“体用之辩”——对中国城市设计学说及话语体系的讨论
|
摘要
学科建设离不开学说的发展,学说发展需要话语体系的建构。本文从历史的视角追溯了中国城市设计学说的思想之源。在对中西方城市设计发展进行比照分析的基础上,提出应立足中国城市设计核心思想及价值观,从基本概念与理论入手,用现代话语重建当代中国城市设计话语体系;指出城市设计话语体系应遵循"体用一源"的法则,思想及理论是"体",方法、策略及技术体系是"用"。城市设计学说不能被资本所绑架,关键在于学说应有独立的价值标准。人、自然和社会是城市设计价值观构建的三个基本维度,保持三者之间的平衡发展才能真正把握城市设计的未来。
The construction of a discipline depends on the doctrinal development, while the doctrinal development requires the construction of the discourse system. This paper traces back to the origin of the thoughts of China's urban design doctrine from a historical perspective. Based on a comparative analysis on urban design and its development between the Chinese and Western cities, this paper proposes that, starting from basic concepts and theories, we should reconstruct an urban design discourse system in contemporary China by use of modern discourse based on the core thoughts and values of Chinese urban design. The paper emphasizes that the urban design discourse system should follow the principle that "substance and use are from the same source". The thoughts and theory are the "substance", while the method, strategy, and technical system are the "use". The key of urban design doctrine that is free from the influence of capital lies in that the doctrine should have its own independent value standards. Human, nature, and society are the three basic dimensions of urban design values, and the balanced development between them can truly lead to the future of urban design.
The construction of a discipline depends on the doctrinal development, while the doctrinal development requires the construction of the discourse system. This paper traces back to the origin of the thoughts of China's urban design doctrine from a historical perspective. Based on a comparative analysis on urban design and its development between the Chinese and Western cities, this paper proposes that, starting from basic concepts and theories, we should reconstruct an urban design discourse system in contemporary China by use of modern discourse based on the core thoughts and values of Chinese urban design. The paper emphasizes that the urban design discourse system should follow the principle that "substance and use are from the same source". The thoughts and theory are the "substance", while the method, strategy, and technical system are the "use". The key of urban design doctrine that is free from the influence of capital lies in that the doctrine should have its own independent value standards. Human, nature, and society are the three basic dimensions of urban design values, and the balanced development between them can truly lead to the future of urban design.
引文
1李德顺.“学”何以有中西之分[N].北京日报,2005-05-30.LI Deshun.Why Are There Differences in“Learning”Between China and the West?[N].Beijing Daily,2005-05-30.
2杨鲜兰.构建当代中国话语体系的难点与对策[J].马克思主义研究,2015(2):59-60.YANG Xianlan.Difficulties and Countermeasures for Constructing the Discursive System of Contemporary China[J].Studies on Marxism,2015(2):59-60.
3吴良镛.世纪之交的凝思:建筑学的未来[M].北京:清华大学出版社,1999:5-6.WU Liangyong.Meditation at the Turn of the Century:The Future of Architecture[M].Beijing:Tsinghua University Press,1999:5-6.
4汪德华.中国古代城市规划文化思想[M].北京:中国城市出版社,1997:48.WANG Dehua.Cultural Thoughts of Ancient Chinese Urban Planning[M].Beijing:China City Press,1997:48.
5洪亮平.从“风水学说”看“山水城市”思想[J].城市规划,1994(4):8-12.HONG Liangping.View the Thought of“Shanshui City”from“Fengshui Theory”[J].City Planning Review,1994(4):8-12.
(1)有关“学术”和“学说”的讨论,见:刘笑敢.天人合一:学术、学说和信仰——再论中国哲学之身份及研究取向的不同.南京大学学报:哲学·人文科学·社会科学,2011,48(6):67-85。
(2)马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第1卷).北京:人民出版社,1995:81。
(3)习近平总书记在哲学社会科学工作座谈会上的讲话,2016年5月17日。
(4)此处引用了王红扬的观点,见:王红扬.整体主义与空间的政治经济学的本质——评《为增长而规划:中国城市与区域规划》(上).国际城市规划,2015(6):23-26。
(5)中国高等学校建筑学、城乡规划学、风景园林学专业指导委员会.高等学校建筑类专业城市设计教学文件.2016。
(6)此处引用了张宇星的观点,见:张宇星.城市设计的未来价值.深圳市城市规划学会,2016。
(7)此处完全不同意张宇星关于“城市空间的价值逻辑”的观点,见:张宇星.城市设计的未来价值.深圳市城市规划学会,2016。
(8)吴良镛.世纪之交的凝思:建筑学的未来.北京:清华大学出版社,1999:13。
2杨鲜兰.构建当代中国话语体系的难点与对策[J].马克思主义研究,2015(2):59-60.YANG Xianlan.Difficulties and Countermeasures for Constructing the Discursive System of Contemporary China[J].Studies on Marxism,2015(2):59-60.
3吴良镛.世纪之交的凝思:建筑学的未来[M].北京:清华大学出版社,1999:5-6.WU Liangyong.Meditation at the Turn of the Century:The Future of Architecture[M].Beijing:Tsinghua University Press,1999:5-6.
4汪德华.中国古代城市规划文化思想[M].北京:中国城市出版社,1997:48.WANG Dehua.Cultural Thoughts of Ancient Chinese Urban Planning[M].Beijing:China City Press,1997:48.
5洪亮平.从“风水学说”看“山水城市”思想[J].城市规划,1994(4):8-12.HONG Liangping.View the Thought of“Shanshui City”from“Fengshui Theory”[J].City Planning Review,1994(4):8-12.
(1)有关“学术”和“学说”的讨论,见:刘笑敢.天人合一:学术、学说和信仰——再论中国哲学之身份及研究取向的不同.南京大学学报:哲学·人文科学·社会科学,2011,48(6):67-85。
(2)马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第1卷).北京:人民出版社,1995:81。
(3)习近平总书记在哲学社会科学工作座谈会上的讲话,2016年5月17日。
(4)此处引用了王红扬的观点,见:王红扬.整体主义与空间的政治经济学的本质——评《为增长而规划:中国城市与区域规划》(上).国际城市规划,2015(6):23-26。
(5)中国高等学校建筑学、城乡规划学、风景园林学专业指导委员会.高等学校建筑类专业城市设计教学文件.2016。
(6)此处引用了张宇星的观点,见:张宇星.城市设计的未来价值.深圳市城市规划学会,2016。
(7)此处完全不同意张宇星关于“城市空间的价值逻辑”的观点,见:张宇星.城市设计的未来价值.深圳市城市规划学会,2016。
(8)吴良镛.世纪之交的凝思:建筑学的未来.北京:清华大学出版社,1999:13。