空间中的社会教化
摘要
对于无所不在的空间,人们往往关注其物质属性以及由此所具有的实用、美观功能。而本研究则以喜洲白族传统民居为例、以中国传统建筑理论与空间社会学为主要分析工具,通过对民居的实地考察与理论分析,揭示出建筑空间同时具有的主观意义与社会属性；研究同时揭示出,由于具有这种主观意义以及社会效用,民居通过朝廷主导、社会习俗以及民众自觉而演变成为了我国传统社会的教化载体。本研究共分6部分：
第1章是《导论》。本章对选题缘由、核心概念、本领域研究状况与研究思路、方法进行了说明。其中对本研究涉及的三个核心概念,笔者分别界定为：“空间”在本研究中特指具有物质特征与主观意义、社会效用的建筑空间；“社会教化”又称教化、风化,它既是我国古代统治者一项重要的治国之策,也是社会各阶层化育民众的一种理想和手段,我国传统教化在内容上以儒家伦理道德教育为主,糅杂了佛、道等多元思想,在方式上则既包括系统、正规的学校教育,也包括渗入社会、家庭生活的各种非系统、非正规的教育感化活动；“喜洲白族传统民居”是指由云南大理喜洲白族于明、清、民国时期修筑的、用于日常居住的建筑场所。
第2章是《喜洲与喜洲白族传统民居概说》。本章通过喜洲地理位置、历史沿革和族源属流的分析,指出喜洲作为文化“十字路口地带”和云南早期的政治、经济、文化中心,在历史上长期与汉族保持了密切联系与交流,因此在民风、民俗上深受汉文化影响,而当地白族也成为了汉化程度较高的一个民族；本章同时通过对大理建筑历史动向的分析,指出包括喜洲在内的大理地区从汉晋开始,于南诏大理国时期达到鼎盛,并通过元、明、清时期的深化而历经了一个建筑汉化的过程；本章还对现存的喜洲白族传统民居做了情况介绍。
第3章是《喜洲白族传统民居中社会教化的形式与内容》。本章通过实地考察,提出了喜洲白族传统民居空间教化的主要形式与内容：一是以民居造型、结构与布局为载体而推行的“礼”制教化。礼教又分为外向教化与内向教化,其中外向教化依靠朝廷律令强制执行,主要是通过门楼、照壁、间数、屋顶以及台基、台阶、进深、用料、雕饰等不同建筑规格的使用,明确家族集体在一个等级社会中的身份与地位.从而达到“辨贵贱、明等威”、培养家族集体“忠”情感的目的。内向教化是外向教化在家族内部的延伸,依靠稳定的社会习俗推行,其目的是通过明确家族个体在家族等级秩序中的身份与地位、培养起家族成员的“孝”情感。内向教化实施的具体路径包括：传统民居以四合院为典型建筑形态,以取家族成员“群居合一”的理想意向：民居形态上又以“方”为基本母题,取家族成员“方正无邪”、按原则做人的理想意向：民居内部以“中”为贵,以中轴线为基准组织起左右均齐、主次分明的礼仪秩序；按照“正位凝命”的原则,家族个体被分置于等级不同的民居空间之中。二是以门楼和照壁为载体而推行的家道与家风教育。包括：以门楼与照壁中姓氏类题词培育敬祖睦宗的家族情感、以祖业类题词表达光大家族历史的家族期望、以劝诫类题词强化完善家族美德的家族精神。三是以“夸饰”为载体而实施的“多元”教化。即民居空间通过各种字、画装饰,表达出营建者道德修身方面的自我追求并以此形成了影响家人价值取向的环境氛围,道德修身的内容包括家训以及读书、立志、积善、崇俭、冶情等等。
第4章是《喜洲白族传统民居的教化特点》。本章分析了民居教化的基本特点：一是内容上统一性与丰富性的结合。所谓统一性,即儒学成为了民居空间的主导精神,民居教化的内容统一于儒家“化民成俗”的伦理道德理想之中；所谓丰富性,是指民居空间同时具有儒家与非儒学思想的交织以及“化民成俗”自身的内在丰富性。二是方法上的“风化”特征。即民居教化折射出了“入”(挠及万物)、“伏”(化物无形)、“顺”(顺调其心)等传统教化的“风化”方法。三是地域上共性与个性的统一。即喜洲白族与中原地区的传统民居相比,既具有教化理念上的共性,也具有教化风格、手法以及载体材料等方面的区域个性。
第5章是《喜洲白族传统民居教化意蕴的成因分析》。本章分析了民居教化意蕴的形成原因：一是理念基石方面,传统“天人合一”观认为天地万物同源于太极、同由“气”构成,因此万物同构并相互感应,而民居作为万物一体中一个重要的全息元,其存在状态也会影响到社会的秩序状态以及人们的精神、行为状态。同时,由于万物同构,人道秩序也就应服从天道秩序,遵循天尊地卑、阳尊阴卑的二元之分,人世君臣、父子、夫妇等关系也应有上下、贵贱之分,而民居作为沟通天、人感应的中介,也应在空间中构建起与天、人道同构的等级秩序。二是历史意识方面,在“家国同构”的传统社会中,朝廷认为家族内部的“孝”情感可以移为对朝廷的“忠”情感,因而将家教提到国本的地位、有意识将“礼”制教化延伸到了家庭生活(包括民居空间)中。朝廷的提倡加之固有的宗法精神传统,使民众十分注重家族宗法活动并由此衍生出一整套的家族文化,其中就包括家道传承与家风教育。三是营建者的身份方面,历史上的喜洲具有文商并重、文商相扶的传统,由于喜洲受儒家文化影响较深、又是早期崇尚儒学的贵族、大姓聚集之地,加之明、清、民国时期“喜洲商帮”兴起,就使得该地出现了大规模华美并承载了丰富儒家教化意蕴的民居建筑群。
第6章是《喜洲白族传统民居教化意蕴的现代启示与思考》。本章审视与反思的内容包括：一是对“天人一合”哲学观,笔者认为应汲取全息与感应观点中的合理成分,注重对生活世界教育因素的挖掘与应用；而对人道遵循天道、应为等级社会的观点,笔者认为这只是一种理论在等级社会结构下由关涉自身利益的“特殊身份”人群作“特殊解释”的结果,应予摒弃。二是对民居教化内容,笔者认为传统“礼”教被朝廷纳入体制,具有了“辨贵贱、明等威”的工具性与虚伪性,因此当前的传统礼仪教育应切换到平等、民主的现代语境下进行,并注重从外在行为控制向内在情感体验的转变；笔者同时认为可适度、理性地进行家风教育,使家庭内部的优秀传统资源对子女产生良好影响,而这样的教育应以避免狭隘的家族本位为前提；笔者还认为喜洲白族居于当地政治、社会、经济地位上层,能自觉对家族成员提出道德修身要求,值得现代社会上层群体借鉴与反思。三是对民居教化的载体与方法,笔者认为父母不应忽略对住宅以及家庭伦理道德教育整体氛围的营造：笔者同时认为,当前伦理道德教育应借鉴传统教化的“风化”方法,注重从学校教育与社会、家庭生活层面构建起一种统整性的影响力,并以润物无声、见微知著以及柔顺化物的方法施教。
People usually show much concern for the physical nature, practical functions and beautiful visions in the ubiquitous space rather than others. However, this thesis tries to disclose the subjective construction and social functions are also the nature of space by a case study on traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality. Furthermore, this thesis focuses on explaining how the traditional houses were transformed into the tool of edification by the strength of imperial government, social custom and people's conscience in ancient Chinese. This thesis consists of six sections:
Chapter 1 is "Introducation". It gives some details about the research reasons, central concepts, current status of the study and research ways. It especially defines three important concepts in this thesis. The first concept is "space", specifically referring to the space of houses filled with physical natures, subjective constructions and social functions in this thesis. The second concept is "social edification", also named as edification or mores education, which was not only one of the most important educational and political policies formulated by imperial government, but also the ideal and practical way of improving people's ethics designed by different classes in ancient China. The main idea in social edification was derived from Confucianism and the other was mixed with Taoism and Buddhism. The practice of social edification included formal and systematic education in school as well as informal and non-systematic educational activities penetrated into social and family culture. The third concept is "traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality", referring to the houses built by Xizhou Bai nationality in the period of Ming and Qing Dynasties and the Republic of China. The purpose of the houses was only for the populace's living.
