Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T15:18:52.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Sociological Imagination in China: Comments on the Thought of Chin Yao-chi (Ambrose Y. C. King)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Get access

Extract

Chin Yao-Chi (Ambrose Y. C. King) is internationally known for the knowledgeability and fluency with which he uses many of the perspectives of Western social science to discuss Chinese culture, modern Chinese history, and current developments on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Born in 1935, growing up in Shanghai, he obtained a Ph.D. degree from the University of Pittsburgh and today is Professor of Sociology and Pro-Vice-Chancellor at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. His life, however, has also been rooted in Taiwan, where he lived for many years after the fall of the mainland, and where he obtained both his B.A. and M.A. degrees. Long before the promise of the Republic of China's development became obvious, at least as early as 1966, he recognized it, astutely introduced Western modernization theory to analyze it, understood that pursuing it required not iconoclasm but a process of critically and creatively building on the inherited culture, and widely influenced Taiwan intellectuals as they tried to make sense out of their complicated, often distressing situation (Chin 1979, 1987, 1991). The publication of eleven of his articles written during the last decade (a few originally in English) by Oxford University Press (Chin 1992) rightly indicates that his views about Chinese modernization should be weighed by all those around the world concerned with this issue, not just by small scholarly circles. Yet just how insightful are his views? To what extent are they shaped by premises that have commonly informed much modern Chinese thought, and that many Western scholars could not easily accept? To what extent has Professor Chin himself “self-consciously” (tzu-chueh) identified any such premises and pondered their viability?

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

List of References

Chang, Hao. 1989.Yu-an i-shih yü min-chu ch'uan-t'ung [The democratic tradition and awareness of the dark side of life]. Taipei: Lien-ching ch'u-pan shih-yeh kung-ssu.Google Scholar
Chung-Hua Institution For Economic Research. Comp. 1989.Conference on Confucianism and Economic Development in East Asia. Taipei: Chung-Hua'Institution for Economic Research, Conference Series No. 13.Google Scholar
Cohen, Paul A. 1988.”The Post-Mao Reforms in Historical Perspective.” The Journal of Asian Studies 47.3:518–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao-Chi, Chin (Ambrose Y. C. King). 1979. Ts'ung ch'uan-t'ung too hsien-tai [From tradition to modernity]. Taipei: Shih-pao ch'u-pan-she.Google Scholar
Yao-Chi, Chin. 1987.Chung-kuo hsien-tai-hua yü chih-shih-fen-tzu [China's intellectuals and the process of Chinese modernization]. Taipei: Shih-pao wen-hua ch'u-pan ch'iyeh yu-hsien kung-ssu.Google Scholar
Yao-Chi, Chin. 1991.Chung-kuo min-chu-chih k'un-chu yü fa-chan [Chinese democracy as both a predicament and a developmental process], Taipei: Shih-pao wen-hua ch'u-pan ch'i-yeh yu-hsien kung-ssu.Google Scholar
Yao-Chi, Chin. 1992.Chung-kuo she-hui yu wen-hua [China's Society and Culture]. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fairbank, John K. 1987.The Great Chinese Revolution. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Fairbank, John K.. 1992.China: A New History. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Huang, K'O-Wu (Max). 1991. “Ch'ing-mo Min-ch'u-te min-chu ssu-hsiang: ii yü yuan-yuan” [The idea of democracy in late Ch'ing and early republican times: Its meaning and origins]. In yen-chiu-yuan, Chung-yang, yen-chiu-so, Chin-tai-shih, ed., Chung-kuo hsien-tai-hua lun-wen-chi [Symposium on Modernization in China, 1860–1949], pp. 363–98. Taipei: Chung-yang yen-chiu-yuan, Chintai-shih yen-chiu-so.Google Scholar
Ku, Hsin. 1992.Chung-kuo ch'i-meng-te li-shih t'u-ching [The historical image and prospects of the Chinese enlightenment]. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Little, Daniel. 1991. “Rational Choice Models and Asian Studies.” The Journal of Asian Studies 50.1:3552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macintyre, Alasdair. 1981.After Virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Metzger, Thomas A. 1984. “Max Weber's Analysis of the Confucian Tradition: A Critique.” The American Asian Review 2.1:2870. Also in Kuo-li T'ai-wan shih-fan ta-hsueh, Li-shih yen-chiu-so's Li-shih hsueh-pao 11:1–38 (June 1983). A German version in Schluchter 1983:229–70.Google Scholar
Metzger, Thomas A.. 1984a. “Eisenstadt's Analysis of the Relation between Modernization and Tradition in China.” The American Asian Review 2.2:187. Also in Kuo-li T'aiwan shih-fan ta-hsueh, Li-shih yen-chiu-so's Li-shih hsueh-pao 12:1—75.Google Scholar
Metzger, Thomas A.. 1990. “Continuities between Modern and Premodern China.” In Cohen, Paul A. and Goldman, Merle, eds., Ideas Across Cultures, pp. 263–92. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Council on East Asian Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, Thomas A.. 1991. “The Chinese Reconciliation of Moral-Sacred Values with Modern Pluralism: Political Discourse in the R.O.C., 1949–1989.” In Myers, Ramon H., ed., Two Societies in Opposition: The Republic of China and the People's Republic of China after Forty Years, pp. 356. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.Google Scholar
Metzger, Thomas A.. 1992. “Optimistic, Impractical This-worldliness: The Modern Chinese Intellectual Mainstream's Utopian Approach to the Revision of China's Inherited Culture.” Paper for conference on “Intellectuals as Cultural Carriers during Transformations in Chinese History,” New York, N.Y., October 31—November 1, 1992.Google Scholar
Schluchter, Wolfgang. 1983.Max Webers Studie über Konfuzianismus und Taoismus. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Yang, Kuo-Shu. 1985.K'ai-fang-te to-yuan she-hui [The open, pluralistic society]. Taipei: Tung-ta t'u-shu ku-fen yu-hsien kung-ssu.Google Scholar
Yang, Kuo-Shu. 1988.Chung-kuo-jen-te shui-pien [The metamorphosis of the Chinese]. Taipei: Kuei-kuan t'u-shu ku-fen yu-hsien kung-ssu.Google Scholar
Yang, Kuo-Shu. and Ch'ung-i, Wen, eds. 1982.She-hui chi hsing-wei k'o-hsueh yen-chiu-te Chung-kuo-hua [The sinification of research in the social and behavioral sciences]. Taipei: Chung-kuo yen-chiu-yuan, Min-tsu-hsueh yen-chiu-so.Google Scholar