinking leads to a split between micro鄄and macro鄄perspective
among French academia，making it difficult to construct a unified theory over the issue.
To alleviate this dilemma，this paper proposes an exchange of ideas between Chinese
and French studies. The aim is to put aside the differences between the two views，and
instead to approach the phenomenon in a holistic and diachronic way. In addition，
quantitative and psychological methods can be introduced into future studies of the
individualization within the Chinese families that may help shed some lights on how to
integrate the dualistic perspectives with the localization in explaining the noticeable
social transformation.
Keywords：individualization of family ， sociology of family ， French sociology ，
social transformation ， methodology

一、引言

1888 年冬日的某天，涂尔干（魪mile Durkheim）登上波尔多大学的讲
—
台， 开启了一门他在当时还未曾深入研究却满怀兴趣的课程——家庭
社会学（Fournier，2007：131）。 在涂尔干看来，家庭是实现社会构建的最
原始、最质朴的细胞，也是反映现实问题的复杂且感性的单元。 在十九
世纪末的法国，随着政治局势、生产方式、文化观念的快速变迁，家庭渐
渐远离传统规范的束缚，呈现一种全新的样态。 这种样态，用涂尔干的
话来说，就是“家庭组织的私域化”和“家庭关系的个人化”（ Durkheim，
1892：5-12）。 涂尔干在 1892 年发表的《伴侣家庭》（“La Famille Conjugale”）
一文中写道：“家庭成员之间的联结已全然立足于个体自身的意愿，对
父母、妻儿的倚赖也是出于自身情感的依恋。 而不再像以往那样受限于
既定的角色和先赋的条件， 只为维护家庭的和谐违背或轻视个人的诉

· 2 ·