Chapter 2 is "The Brief Introduction of Xizhou and Traditional Houses of Xizhou Bai Nationality". The main contents of this chapter are to draw a conclusion that the connections and exchanges between Bai and Han nationality were so close and frequent that the culture and customs of Xizhou Bai nationality were deeply influenced by Han nationality by analyzing the location and history of Xizhou as well as the origination of Xizhou Bai nationality. This chapter also analyzes the history of Xizhou's architecture and generalizes that the architecture in Xizhou had ever experienced a process of Hanization, which began from Han and Jin Dynasties, had prosperous time during the period of Nanzhao and Dali State, and deepened continually in Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties. Finally, this chapter gives some basic information about the extant traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality.
Chapter 3 is "The Ways and Contents of Social Edification in Traditional Houses of Xizhou Bai Nationality". This chapter describes three most important ways and contents of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality. The first one is feudal rites, by means of the shape, structure and placement of traditional houses, which was divided into "internal feudal rites" and "external feudal rites". The purpose of "external feudal rites" was to differentiate the identity between noble and humble people and keep them behaving in corresponding ways so that the whole clan's royalty and obedience for the imperial government could arise. The practice of "external feudal rites", which was provided by law, demanded the constitutions of houses, such as gate, roof, bay, depth, step, foundation, screen-wall, material, decoration, and so on, must be consistent with the clan's political status in a hierarchical society. "Internal feudal rites" is the extension of "external feudal rites" inward. "Internal feudal rites", which were under the pressure of social customs, aimed to breed the filial piety of individuals in the clan. The ways of "internal feudal rites" are the following. Firstly, the typical traditional house was the Chinese courtyard house, a quadrangle architectural form, just to make sure all the members in the clan would live together in an intimate space. Secondly, the basic plane form of space in the traditional houses, including room, door, foundation, frame of decoration, and so on, was rectangle, that means nobody in the clan is permitted to behave beyond the ethical principles. Thirdly, most of things in the houses were arranged around the center axis and kept symmetrically framed on both sides and clear separation between leading and subsidiary position. The purpose of the arrangement was for the convenience of ceremony. Finally, everyone in the clan should be located at the different place according to the principle of "be where you would be and be obedient to the fate". The second content of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality was the education on the family style and culture by means of gate and screen-wall. It incorporated writing words related to family name to show the respect for ancestors, recording the title of ancestors to bright the history of the clan and express the aspiration to persuade members of clan to develop virtue. The third content of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality is multi-education that is giving many different ethical rules on the space of houses by writing or drawing something such as family motto, striving to learn knowledge, aspiring to achieve success, accumulating good deed, living simply and frugally, cultivating own temperament, and so on.
Chapter 4 is universality Characteristics of Social Edification in Traditional Houses of Xizhou Bai Nationality". There are three main characteristics of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality. The first one is the combination of unity and diversity in the content of social edification. Unity means that Confucianism played a leading role in the space of traditional houses and the contents of edification were united under the Confucian values. Diversity means there were both Confucian and non-Confucian ideas in the space of traditional houses at the same time, and the Confucian ideas had their own richness. The second one is mores education which we can also call "wind education" that means the ways of educating people just like wind. The performance of "wind education" includes "entering" (education would touch everything around us), "hiding" (education would be imperceptible even it touches you), "being tender" (education are not permitted to be fierce). The third one is the universality and individuality of social edification by comparing Xizhou and other areas in china. The embodiment of universality is Confucianism are both dominant in Xizhou's traditional houses and other areas, and the embodiment of individuality is the style, the apparent ways and building materials of edification in Xizhou are different from other areas.
Chapter 5 is "Analyses on the Origination of Social Edification in Xizhou Bai Nationality Traditional Houses". The analyses are from three different perspectives. From the perspective of philosophy of "the integrity of human and nature", Chinese ancients thought that everything in the universe originates from the Taiji which is constituted of Qi. That means everything in the universe is holographic and interactive. So, the houses have strong influence on the social order and people's spirit and behavior just because it is an important holographic unit and is interactive with people. At the same time, everything in the universe originates from one whole entity so that everything has the same construction. That means the social order would be obedient to the natural order and would differentiate the noble and humble status between monarchs and courtiers, fathers and sons, husbands and wives just because sky is nobler than ground, Yang is nobler than Yin in a dualistic world. Also, as a bridge between nature and human, the houses would construct the same order as natural and social order. From the perspective of social conscience, the ancient governor of the empire looked up to the family education as the basis of governance and consciously extended the edification into the family because they believed the emotion of filial piety could be transformed into royalty for the government in a society where the country had the same construction as the family. The advocacy of government and the impact of the patriarchal clan system created a series of family culture and education on family style was included. From the perspective of identity of builder, early Bai nationality who lived in Xizhou were aristocracy and famous clans. They were influenced deeply by the Confucianism and cared much about cultural tradition. On the other hand, they paid much attention to commerce and regarded it as the support of family life and study profession. During the period of Qing and Ming Dynasties and the Republic of China, accompanied by the formation and development of Xizhou Commercial Groups, Bai nationality in Xizhou had abundant capital to put the idea of Confucianism into a magnificent group of houses.
Chapter 6 is "Enlightenment and Reflection on Social Edification in Xizhou Bai Nationality Traditional Houses Based on Current Context". About the philosophy of "the integrity of human and nature", this thesis suggests that we should be sensitive to the ethical educational elements around us in the living world and try to dig and apply them, draw lessons from the point that everything in the universe is holographic and interactive. However, this thesis doesn't think it is reasonable that society should be obedient to the natural order and should be hierarchical. That point was just one "special explanation" for a certain theory made by "special groups" whose benefits are bound to that explanation. About the content of social edification in the traditional houses, there are three points. Firstly, this thesis concludes that the feudal rites already were brought into the political system instead of simple customs, and were regarded as the tool of differentiating the noble and humble status. It resulted in some additional instrumental and disguised value to the feudal rites. So nowadays, only the parts of traditional etiquette matching a democratic and equal society can be the contents of education. Secondly, this thesis thinks moderate, rational, healthy education on family style is helpful for the moral improvement of children, but the prerequisite is the education would not lead to the narrow departmentalism of clan. Thirdly, this thesis concludes that, as a higher class in the area of Dali, early Bai nationality in Xizhou was not only interested in power and fortune but also cared about their own morality. That is a really good example for the people nowadays. About the ways of social edification, this thesis thinks it is a good idea that ethical education, especially the basic ethical value judgement, should be united into a whole by different ways from the school, society and family. Some characteristics of wind education, such as "entering", "hiding" and "being tender" are also useful.
第1章是《导论》。本章对选题缘由、核心概念、本领域研究状况与研究思路、方法进行了说明。其中对本研究涉及的三个核心概念,笔者分别界定为：“空间”在本研究中特指具有物质特征与主观意义、社会效用的建筑空间；“社会教化”又称教化、风化,它既是我国古代统治者一项重要的治国之策,也是社会各阶层化育民众的一种理想和手段,我国传统教化在内容上以儒家伦理道德教育为主,糅杂了佛、道等多元思想,在方式上则既包括系统、正规的学校教育,也包括渗入社会、家庭生活的各种非系统、非正规的教育感化活动；“喜洲白族传统民居”是指由云南大理喜洲白族于明、清、民国时期修筑的、用于日常居住的建筑场所。
第2章是《喜洲与喜洲白族传统民居概说》。本章通过喜洲地理位置、历史沿革和族源属流的分析,指出喜洲作为文化“十字路口地带”和云南早期的政治、经济、文化中心,在历史上长期与汉族保持了密切联系与交流,因此在民风、民俗上深受汉文化影响,而当地白族也成为了汉化程度较高的一个民族；本章同时通过对大理建筑历史动向的分析,指出包括喜洲在内的大理地区从汉晋开始,于南诏大理国时期达到鼎盛,并通过元、明、清时期的深化而历经了一个建筑汉化的过程；本章还对现存的喜洲白族传统民居做了情况介绍。
第3章是《喜洲白族传统民居中社会教化的形式与内容》。本章通过实地考察,提出了喜洲白族传统民居空间教化的主要形式与内容：一是以民居造型、结构与布局为载体而推行的“礼”制教化。礼教又分为外向教化与内向教化,其中外向教化依靠朝廷律令强制执行,主要是通过门楼、照壁、间数、屋顶以及台基、台阶、进深、用料、雕饰等不同建筑规格的使用,明确家族集体在一个等级社会中的身份与地位.从而达到“辨贵贱、明等威”、培养家族集体“忠”情感的目的。内向教化是外向教化在家族内部的延伸,依靠稳定的社会习俗推行,其目的是通过明确家族个体在家族等级秩序中的身份与地位、培养起家族成员的“孝”情感。内向教化实施的具体路径包括：传统民居以四合院为典型建筑形态,以取家族成员“群居合一”的理想意向：民居形态上又以“方”为基本母题,取家族成员“方正无邪”、按原则做人的理想意向：民居内部以“中”为贵,以中轴线为基准组织起左右均齐、主次分明的礼仪秩序；按照“正位凝命”的原则,家族个体被分置于等级不同的民居空间之中。二是以门楼和照壁为载体而推行的家道与家风教育。包括：以门楼与照壁中姓氏类题词培育敬祖睦宗的家族情感、以祖业类题词表达光大家族历史的家族期望、以劝诫类题词强化完善家族美德的家族精神。三是以“夸饰”为载体而实施的“多元”教化。即民居空间通过各种字、画装饰,表达出营建者道德修身方面的自我追求并以此形成了影响家人价值取向的环境氛围,道德修身的内容包括家训以及读书、立志、积善、崇俭、冶情等等。
第4章是《喜洲白族传统民居的教化特点》。本章分析了民居教化的基本特点：一是内容上统一性与丰富性的结合。所谓统一性,即儒学成为了民居空间的主导精神,民居教化的内容统一于儒家“化民成俗”的伦理道德理想之中；所谓丰富性,是指民居空间同时具有儒家与非儒学思想的交织以及“化民成俗”自身的内在丰富性。二是方法上的“风化”特征。即民居教化折射出了“入”(挠及万物)、“伏”(化物无形)、“顺”(顺调其心)等传统教化的“风化”方法。三是地域上共性与个性的统一。即喜洲白族与中原地区的传统民居相比,既具有教化理念上的共性,也具有教化风格、手法以及载体材料等方面的区域个性。
第5章是《喜洲白族传统民居教化意蕴的成因分析》。本章分析了民居教化意蕴的形成原因：一是理念基石方面,传统“天人合一”观认为天地万物同源于太极、同由“气”构成,因此万物同构并相互感应,而民居作为万物一体中一个重要的全息元,其存在状态也会影响到社会的秩序状态以及人们的精神、行为状态。同时,由于万物同构,人道秩序也就应服从天道秩序,遵循天尊地卑、阳尊阴卑的二元之分,人世君臣、父子、夫妇等关系也应有上下、贵贱之分,而民居作为沟通天、人感应的中介,也应在空间中构建起与天、人道同构的等级秩序。二是历史意识方面,在“家国同构”的传统社会中,朝廷认为家族内部的“孝”情感可以移为对朝廷的“忠”情感,因而将家教提到国本的地位、有意识将“礼”制教化延伸到了家庭生活(包括民居空间)中。朝廷的提倡加之固有的宗法精神传统,使民众十分注重家族宗法活动并由此衍生出一整套的家族文化,其中就包括家道传承与家风教育。三是营建者的身份方面,历史上的喜洲具有文商并重、文商相扶的传统,由于喜洲受儒家文化影响较深、又是早期崇尚儒学的贵族、大姓聚集之地,加之明、清、民国时期“喜洲商帮”兴起,就使得该地出现了大规模华美并承载了丰富儒家教化意蕴的民居建筑群。
第6章是《喜洲白族传统民居教化意蕴的现代启示与思考》。本章审视与反思的内容包括：一是对“天人一合”哲学观,笔者认为应汲取全息与感应观点中的合理成分,注重对生活世界教育因素的挖掘与应用；而对人道遵循天道、应为等级社会的观点,笔者认为这只是一种理论在等级社会结构下由关涉自身利益的“特殊身份”人群作“特殊解释”的结果,应予摒弃。二是对民居教化内容,笔者认为传统“礼”教被朝廷纳入体制,具有了“辨贵贱、明等威”的工具性与虚伪性,因此当前的传统礼仪教育应切换到平等、民主的现代语境下进行,并注重从外在行为控制向内在情感体验的转变；笔者同时认为可适度、理性地进行家风教育,使家庭内部的优秀传统资源对子女产生良好影响,而这样的教育应以避免狭隘的家族本位为前提；笔者还认为喜洲白族居于当地政治、社会、经济地位上层,能自觉对家族成员提出道德修身要求,值得现代社会上层群体借鉴与反思。三是对民居教化的载体与方法,笔者认为父母不应忽略对住宅以及家庭伦理道德教育整体氛围的营造：笔者同时认为,当前伦理道德教育应借鉴传统教化的“风化”方法,注重从学校教育与社会、家庭生活层面构建起一种统整性的影响力,并以润物无声、见微知著以及柔顺化物的方法施教。
People usually show much concern for the physical nature, practical functions and beautiful visions in the ubiquitous space rather than others. However, this thesis tries to disclose the subjective construction and social functions are also the nature of space by a case study on traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality. Furthermore, this thesis focuses on explaining how the traditional houses were transformed into the tool of edification by the strength of imperial government, social custom and people's conscience in ancient Chinese. This thesis consists of six sections:
Chapter 1 is "Introducation". It gives some details about the research reasons, central concepts, current status of the study and research ways. It especially defines three important concepts in this thesis. The first concept is "space", specifically referring to the space of houses filled with physical natures, subjective constructions and social functions in this thesis. The second concept is "social edification", also named as edification or mores education, which was not only one of the most important educational and political policies formulated by imperial government, but also the ideal and practical way of improving people's ethics designed by different classes in ancient China. The main idea in social edification was derived from Confucianism and the other was mixed with Taoism and Buddhism. The practice of social edification included formal and systematic education in school as well as informal and non-systematic educational activities penetrated into social and family culture. The third concept is "traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality", referring to the houses built by Xizhou Bai nationality in the period of Ming and Qing Dynasties and the Republic of China. The purpose of the houses was only for the populace's living.
Chapter 2 is "The Brief Introduction of Xizhou and Traditional Houses of Xizhou Bai Nationality". The main contents of this chapter are to draw a conclusion that the connections and exchanges between Bai and Han nationality were so close and frequent that the culture and customs of Xizhou Bai nationality were deeply influenced by Han nationality by analyzing the location and history of Xizhou as well as the origination of Xizhou Bai nationality. This chapter also analyzes the history of Xizhou's architecture and generalizes that the architecture in Xizhou had ever experienced a process of Hanization, which began from Han and Jin Dynasties, had prosperous time during the period of Nanzhao and Dali State, and deepened continually in Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties. Finally, this chapter gives some basic information about the extant traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality.
Chapter 3 is "The Ways and Contents of Social Edification in Traditional Houses of Xizhou Bai Nationality". This chapter describes three most important ways and contents of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality. The first one is feudal rites, by means of the shape, structure and placement of traditional houses, which was divided into "internal feudal rites" and "external feudal rites". The purpose of "external feudal rites" was to differentiate the identity between noble and humble people and keep them behaving in corresponding ways so that the whole clan's royalty and obedience for the imperial government could arise. The practice of "external feudal rites", which was provided by law, demanded the constitutions of houses, such as gate, roof, bay, depth, step, foundation, screen-wall, material, decoration, and so on, must be consistent with the clan's political status in a hierarchical society. "Internal feudal rites" is the extension of "external feudal rites" inward. "Internal feudal rites", which were under the pressure of social customs, aimed to breed the filial piety of individuals in the clan. The ways of "internal feudal rites" are the following. Firstly, the typical traditional house was the Chinese courtyard house, a quadrangle architectural form, just to make sure all the members in the clan would live together in an intimate space. Secondly, the basic plane form of space in the traditional houses, including room, door, foundation, frame of decoration, and so on, was rectangle, that means nobody in the clan is permitted to behave beyond the ethical principles. Thirdly, most of things in the houses were arranged around the center axis and kept symmetrically framed on both sides and clear separation between leading and subsidiary position. The purpose of the arrangement was for the convenience of ceremony. Finally, everyone in the clan should be located at the different place according to the principle of "be where you would be and be obedient to the fate". The second content of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality was the education on the family style and culture by means of gate and screen-wall. It incorporated writing words related to family name to show the respect for ancestors, recording the title of ancestors to bright the history of the clan and express the aspiration to persuade members of clan to develop virtue. The third content of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality is multi-education that is giving many different ethical rules on the space of houses by writing or drawing something such as family motto, striving to learn knowledge, aspiring to achieve success, accumulating good deed, living simply and frugally, cultivating own temperament, and so on.
Chapter 4 is universality Characteristics of Social Edification in Traditional Houses of Xizhou Bai Nationality". There are three main characteristics of social edification in traditional houses of Xizhou Bai nationality. The first one is the combination of unity and diversity in the content of social edification. Unity means that Confucianism played a leading role in the space of traditional houses and the contents of edification were united under the Confucian values. Diversity means there were both Confucian and non-Confucian ideas in the space of traditional houses at the same time, and the Confucian ideas had their own richness. The second one is mores education which we can also call "wind education" that means the ways of educating people just like wind. The performance of "wind education" includes "entering" (education would touch everything around us), "hiding" (education would be imperceptible even it touches you), "being tender" (education are not permitted to be fierce). The third one is the universality and individuality of social edification by comparing Xizhou and other areas in china. The embodiment of universality is Confucianism are both dominant in Xizhou's traditional houses and other areas, and the embodiment of individuality is the style, the apparent ways and building materials of edification in Xizhou are different from other areas.
Chapter 5 is "Analyses on the Origination of Social Edification in Xizhou Bai Nationality Traditional Houses". The analyses are from three different perspectives. From the perspective of philosophy of "the integrity of human and nature", Chinese ancients thought that everything in the universe originates from the Taiji which is constituted of Qi. That means everything in the universe is holographic and interactive. So, the houses have strong influence on the social order and people's spirit and behavior just because it is an important holographic unit and is interactive with people. At the same time, everything in the universe originates from one whole entity so that everything has the same construction. That means the social order would be obedient to the natural order and would differentiate the noble and humble status between monarchs and courtiers, fathers and sons, husbands and wives just because sky is nobler than ground, Yang is nobler than Yin in a dualistic world. Also, as a bridge between nature and human, the houses would construct the same order as natural and social order. From the perspective of social conscience, the ancient governor of the empire looked up to the family education as the basis of governance and consciously extended the edification into the family because they believed the emotion of filial piety could be transformed into royalty for the government in a society where the country had the same construction as the family. The advocacy of government and the impact of the patriarchal clan system created a series of family culture and education on family style was included. From the perspective of identity of builder, early Bai nationality who lived in Xizhou were aristocracy and famous clans. They were influenced deeply by the Confucianism and cared much about cultural tradition. On the other hand, they paid much attention to commerce and regarded it as the support of family life and study profession. During the period of Qing and Ming Dynasties and the Republic of China, accompanied by the formation and development of Xizhou Commercial Groups, Bai nationality in Xizhou had abundant capital to put the idea of Confucianism into a magnificent group of houses.
Chapter 6 is "Enlightenment and Reflection on Social Edification in Xizhou Bai Nationality Traditional Houses Based on Current Context". About the philosophy of "the integrity of human and nature", this thesis suggests that we should be sensitive to the ethical educational elements around us in the living world and try to dig and apply them, draw lessons from the point that everything in the universe is holographic and interactive. However, this thesis doesn't think it is reasonable that society should be obedient to the natural order and should be hierarchical. That point was just one "special explanation" for a certain theory made by "special groups" whose benefits are bound to that explanation. About the content of social edification in the traditional houses, there are three points. Firstly, this thesis concludes that the feudal rites already were brought into the political system instead of simple customs, and were regarded as the tool of differentiating the noble and humble status. It resulted in some additional instrumental and disguised value to the feudal rites. So nowadays, only the parts of traditional etiquette matching a democratic and equal society can be the contents of education. Secondly, this thesis thinks moderate, rational, healthy education on family style is helpful for the moral improvement of children, but the prerequisite is the education would not lead to the narrow departmentalism of clan. Thirdly, this thesis concludes that, as a higher class in the area of Dali, early Bai nationality in Xizhou was not only interested in power and fortune but also cared about their own morality. That is a really good example for the people nowadays. About the ways of social edification, this thesis thinks it is a good idea that ethical education, especially the basic ethical value judgement, should be united into a whole by different ways from the school, society and family. Some characteristics of wind education, such as "entering", "hiding" and "being tender" are also useful.
引文
(英)安东尼·吉登斯,著.李康,李猛,译.社会的构成[M].北京：三联书店,1998
敖侍恒,赵晓峰.中国传统建筑单体的生态文化内涵浅析[J].华中建筑,2006(9)
曹影.“教化”的缘起、内涵及与道德教育的异同[J].长白学刊,2005(2)
陈冬苗.中国传统建筑入口研究[D].南京：东南大学,2006
陈劲松.儒学社会：中国传统社会的社会学分析框架[J].浙江学刊,2000(1)
(明)陈梦和.阳宅集成[M].北京：燕山出版社,1991
陈谋德.白族传统建筑是中原文化与本土文化融合的历史见证[J].中国勘察设计,2002(10)
丁钢.近世中国经济生活与宗族教育[M].上海：上海教育出版社,1996
(英)厄里,著.李康,译.关于时间与空间的社会学[M]／／布赖恩·特纳.社会理论指南.上海：上海人民出版社,2003
(美)弗朗西斯.D.K.钦,著.邹德农,方千里,译.建筑：形式、空间和秩序[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,1989
高德胜.论空间的德育意蕴[J].教育研究与实验,2006(4)
高峰.空间的社会意义：一种社会学的理论探索[J].江海学刊,2007(2)
谷成东.白族民居建筑[J].住宅科技,2004(7)
(明)顾吾序,著.(清)箬冠道人,撰.八宅明镜[M].上海：上海江东茂记书局,民国八年
韩祥伟.教学空间的新界定及其优化研究[D].曲阜：曲阜师范大学,2007
何隽.儒家伦理教化的一个考察与分析[J].浙江学刊,1994(5)
贺宾.现代道德教化的民间之纬[J].江淮论坛,2006(4)
侯东亮.建筑人类学的思考——论建筑文化与传统建筑的关系[J].技情报开发与经济,2006(20)
候幼彬.中国建筑美学[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江科技出版社,1997
胡华生.论南昭的建筑文化[J].东南亚,1999(1)
胡静.儒家道德教化现象之分析[J].江汉论坛,2004(5)
黄珂峰,陈纲伦.中国传统建筑的伦理功能[J].华中建筑,2004(4)
黄书光.论中国传统教化的近代解构[J].浙江大学学报(人社版),2005(11)
黄书光.论中国传统教化的理论基础与组织特征[J].教育学报,2005(8)
黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
(明)计成.园治[M].北京：全国图书馆文献缩微中心,1993
(美)卡斯腾·哈里斯,著.申嘉,陈朝晖,译.建筑的伦理功能[M].北京：华夏出版社, 2001
(美)拉普卜特,著.黄兰谷,等译.建成环境的意义——非言语表达方法[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,1992
(宋)李诚.李明仲营造法式[M].北京：北京图书馆出版社,2003
李景林.本虚而实——儒家教化理念的立身之所[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2004(4)
李景林.教化的哲学：儒学思想的一种新诠释[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005
李莉萍,朱静文.观念与形象——云南白族居住建筑空间的文化背景[J].室内装修与设计,2001(11)
李少君.图解黄帝宅经[M].西安：陕西师范大学出版社,2008.
李小敏.国外空间社会理论的互动与论争——社区空间理论的流变[J].城市问题,2006(9)
李正清.大理喜洲文化史考[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1998
梁思成.中国建筑史[M].天津：百花文艺出版社,1999
梁永佳.作为本土知识的仪式空间——以大理喜洲为例[J].中南民族大学学报(人社版)2006(3)
林炊利.泉洲村落教化的传统与变革——基于一个小生产队的调查与研究[D].上海：华东师范大学,2007
刘定坤.乡土建筑空间环境中的教化性特征[J].华中建筑,1999(4)
刘兰.中国传统建筑的伦理功能[J].华中建筑,2006(1)
刘铁芳.从独白到对话：传统道德教化的现代性转向[J].北京大学教育评论,2004(1)
刘文勇.为天下而教化：儒家教化说之精神再检讨[J].西南大学学报(人社版),2007(4)
刘一光,康宁.中国传统建筑的美学特征及其现代转型[J].艺术百家,2007(1)
刘裕荣,熊海龙.冲突与融合—云南大理喜洲村白族民居门文化[J].小城镇建设,2006(1)
柳肃.儒家祭祀文化与东亚书院建筑的仪式空间[J].湖南大学学报社科版,2007(11)
鲁宁,鲁辉,鲁杰.中国传统建筑艺术大观[M].成都：四川人民出版社,2000
罗哲文,王振复.中国建筑文化大观[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2001
马蜂.中国古代建筑与人文教化[J].北京科技大学学报社科版,1999(12)
潘谷西.中国建筑史[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,2001
(德)齐美尔,著.林荣远,译.社会学：关于社会化形式的研究[M].北京：华夏出版社,2002
钱雅妮.浅析传统建筑的伦理功能—从同里古镇看起[J].华中建筑,2005(4)
钱正坤.世界建筑史话[M].北京：国际文化出版社,2000
全红.中国古代社会教化问题探讨[J].中国青年政治学院学报,1994(1)
盛建荣.周城白族民居的变迁[J].武汉大学学报工学版,2004(6)
石克辉,胡雪松.质朴清纯 崇尚自然——大理白族合院式住宅的室内装饰文化[J].华中建 筑,1999(4)
石艳.学校空间与不平等性别关系的再生产[J].当代教育科学,2007(15)
宋为民.中医全息论[M].重庆：重庆出版社,1989
台震林.宇宙全息统一论与中国传统文化[M].济南：山东人民出版社,1991
汪洪谰.天人合一：中国传统建筑中的哲学[J].宁夏社会科学,2006(5)
王沪宁.当代中国村落家族文化——对中国社会现代化的一项探索[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1991
王惠泉.绘图阳宅十书集成[M].上海：上海校经山房石印
王琼.试论中庸思想对中国传统建筑的影响[J].当代经理人,2006(5)
王先明,尤永斌.略论晚清乡村教化体系的历史变迁[J].史学月刊,1999(3)
(清)魏清江.宅谱指要[M].上海：扫叶山房,民国
吴培秀.试论中国传统建筑装饰的民俗文化特征[J].艺术百家,2006(5)
武燕.初访喜洲白族民居[J].艺术与设计理论,2007(2)
喜洲镇志编撰委员会.喜洲镇志[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,2005
谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
谢长法.祠堂及其社会教化[J].孔孟月刊,1996(11)
邢媛.论社会教化的系统性[J].系统辨证学学报,2000(10)
徐游宜,沈德昆.论白族民居彩绘装饰艺术对包装设计的启示[J].艺术与设计理论,2007(8)
徐月亮.中国古代教化对重建人文精神的启示[J].河北理工大学学报社科版,2006(5)
徐震,顾大治.徽州民居中的教化场所分析[J].合肥工业大学学报社科版,2008(2)
许娘光.宗族·种姓·俱乐部[M].北京：华夏出版社,1990
薛祖军.略论历史文化底蕴对喜洲白族民居建筑的影响[J].大理学院学报,2005(3)
薛祖军.自然生态环境对白族地区民居建筑形式的影响[J].大理学院学报,2004(3)
闫旭蕾.关于学校教育时空的社会学分析[J].当代教育科学,2006(6)
杨国材.白族传统文化的内涵与传承[J].中南民族大学学报,2004(2)
杨丽萍.试析大理白族民居建筑中的照壁[J].大理文化,2007(4)
姚慧,杨萍惠.传统建筑的门文化意向[J].文博,2006(3)
叶涯剑.空间社会学的方法论和基本概念解析[J].贵州社会科学,2006(1)
叶涯剑.空间社会学的缘起和发展——社会研究的一种新视角[J].河南社会科学,2005(9)
袁诤,王炎松.大理周城白族民居建筑文化特征[J].华中建筑,2001(6)
云南省编辑组.白族社会历史调查[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,1991
云南省设计院云南民居编写组.云南民居[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,1986
詹世友.“教化”理论基本原则分析[J].江西社会科学,1995(10)
詹世友.论教化的三大原理[J].南昌大学学报人社版,2000(7)
张金鹏,寸云激.民居与村落—白族聚居形式的社会人类学研究[M].昆明：云南美术出版社,2002
(明)张觉正.阳宅爱众篇[M].上海：上海广益书局,民国四年
张泉.白族建筑艺术[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,2005.
张汝梅,周毅敏.白族民居建筑的审美历程与文化意蕴[J].大理学院学报,2002(3)
张晓春,李翔宁.建筑与民俗——建筑空间的文化人类学探讨[J].华中建筑,1998(4)
张月中，周月亮.传统教化的秘密与魅力[J].东岳论丛,1992(1)
张增祺.云南建筑史[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,1999
赵勤.喜洲白族民居建筑群[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1999
郑洪.从现象学的视野看待传统建筑空间——石林小院空间初探[D].南京：东南大学,2005
郑晓江.论中华民族伦理道德教化的辅助系统[C]／／炎帝与汉民族国际学术研讨会论文集,2002
郑晓江.儒家德治、教化与礼制的现代沉思[J].南昌大学学报哲社版,1998(6)
周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
周志奇.阳宅大全图说[M].上海：上海大成书局,民国十一年
庄锦英.空间语言：一种被忽略的教学力量[J].基础教育,2007(5)
Fitzgerald C.P. The Tower of the Five Glories:The Min Chia of Ta Li, Yunnan [M]. London:The Gresset Press,1.941.
