论文部分内容阅读
作者认为,当代印度的“城里人”身份应在既有的世界观———如包容观以及与之相对的主张排斥的观点———语境中去理解,应在从“道德”方面而不是从目的方面去诠释合理性的语境中去理解。作者主要思考了以下几个问题:是否能够脱离开与“城市”普遍相连的物质特性来定义“都市”?是否有一天可以把“城市规划”定义为生活方式?在思考一个城市及其人口、经济乃至基础设施的发展方式时,是否可以脱离开对国内政治、世界经济和环境变化对全球非城市地区的治理或影响的分析?作者最后指出,我们应该回到作为整体论学科的人类学上,应该回到下列观点,即城市、乡村或其他类别都是不可分割的,它们在人类和社会史上是盘根错节的。
The author believes that contemporary India’s “city-bearer” identity should be understood in the context of existing world outlooks, such as tolerance and relative discordance, and should be based on “morality ”Rather than from the purpose to explain the context of rationality to understand. The author mainly considers the following questions: Can we define “city ” without the material properties that are generally connected with “city ”? Can one day define “urban planning ” as the way of life? Whether a city, its population, its economy, and even its infrastructure development can be separated from the analysis of the governance or influence of global politics, the world economy and environmental change on the global non-urban areas? Finally, the author states that we should return to the overall On anthropological subjects, one should return to the view that urban, rural or other categories are indivisible and that they are in the wrong place in human and social history.