大眾社會與中介團體理論

Mass Society and The Theories of Intermediate Group

在現代社會，傳統的社區已漸喪失其固有的多元功能，而新出現的自發性結社(Voluntary association)卻始終未能發揮其應有的功能。特別是在工業及都市化社會，由於廣大民眾之間，缺乏有效的中介團體，以致一般大眾有如散沙一般，成為原子般的存在。他們缺乏可以歸屬、認同、以取得精神安定感的社會團體，而有迷亂或病態行為(anomic behavior) 的普遍發生。這是現代社會的危機之一。在組織力特別薄弱，個人中心主義（或家族中心主義）特別強烈的我國社會，人們只習慣於傳統性的血緣性或地緣性團體，而無法產生有效的組織力量，這問題特別嚴重。誠是不容忽視之問題。本文探討從十九世紀到二十世紀的社會學者或政治社會學者如托克維爾(Alexis de Tocqueville)、凃爾幹(Emile Durkheim)、齊穆爾(Georg Simmel)、拉斯基(Harold Laski)及孔豪澤(William Kornhauser)等人的社會及團體結溝理論。特別是有關在逐漸出現的新社會結構中的中介團體的理論。同時也分析做為中介團體的社會與結社的性質、形態、功能以及其變化等情形。在社會規模巨大化、社會組織科層化及機械化的時代，現代社會隨時有淪為極權化或大眾化的危險性。為了確保社會多元化及民主化的理想，應進一步加強自發性團體的組織功能，使之健全發展，並充分發揮其功能。此乃本文討論重點。本文亦對過份樂觀的中介團體論提出警告，因為志願性團體（特別是做為工具性團體的中介團體）為了增強其影響力而過份龐大後，甚有可能成為麥司•韋伯(Max Weber)所曾警告的新的鐵籠，重新成為個人獨立與自由的攀籠。雖然如此，本文作者仍認為，克服此矛盾之道無他，只有借諸不斷創新的自發性團體。際此，曼海姆(Karl Mannheim)所強調的「社會技術」 (Soxcial techniques)的探索與發展，在現代社會愈益增加其重要意義。

The decline of community, with the erosion of traditional values and of social integration, has been one of the most notable changes wrought by the shaping forces of modern society. Community today has lost its original capacity to satisfy the various needs of its members. It also has ceased to play an effective role as an intermediate group between the individual or the family and the state or the total society. To make matter worse, the new emerging voluntary association, which is expected to take the place and play the role of community in modern society, has not yet fully grown up to meet the requirements of society today. Hence a vaccume has been produced in modern society as a result of these processes. It is especially true in modern urban society where the people, because of lack of the effective intermediate organizations, has been in the rapid process of atomization, exploited from a stable group as the object of individual identification and sense of belonging. Consequently there are very common phenomena of anomie or anomic behavior among the people in modern society. The problem is particularly serious in the Chinese society where the majority of members are characteristically egocentric or family-centrede. The Chinese are generally said to be short of the ability in organizational behavior beyond the scope of kinship or traditionally land-related relationships. This paper explored in detail the theories of social group structure, especially those of intermediate group of the 19th and 20th Centry sociologists or political sociologists such as Alexis de Tocqueville, Emile Durkheim, Georg Simmel, Harold Laski and William Kornhauser. The emphasis is also made on the types, functions and transformation of intermediate groups in modern industrial society. In an age of 'the Great Society' (G. Wallace) and of the machine-like bureaucratic formal organization, modern society is very likely vulnerable to become the victim of totalitarian society on one hand or of the irrational mass cociety on the other. The key to hold the society in line with the ideal of pluralistic.and democratic society lies in the development and the fully functioning of the strong and effective intermediate groups. This is the main theme of this paper. The author also has warned the too optimistic tendency of some of the theories of intermediate group, because as predicted by Max Weber, when the voluntary, instrumental association has become enormous size, it is likely to become a new cage of iron to restrain the independence and liberty of individuals. However the author find that to overcome this dilemma, there is no other way than the unceasing formation of new voluntary associations in order to deal with the endless problems of organization. This seems the inescapable fate of modern people, hence the 'social techniques' suggested by Karl Mannheim in handling the human enterprises has its particular implications today.