Knapp Ronald G. China's Old Dwellings [M]. Honolulu:University of Hawai'i Press,2000.
Knapp Ronald G. China's Vernacular Architecture:House Form and Culture [M]. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,1989.
Knapp Ronald G. Chinese Houses-The Architectural Heritage of a Nation [M]. Tokyo: Tuttle Publishing,2005.
①李景林.教化的哲学：儒学思想的一种新诠释[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005
②夏铸九,王志弘,编译.空间的文化形式与社会理论读本[M].台北：明文书局,1993
①周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
③谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
④陈谋德.白族传统建筑是中原文化与本土文化融合的历史见证[J].中国勘察设计,2002(10)
⑤黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
②曹影.教化的缘起及其意蕴[J].东北师大学报(哲社版),2006(3)
①冯天瑜.中华文化辞典[K].武昌：武汉大学出版社,2001
①黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
①石峻,等.中国佛教资料选编[M].北京：中华书局,1989
②(汉)班固,撰.颜师古,注,汉书[M].北京：中华书局,1976
②弗兰克斯·彭茨,等.空间—剑桥年度主题讲座[Ml.马光亭,章绍增,译.北京：华夏出版社,2006
②叶涯剑.空间社会学的方法论和基本概念解析[J].贵州社会科学,2006(1)
①[汉]许慎撰,段玉裁,注.说文解字注[M].郑州：中洲古籍出版社,2006
①黄珂峰,陈纲伦.中国传统建筑的伦理功能[J].建筑,2004(4)
①黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
②何隽.儒家伦理教化的一个考察与分析[J].浙江学刊,1994(5)
③马蜂.中国古代建筑与人文教化[J].北京科技大学学报社科版,1999(12)
①叶涯剑.空间社会学的缘起与发展—社会研究的一个新视角[J].河南社会科学,2005(9)
②叶涯剑.空间社会学的缘起与发展—社会研究的一个新视角[J].河南社会科学,2005(9)
①王星,孙慧民,田克琴,等.人类文化的空间组合[M].上海：上海出版社,1990
①周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
②杨政业.大理文化论[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,2001
①大理白族自治洲城建局.云南大理白族建筑[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,1994
②张增祺.云南建筑史[M].昆明：云南出版社,1999
①蒋高辰.云南民族住屋文化[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,1997
①高介华.孔子与中国建筑文化[J].华中建筑,1992(4)
①李允稣.华夏意匠[M].香港：广角镜出版社,1984
①赵勤.喜洲白族民居建筑群[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1999
①大理白族自治洲城建局.云南大理白族建筑[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,1994
①梁思成.中国建筑史[M].天津：百花文艺出版社,1998 ②伊东忠太,著,陈清泉,译.中国建筑史[M].上海：商务印书馆,1937
①我国传统习俗中,并非总是“左为上、右为下”。朝代不同、事情不同,左右、上下之分也就有所不同。《道德经》中有“君子居则贵左,用兵则贵吉……吉事尚左,凶事尚右。”故一般而言,日居生活以左为贵。
②[美]拉普卜特.建成环境的意义——非言语表达方法[M].黄兰谷, 等译.北京:中国建筑工业出版社,1992
①袁诤、王炎松.大理周城白族民居建筑文化特征[J].华中建筑,2001(6)
①张中华.中国画中的“四君子”及其文化内涵[J].贵州大学学报艺术版,2003(1)
①徐雷,王译林.儒家思想对居宅文化的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005(12)
①冯天瑜.中华文化辞典[K].武昌：武汉大学出版社,2001
①杜维明.杜维明新儒学论著辑要[M].北京：中国广播电视出版社,1992
②李景林.教化的哲学：儒学思想的一种新诠释[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005
③何隽.儒家伦理教化的一个考察与分析[J].浙江学刊,1994(5)
① M. Gottdiener, R. Hutchison. The New Urban Sociology (Second Edition). McGraw-Hill Companies,2000.转引自司敏. “社会空间视角”：当代城市社会学研究的新视角[J].社会,2004(5).
①宋为民.中医全息论[M].重庆：重庆出版社,1989
①梁思成.中国建筑史[M].天津：百花文艺出版社,1998
①高峰.空间的社会意义：一种社会学的理论探索[J].江海学刊,2007(2)
①梁启超.梁启超全集·新大陆游记[M].北京：北京出版社,1999
①孟德斯鸠.论法的精神[M].北京：商务印书馆,1978
②王沪宁.当代中国村落家族文化——对中国社会现代化的一项探索[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1991
①转引自：刘云杉.教学空间的塑造[J].教育科学研究,2004(6)
①在朱熹《家礼》以前,祭祀活动主要限于贵族阶层。北宋以后,根据《家礼》的提倡,祭祀活动才开始逐渐由贵族阶层发展到普通民众之中。
②陈独秀.东西民族根本思想之差异[J].新青年,1915年第1卷第4号
③转引自：苏国勋.理性化及其限制——韦伯思想引论[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1988
④[美]费正清.美国与中国[M].北京：商务印书馆,1987
⑤王沪宁.当代中国村落家族文化——对中国社会现代化的一项探索[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1991
①徐少锦,陈延斌.中国家训史[M].西安：陕西人民出版社,2003
②陈廷斌.试论明清家训的发展及其教化实践[J].齐鲁学刊,2003(1)
③丁钢.近世中国经济生活与宗族教育[M].上海：上海教育出版社,1996
①谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
①周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
①张海鹏,张海.中国十大商帮[M].合肥：黄山书社,1993
①丁钢.近世中国经济生活与宗族教育[M].上海：上海教育出版社,1996
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
③钱正坤.世界建筑史话[M].北京：国际文化出版社,2000
④赵勤.喜洲白族民居建筑群[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1999
①“题名坊”原坊毁于“文化大革命”期间,此后在原址重建有石坊并称为“文明坊”。
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
①谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2).
