ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办:中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理科学进展 ›› 2023, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (8): 1541-1552.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2023.01541

• 研究前沿 • 上一篇    

荣誉文化与面子文化:三分框架与本土概念视角下的比较

魏新东1,3, 张凯丽2,3, 傅绪荣4, 汪凤炎2,3()   

  1. 1南京信息工程大学教师教育学院, 南京 210044
    2南京师范大学心理学院, 南京 210097
    3南京师范大学道德教育研究所, 南京 210097
    4南京晓庄学院心理健康研究院, 南京市未成年人心理健康研究院, 南京 210013
  • 收稿日期:2022-09-27 出版日期:2023-08-15 发布日期:2023-05-12
  • 通讯作者: 汪凤炎, E-mail: fywangjx8069@163.com
    魏新东和张凯丽并列为第一作者。
  • 基金资助:
    教育部重大课题攻关项目(21JZD063);国家自然科学基金项目(31971014);国家自然科学基金项目(62272236);2020年度江苏省第五期“333高层次人才培养工程”科研资助项目;江苏高校哲学社会科学一般项目(2022SJYB0182)

Honor culture and face culture: A comparison through the lens of the dignity, honor, and face cultural framework and indigenous social theory

WEI Xindong1,3, ZHANG Kaili2,3, FU Xurong4, WANG Fengyan2,3()   

  1. 1School of Teacher Education, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044, China
    2School of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210097, China
    3Institute of Moral Education Research, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210097, China
    4Institute of Mental Health, Nanjing Xiaozhuang University, Nanjing 210013, China
  • Received:2022-09-27 Online:2023-08-15 Published:2023-05-12

摘要:

荣誉文化与面子文化虽都较重视个体行为应尽量符合社会期望及相应的社会文化规范, 但它们有诸多差异。“尊严-荣誉-面子”三分框架下荣誉文化的自我价值来源包括同等重要的自我认知与他人评价, 而面子文化以他人评价为主; 荣誉文化社会等级结构不稳定, 讲究竞争、暴力与美德并重, 面子文化社会等级较稳定, 讲究谦虚、和谐与合作。本土概念下荣誉中自我形象与社会形象相对一致, 包括道德、性别与家庭荣誉等维度, 会以暴力手段捍卫荣誉; 面子中自我形象与社会形象通常不一致, 主要包括道德与社会成就, 表现为挣面子与避免丢面子两个维度, 注重彰显地位与维护权威。在此基础上, 从都较重视社会规范的“理一”视角出发, 将两个文化的“分殊”之处归为社会文化规范的道德化与工具化, 并基于此提出两点展望: 改善测量工具; 探究不同文化变迁内容对社会规范道德化和工具化的影响。

关键词: 集体主义, 荣誉, 面子, 社会规范, 文化差异

Abstract:

Honor and face cultures attach great importance to regulating individual behavior by social expectations and cultural norms. However, the two cultural phenomena differ in several crucial aspects. The new cultural framework of dignity, honor, and face was proposed based on three different cultural logics and reveals that while both honor culture and face culture place importance on adhering to social norms, honor culture places greater emphasis on both self-awareness and external evaluations for self-worth, whereas face culture places more weight on external evaluations. Additionally, honor culture is characterized by an unstable social hierarchy prone to competition, violence, and virtue, while face culture prioritizes modesty, harmony, and cooperation within a more stable hierarchy. However, the framework does not fully explore the cultural practices and specific connotations that are locally relevant to each respective culture.

From indigenous perspectives, the self-image and social image in honor culture are relatively consistent, and honor encompasses moral, gender, and family-related aspects that may be defended through violence. In contrast, self-image and social image in face culture tend to be incongruent, and face involves morality and social achievement, which is expressed through the dimensions of seeking face and avoiding losing face with an emphasis on status and authority.

Combined with the above two perspectives, these core differences between honor and face cultures can be attributed to the moralization and instrumentalization of social cultural norms. Specifically, honor tends to moralize social and cultural norms by transforming descriptive norms into prescriptive norms, where majority and typical behaviors that exist in a culture are considered behaviors that group members should or must abide by. In contrast, face instrumentalizes social and cultural norms by using descriptive and prescriptive norms as means and tools to maintain relationships, demonstrate status, and uphold authority. This perspective provides new insights into cultural phenomena, such as the positive correlation between violence and virtue in honor cultures, where violence becomes a social norm that adapts to the honor culture environment and is moralized into a virtuous attribute. The social norm of harmony in face culture exists both as value-oriented harmony influenced by Confucian culture and instrumental harmony in daily life, leading to a dissonance between face and heart. This comparative analysis can help in developing new measurement models to test the core differences between the honor and face cultures and explore the impact of changing values and social ecological variables on the moralization and instrumentalization of social norms in the context of cultural change.

Key words: collectivism, honor, face, dignity, cultural differences

中图分类号: