王红扬

Wang Hongyang

关键词：整体主义；中等发展陷阱；人居三；规划改革；新型城镇化；本体论；认识论；方法论

Keywords：Holism; Middle Development Trap; Habitat III;Planning Reform; Chinese New Urbanization; Ontology;Epistemology; Methodology

摘要：

解读人居三，以《新城市议程》和《城市与区域规划国际准则》为例，剖析其中潜藏着“规划包罗一切”的危险。该倾向似乎具有逻辑必然性，论文论证其背后是先验、确定、局部、线性的世界观。进而，以一个“认知形成”原型引领，系统阐述以关系、一致性、可变、同时性逻辑、整体等为核心的认知与事物演化的真正本质。两种世界观的对比，澄明了包罗一切式解决方案普遍发生但无效的原因，其与中等发展陷阱的关联，以及突破中等发展陷阱的原理等，最终应用于对中国式中等发展及助力突破中国式中等发展的新型城镇化与规划改革的讨论。本文以建构整体主义为核心理论诉求，本身也是该理论的一次实践。

Abstract：

 The essay starts with Habitat III, the newest milestone of global planning. It examines its two core documents, New Urban Agenda and International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning, analyzing there is an underlying issue of “planning becomes everything”. It then demonstrates that beyond the “everything” issue there is the orthodox philosophy viewing the world comprised by a priori exact parts and linear logic. In contrast to the orthodox philosophy, guided by a prototype how human recognition of the world is formed, the essay then systematically elucidates a new philosophy of Holism, with relation, conformity, changeableness, synchronic logic and whole among its core ingredients. Based on this theory, the problematic nature of “everything”, the nature of Middle Development Trap and the relationship between them become clear. The rationale to break the MDT is also illuminated. These implications are finally applied to a discussion on the the nature of Chinese Middle Development and the Chinese New Urbanization and planning reform to help break the Chinese Middle Development. The establishment of a new Theory of Holism is the main theoretical purpose of the essay, with itself being a holistic application of the theory.

王红扬，博士，南京大学建筑与城市规划学院教授，中法城市·区域·规划科学研究中心主任

• [1] 孙立平. 当前中国最急迫的三个问题——国家的方向感、精英的安全感、老百姓的希望感[Z]. 微信公众号“人民论坛网”（ID: rmltwz）, 2016-07-29.
  [2] 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：中国的城市与区域规划》[J]. 国际城市规划, 2016, 3: 3-15.
  [3] UN General Assembly. New Urban Agenda[C]. United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainblae Urban Development (Habitat III), Item 10 of the provisional agenda, 2016-09-29.
  [4] UN-Habitat. International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning[C]. UN-Habitat, 2015: 2, 8.
  [5] 汪光焘. 贯彻《城乡规划法》，依法编制城乡规划——在全国城市规划院院长会议上的讲话[J]. 城市规划, 2008, 1: 9-16.
  [6] 孙忆敏, 赵民. 从《城市规划法》到《城乡规划法》的历时性解读[J]. 上海城市规划, 2008, 2: 55-60.
  [7] 李雪飞, 何流, 张京祥. 基于《城乡规划法》的控制性详细规划改革[J]. 规划师, 2009, 8: 71-80.
  [8] 张兵. 渐进的规划制度改革面临的出路——关于制定《城乡规划法》的讨论[J]. 城市规划, 2000, 10: 8-13.
  [9] 颜丽杰. 《城乡规划法》之后的控制性详细规划——从科学技术与公共政策的分化谈控制性详细规划的困惑与出路[J]. 城市规划, 2008, 11: 46-50.
  [10] United Nations. The Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements[C]. United Nations Conference on Human Settlements, 1976-06-11.
  [11] United Nations. The Vancouver Action Plan: 64 Recommendations for National Action[C]. Approved at Habitat: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements, Vancouver, Canada, 1976.5.31-6.11.
  [12] Aaron Wildavsky. If Planning is Everything, Maybe It’s Nothing[J]. Policy Sciences, 1973, 4: 127-153.
  [13] 石楠.中国城市规划学会秘书长石楠解读人居三《新城市议程》[DB/OL]. 中国城市规划网. (2016-10-19)[2016-12-01]. http://www.planning.org.cn/solicity/view_news?id=832.
  [14] 康德. 纯粹理性批判[M].邓晓芒, 译. 人民出版社, 2004: 357-404.
  [15] Klement Kevin. Russell’s Logical Atomism[EB/OL]. Stanford University, the Metaphysics Research Lab. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Phylosophy, 2013. [2017-01-13]. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-atomism.
  [16] Ian Proops. Wittgenstein’s Logical Atomism[EB/OL]. Stanford University, the Metaphysics Research Lab, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Phylosophy, 2013. [2017-01-13]. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein-atomism.
  [17] 王红扬. 对新时代背景下中国城市化研究的方法论思考[J]. 城市规划, 2000, 6: 7-16.
  [18] Kuhn T S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions[M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962.
  [19] 王小波. 思维的乐趣[M]. 中国人民大学出版社, 2005.
  [20] 伯特兰·罗素. 西方的智慧[M]. 文化艺术出版社, 2005.
  [21] Fishman Robert. Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century[M]. The MIT Press, 1982.
  [22] 大前研一. 低智商社会[M]. 中信出版社, 2010.
  [23] 人民日报. 元旦献词：以自我革命的气魄推进全面深化改革[N]. 2017-01-01.
  [24] 路德维希·冯·贝塔兰菲. 一般系统论（基础·发展·应用）[M]. 秋同, 袁嘉新, 译. 社会科学文献出版社, 1987.
  [25] Smuts J C. Holism and Evolution[M]. Gestalt Journal Press, 2013.
  [26] Graham Stephen, Healey Patsy. Relational Concepts of Space and Place: Issues for Planning Theory and Practice[J]. European Planning Studies, 1999, 5: 623-646
  [27] 卢风. 整体主义环境哲学对现代性的挑战[J]. 中国社会科学, 2012, 9: 43-62.
  [28] 王宁. 个体主义与整体主义对立的新思考——社会研究方法论的基本问题之一[J]. 中山大学学报（社会科学版）, 2002, 2: 125-132.
  [29] 刘晓虹. 试论中国传统价值体系中的整体主义及其在近代的变革[J]. 兰州大学学报（社会科学版）, 2000, 5: 69-75.

• 收起