①[美]塞缪尔·亨廷顿.文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建[M].北京：新华出版社,1998
①夏光.后结构主义与后现代社会理论[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2003
②[德]马克斯·舍勒,著.艾彦,译.知识社会学问题[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999
①吴学昭.吴宓与陈寅恪[M].北京：清华大学出版社,1992
①[法]孟德斯鸠,著.张雁深,译.论法的精神[M].北京：商务印书馆,1961
①李景林.本实而虚—儒家教化理念的立身之所[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2004(4)
②陈杰思.人文礼教与封建礼教儒学与当代文明[C]//纪念孔子诞生2555周年国际学术研讨会论文集.北京：九州出版社,2005
①梁漱溟.中国文化要义[M].上海：学林出版社,1987
②孙中山.孙中山选集[M].北京：人民出版社,1981
①(德)齐美尔,著.林荣远,译.社会学：关于社会化形式的研究[M].北京：华夏出版社,2002
①冯天瑜.中华文化辞典[K].武昌：武汉大学出版社,2001
敖侍恒,赵晓峰.中国传统建筑单体的生态文化内涵浅析[J].华中建筑,2006(9)
曹影.“教化”的缘起、内涵及与道德教育的异同[J].长白学刊,2005(2)
陈冬苗.中国传统建筑入口研究[D].南京：东南大学,2006
陈劲松.儒学社会：中国传统社会的社会学分析框架[J].浙江学刊,2000(1)
(明)陈梦和.阳宅集成[M].北京：燕山出版社,1991
陈谋德.白族传统建筑是中原文化与本土文化融合的历史见证[J].中国勘察设计,2002(10)
丁钢.近世中国经济生活与宗族教育[M].上海：上海教育出版社,1996
(英)厄里,著.李康,译.关于时间与空间的社会学[M]／／布赖恩·特纳.社会理论指南.上海：上海人民出版社,2003
(美)弗朗西斯.D.K.钦,著.邹德农,方千里,译.建筑：形式、空间和秩序[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,1989
高德胜.论空间的德育意蕴[J].教育研究与实验,2006(4)
高峰.空间的社会意义：一种社会学的理论探索[J].江海学刊,2007(2)
谷成东.白族民居建筑[J].住宅科技,2004(7)
(明)顾吾序,著.(清)箬冠道人,撰.八宅明镜[M].上海：上海江东茂记书局,民国八年
韩祥伟.教学空间的新界定及其优化研究[D].曲阜：曲阜师范大学,2007
何隽.儒家伦理教化的一个考察与分析[J].浙江学刊,1994(5)
贺宾.现代道德教化的民间之纬[J].江淮论坛,2006(4)
侯东亮.建筑人类学的思考——论建筑文化与传统建筑的关系[J].技情报开发与经济,2006(20)
候幼彬.中国建筑美学[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江科技出版社,1997
胡华生.论南昭的建筑文化[J].东南亚,1999(1)
胡静.儒家道德教化现象之分析[J].江汉论坛,2004(5)
黄珂峰,陈纲伦.中国传统建筑的伦理功能[J].华中建筑,2004(4)
黄书光.论中国传统教化的近代解构[J].浙江大学学报(人社版),2005(11)
黄书光.论中国传统教化的理论基础与组织特征[J].教育学报,2005(8)
黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
(明)计成.园治[M].北京：全国图书馆文献缩微中心,1993
(美)卡斯腾·哈里斯,著.申嘉,陈朝晖,译.建筑的伦理功能[M].北京：华夏出版社, 2001
(美)拉普卜特,著.黄兰谷,等译.建成环境的意义——非言语表达方法[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,1992
(宋)李诚.李明仲营造法式[M].北京：北京图书馆出版社,2003
李景林.本虚而实——儒家教化理念的立身之所[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2004(4)
李景林.教化的哲学：儒学思想的一种新诠释[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005
李莉萍,朱静文.观念与形象——云南白族居住建筑空间的文化背景[J].室内装修与设计,2001(11)
李少君.图解黄帝宅经[M].西安：陕西师范大学出版社,2008.
李小敏.国外空间社会理论的互动与论争——社区空间理论的流变[J].城市问题,2006(9)
李正清.大理喜洲文化史考[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1998
梁思成.中国建筑史[M].天津：百花文艺出版社,1999
梁永佳.作为本土知识的仪式空间——以大理喜洲为例[J].中南民族大学学报(人社版)2006(3)
林炊利.泉洲村落教化的传统与变革——基于一个小生产队的调查与研究[D].上海：华东师范大学,2007
刘定坤.乡土建筑空间环境中的教化性特征[J].华中建筑,1999(4)
刘兰.中国传统建筑的伦理功能[J].华中建筑,2006(1)
刘铁芳.从独白到对话：传统道德教化的现代性转向[J].北京大学教育评论,2004(1)
刘文勇.为天下而教化：儒家教化说之精神再检讨[J].西南大学学报(人社版),2007(4)
刘一光,康宁.中国传统建筑的美学特征及其现代转型[J].艺术百家,2007(1)
刘裕荣,熊海龙.冲突与融合—云南大理喜洲村白族民居门文化[J].小城镇建设,2006(1)
柳肃.儒家祭祀文化与东亚书院建筑的仪式空间[J].湖南大学学报社科版,2007(11)
鲁宁,鲁辉,鲁杰.中国传统建筑艺术大观[M].成都：四川人民出版社,2000
罗哲文,王振复.中国建筑文化大观[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2001
马蜂.中国古代建筑与人文教化[J].北京科技大学学报社科版,1999(12)
潘谷西.中国建筑史[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,2001
(德)齐美尔,著.林荣远,译.社会学：关于社会化形式的研究[M].北京：华夏出版社,2002
钱雅妮.浅析传统建筑的伦理功能—从同里古镇看起[J].华中建筑,2005(4)
钱正坤.世界建筑史话[M].北京：国际文化出版社,2000
全红.中国古代社会教化问题探讨[J].中国青年政治学院学报,1994(1)
盛建荣.周城白族民居的变迁[J].武汉大学学报工学版,2004(6)
石克辉,胡雪松.质朴清纯 崇尚自然——大理白族合院式住宅的室内装饰文化[J].华中建 筑,1999(4)
石艳.学校空间与不平等性别关系的再生产[J].当代教育科学,2007(15)
宋为民.中医全息论[M].重庆：重庆出版社,1989
台震林.宇宙全息统一论与中国传统文化[M].济南：山东人民出版社,1991
汪洪谰.天人合一：中国传统建筑中的哲学[J].宁夏社会科学,2006(5)
王沪宁.当代中国村落家族文化——对中国社会现代化的一项探索[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1991
王惠泉.绘图阳宅十书集成[M].上海：上海校经山房石印
王琼.试论中庸思想对中国传统建筑的影响[J].当代经理人,2006(5)
王先明,尤永斌.略论晚清乡村教化体系的历史变迁[J].史学月刊,1999(3)
(清)魏清江.宅谱指要[M].上海：扫叶山房,民国
吴培秀.试论中国传统建筑装饰的民俗文化特征[J].艺术百家,2006(5)
武燕.初访喜洲白族民居[J].艺术与设计理论,2007(2)
喜洲镇志编撰委员会.喜洲镇志[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,2005
谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
谢长法.祠堂及其社会教化[J].孔孟月刊,1996(11)
邢媛.论社会教化的系统性[J].系统辨证学学报,2000(10)
徐游宜,沈德昆.论白族民居彩绘装饰艺术对包装设计的启示[J].艺术与设计理论,2007(8)
徐月亮.中国古代教化对重建人文精神的启示[J].河北理工大学学报社科版,2006(5)
徐震,顾大治.徽州民居中的教化场所分析[J].合肥工业大学学报社科版,2008(2)
许娘光.宗族·种姓·俱乐部[M].北京：华夏出版社,1990
薛祖军.略论历史文化底蕴对喜洲白族民居建筑的影响[J].大理学院学报,2005(3)
薛祖军.自然生态环境对白族地区民居建筑形式的影响[J].大理学院学报,2004(3)
闫旭蕾.关于学校教育时空的社会学分析[J].当代教育科学,2006(6)
杨国材.白族传统文化的内涵与传承[J].中南民族大学学报,2004(2)
杨丽萍.试析大理白族民居建筑中的照壁[J].大理文化,2007(4)
姚慧,杨萍惠.传统建筑的门文化意向[J].文博,2006(3)
叶涯剑.空间社会学的方法论和基本概念解析[J].贵州社会科学,2006(1)
叶涯剑.空间社会学的缘起和发展——社会研究的一种新视角[J].河南社会科学,2005(9)
袁诤,王炎松.大理周城白族民居建筑文化特征[J].华中建筑,2001(6)
云南省编辑组.白族社会历史调查[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,1991
云南省设计院云南民居编写组.云南民居[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,1986
詹世友.“教化”理论基本原则分析[J].江西社会科学,1995(10)
詹世友.论教化的三大原理[J].南昌大学学报人社版,2000(7)
张金鹏,寸云激.民居与村落—白族聚居形式的社会人类学研究[M].昆明：云南美术出版社,2002
(明)张觉正.阳宅爱众篇[M].上海：上海广益书局,民国四年
张泉.白族建筑艺术[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,2005.
张汝梅,周毅敏.白族民居建筑的审美历程与文化意蕴[J].大理学院学报,2002(3)
张晓春,李翔宁.建筑与民俗——建筑空间的文化人类学探讨[J].华中建筑,1998(4)
张月中，周月亮.传统教化的秘密与魅力[J].东岳论丛,1992(1)
张增祺.云南建筑史[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,1999
赵勤.喜洲白族民居建筑群[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1999
郑洪.从现象学的视野看待传统建筑空间——石林小院空间初探[D].南京：东南大学,2005
郑晓江.论中华民族伦理道德教化的辅助系统[C]／／炎帝与汉民族国际学术研讨会论文集,2002
郑晓江.儒家德治、教化与礼制的现代沉思[J].南昌大学学报哲社版,1998(6)
周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
周志奇.阳宅大全图说[M].上海：上海大成书局,民国十一年
庄锦英.空间语言：一种被忽略的教学力量[J].基础教育,2007(5)
Fitzgerald C.P. The Tower of the Five Glories:The Min Chia of Ta Li, Yunnan [M]. London:The Gresset Press,1.941.
Knapp Ronald G. China's Old Dwellings [M]. Honolulu:University of Hawai'i Press,2000.
Knapp Ronald G. China's Vernacular Architecture:House Form and Culture [M]. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,1989.
Knapp Ronald G. Chinese Houses-The Architectural Heritage of a Nation [M]. Tokyo: Tuttle Publishing,2005.
①李景林.教化的哲学：儒学思想的一种新诠释[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005
②夏铸九,王志弘,编译.空间的文化形式与社会理论读本[M].台北：明文书局,1993
①周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
③谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
④陈谋德.白族传统建筑是中原文化与本土文化融合的历史见证[J].中国勘察设计,2002(10)
⑤黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
②曹影.教化的缘起及其意蕴[J].东北师大学报(哲社版),2006(3)
①冯天瑜.中华文化辞典[K].武昌：武汉大学出版社,2001
①黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
①石峻,等.中国佛教资料选编[M].北京：中华书局,1989
②(汉)班固,撰.颜师古,注,汉书[M].北京：中华书局,1976
②弗兰克斯·彭茨,等.空间—剑桥年度主题讲座[Ml.马光亭,章绍增,译.北京：华夏出版社,2006
②叶涯剑.空间社会学的方法论和基本概念解析[J].贵州社会科学,2006(1)
①[汉]许慎撰,段玉裁,注.说文解字注[M].郑州：中洲古籍出版社,2006
①黄珂峰,陈纲伦.中国传统建筑的伦理功能[J].建筑,2004(4)
①黄书光.中国社会教化的传统与变革[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2005
②何隽.儒家伦理教化的一个考察与分析[J].浙江学刊,1994(5)
③马蜂.中国古代建筑与人文教化[J].北京科技大学学报社科版,1999(12)
①叶涯剑.空间社会学的缘起与发展—社会研究的一个新视角[J].河南社会科学,2005(9)
②叶涯剑.空间社会学的缘起与发展—社会研究的一个新视角[J].河南社会科学,2005(9)
①王星,孙慧民,田克琴,等.人类文化的空间组合[M].上海：上海出版社,1990
①周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
②杨政业.大理文化论[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,2001
①大理白族自治洲城建局.云南大理白族建筑[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,1994
②张增祺.云南建筑史[M].昆明：云南出版社,1999
①蒋高辰.云南民族住屋文化[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,1997
①高介华.孔子与中国建筑文化[J].华中建筑,1992(4)
①李允稣.华夏意匠[M].香港：广角镜出版社,1984
①赵勤.喜洲白族民居建筑群[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1999
①大理白族自治洲城建局.云南大理白族建筑[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,1994
①梁思成.中国建筑史[M].天津：百花文艺出版社,1998 ②伊东忠太,著,陈清泉,译.中国建筑史[M].上海：商务印书馆,1937
①我国传统习俗中,并非总是“左为上、右为下”。朝代不同、事情不同,左右、上下之分也就有所不同。《道德经》中有“君子居则贵左,用兵则贵吉……吉事尚左,凶事尚右。”故一般而言,日居生活以左为贵。
②[美]拉普卜特.建成环境的意义——非言语表达方法[M].黄兰谷, 等译.北京:中国建筑工业出版社,1992
①袁诤、王炎松.大理周城白族民居建筑文化特征[J].华中建筑,2001(6)
①张中华.中国画中的“四君子”及其文化内涵[J].贵州大学学报艺术版,2003(1)
①徐雷,王译林.儒家思想对居宅文化的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005(12)
①冯天瑜.中华文化辞典[K].武昌：武汉大学出版社,2001
①杜维明.杜维明新儒学论著辑要[M].北京：中国广播电视出版社,1992
②李景林.教化的哲学：儒学思想的一种新诠释[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005
③何隽.儒家伦理教化的一个考察与分析[J].浙江学刊,1994(5)
① M. Gottdiener, R. Hutchison. The New Urban Sociology (Second Edition). McGraw-Hill Companies,2000.转引自司敏. “社会空间视角”：当代城市社会学研究的新视角[J].社会,2004(5).
①宋为民.中医全息论[M].重庆：重庆出版社,1989
①梁思成.中国建筑史[M].天津：百花文艺出版社,1998
①高峰.空间的社会意义：一种社会学的理论探索[J].江海学刊,2007(2)
①梁启超.梁启超全集·新大陆游记[M].北京：北京出版社,1999
①孟德斯鸠.论法的精神[M].北京：商务印书馆,1978
②王沪宁.当代中国村落家族文化——对中国社会现代化的一项探索[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1991
①转引自：刘云杉.教学空间的塑造[J].教育科学研究,2004(6)
①在朱熹《家礼》以前,祭祀活动主要限于贵族阶层。北宋以后,根据《家礼》的提倡,祭祀活动才开始逐渐由贵族阶层发展到普通民众之中。
②陈独秀.东西民族根本思想之差异[J].新青年,1915年第1卷第4号
③转引自：苏国勋.理性化及其限制——韦伯思想引论[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1988
④[美]费正清.美国与中国[M].北京：商务印书馆,1987
⑤王沪宁.当代中国村落家族文化——对中国社会现代化的一项探索[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1991
①徐少锦,陈延斌.中国家训史[M].西安：陕西人民出版社,2003
②陈廷斌.试论明清家训的发展及其教化实践[J].齐鲁学刊,2003(1)
③丁钢.近世中国经济生活与宗族教育[M].上海：上海教育出版社,1996
①谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
①周文敏.穿越神灵的村庄[M].昆明：云南人民出版社,2000
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
①张海鹏,张海.中国十大商帮[M].合肥：黄山书社,1993
①丁钢.近世中国经济生活与宗族教育[M].上海：上海教育出版社,1996
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
③钱正坤.世界建筑史话[M].北京：国际文化出版社,2000
④赵勤.喜洲白族民居建筑群[M].昆明：云南民族出版社,1999
①“题名坊”原坊毁于“文化大革命”期间,此后在原址重建有石坊并称为“文明坊”。
②谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2)
①谢本书.解读云南大理喜洲[J].学术探索,2003(2).
①[美]塞缪尔·亨廷顿.文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建[M].北京：新华出版社,1998
①夏光.后结构主义与后现代社会理论[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2003
②[德]马克斯·舍勒,著.艾彦,译.知识社会学问题[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999
①吴学昭.吴宓与陈寅恪[M].北京：清华大学出版社,1992
①[法]孟德斯鸠,著.张雁深,译.论法的精神[M].北京：商务印书馆,1961
①李景林.本实而虚—儒家教化理念的立身之所[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2004(4)
②陈杰思.人文礼教与封建礼教儒学与当代文明[C]//纪念孔子诞生2555周年国际学术研讨会论文集.北京：九州出版社,2005
①梁漱溟.中国文化要义[M].上海：学林出版社,1987
②孙中山.孙中山选集[M].北京：人民出版社,1981
①(德)齐美尔,著.林荣远,译.社会学：关于社会化形式的研究[M].北京：华夏出版社,2002
①冯天瑜.中华文化辞典[K].武昌：武汉大学出版社,2001