Abstract:As the society and economy develop, human beings have gradually stepped into an era dominated by spiritual needs, and their demand for environmental and spatial quality is constantly rising. Consequently, to better satisfy people’s spiritual needs, a shift is to be carried out in the territorial spatial planning from “material planning” to “human-oriented planning”. This study reviews the development of territorial spatial planning by using literature analysis and deduction and induction, summarizes the development and drawbacks of traditional material spatial planning in China since the reform and opening up, analyzes the significance of spiritual needs, and then reveals the inevitability of the shift from “material planning” to “human-oriented planning”. Taking the spiritual needs of people’s aspirations for a better life as an entry point, the study explores the coupling mechanism between “Mind is Principle” and territorial spatial planning and determine the planning approach, so as to make up for the structural deficiencies of the current territorial spatial planning.“Mind is Principle” emphasizes the influence of subject spirit on everything in the universe and highly appreciates the spiritual value of human beings. The territorial spatial planning under the guidance of “Mind is Principle” takes the spiritual space as the carrier, shapes the spiritual variables into a continuous spectrum of happiness, and finally realizes an ideal and poetic dwelling which is more in line with the value orientation of territorial spatial planning in the era of ecological civilization. In accordance with the theoretical framework of “connotation-cognition-approach”, the study starts from the realistic dilemma of territorial spatial planning to support the spiritual needs of human beings, takes the idea of “Mind is Principle” as the value orientation, and aims at the growing spiritual needs of human beings in the era of ecological civilization. It constructs a theoretical framework for territorial spatial planning under the orientation of “Mind is Principle” and selects actual cases to explore feasible approaches to enhance human well-being and create an ideal and poetic dwelling under this value orientation. The “Mind is Principle” space consists of spiritual space, social space and material space, of which spiritual space is the key object of territorial spatial planning under the orientation of “Mind is Principle”. In addition, the spiritual variables and the objective well-being together constitute a continuous happiness spectrum, which is the basis for constructing a poetic dwelling. Spiritual space consists of emotional space, happy space and poetic dwelling space. Emotional space emphasizes the creation of emotional media facilities, all-age friendly space and resilient emotional facilities; happy space can be divided into happy streets and immersive space, etc.; and poetic dwelling space highlights the innovation of culture and righteousness, the construction of nostalgic homes and the shaping of spatial aesthetics.The human subjective spirit is an important variable in future territorial spatial planning. In answering the question of “how to embody humanistic care and pay attention to spiritual needs in territorial spatial planning”, this study, by deconstructing the spiritual space and theoretically exploring the spatial philosophy of “Mind is Principle”, offers a preliminary knowledge of the coupling mechanism between “Mind is Principle” and territorial spatial planning, and contributes a Chinese proposal to enrich the world’s theoretical system of territorial spatial planning.
邹依诺, 吴次芳, 谷玮. “心即理”导向下的国土空间规划理论认知和路径探索[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2024, 54(4): 70-85.
Zou Yinuo, Wu Cifang, Gu Wei. Cognition and Approach of Territorial Spatial Planning Inspired by the “Mind Is Principle” Perspective. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2024, 54(4): 70-85.
1 习近平: 《决胜全面建成小康社会夺取新时代中国特色社会主义伟大胜利——在中国共产党第十九次全国代表大会上的报告》,2017年10月27日,http://www.gov.cn/zhuanti/2017-10/27/content_5234876.htm,2023年6月5日。 2 袁祖社、刘华清: 《新时代美好精神生活的三维价值追求》,《山东社会科学》2019年第8期,第5-10页。 3 刘沛林: 《新型城镇化建设中“留住乡愁”的理论与实践探索》,《地理研究》2015年第7期,第1205-1212页。 4 余亮亮、蔡银莺: 《国土空间规划管制与区域经济协调发展研究——一个分析框架》,《自然资源学报》2017年第8期,第1445-1456页。 5 曹世潮: 《心时代:一个情感化的世界及其经济图景》,北京:中国财政经济出版社,2002年。 6 郝庆、彭建、魏冶等: 《“国土空间”内涵辨析与国土空间规划编制建议》,《自然资源学报》2021年第9期,第2219-2247页。 7 傅婷婷、谷玮、王梦婧等: 《统筹发展与安全背景下的城市更新行动——基于社会空间融合的视角》,《中国土地科学》2023年第2期,第11-20页。 8 Rodrigue J. P., Dablanc L. & Giuliano G., “The freight landscape: convergence and divergence in urban freight distribution,” Journal of Transport and Land Use, Vol. 10, No. 1 (2017), pp. 557-572. 9 美]简·雅各布斯: 《美国大城市的死与生》(第2版),金衡山译,南京:译林出版社,2006年。 10 孙萌: 《后工业时代城市空间的生产:西方后现代马克思主义空间分析方法解读中国城市艺术区发展和规划》,《国际城市规划》2009年第6期,第60-65页。 11 Venkatesh S., Chicago’s Pragmatic Planners: American Sociology and the Myth of Community, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. 12 Downs R. M. & Meyer J. T., “Geography and the mind: an exploration of perceptual geography,” American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 22, No. 1 (1978), pp. 59-77. 13 孟凡君: 《美学、艺术与神经科学的交融互鉴——泽基神经美学研究的总体进路及反思》,《浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)》2023年第6期,第58-70页。 14 Panksepp J., Affective Neuroscience, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. 15 Dolan R. J., “Emotion, cognition, and behavior,” Science, Vol. 298, No. 5596 (2002), pp. 1191-1194. 16 Baumeister R. F., Vohs K. D. & DeWall C. N. et al., “How emotion shapes behavior: feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation,” Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 11, No. 2 (2007), pp. 167-203. 17 德]克劳斯·黑尔德: 《世界现象学》,倪梁康等译,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2003年。 18 Steven H., Questions of Perception: Phenomenology of Architecture, San Francisco: William Stout Publishers, 2006. 19 Ponty M., Phenomenology of Perception, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1962. 20 美]R. E. 帕克、E. N. 伯吉斯、R. D. 麦肯齐: 《城市社会学——芝加哥学派城市研究》,宋俊岭、郑也夫译,北京:商务印书馆,2012年。 21 唐子来、寇永霞: 《面向市场经济的城市土地资源配置:珠海实证研究》,《城市规划》2000年第10期,第21-25页。 22 李昊、朱天: 《从物质性规划到社会性规划——西方规划转型回顾及其对我国的启示》,见中国城市规划学会编: 《城乡治理与规划改革——2014中国城市规划年会论文集》,北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2014年,第230-239页。 23 York R., Eugene A. R. & Thomas D. et al., “Footprints on the earth: the environmental consequences of modernity,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 68, No. 2 (2003), pp. 279-300. 24 仲彬: 《社会主义市场经济条件下人的精神需求的特点》,《南京师大学报(社会科学版)》1999年第5期,第7页。 25 曹康、贾淑倩、郑卫: 《改革开放以来中国城市规划理论国际化历程研究》,《规划师》2019年第19期,第5-12页。 26 习近平: 《在第十八届中央纪律检查委员会第六次全体会议上的讲话》,2016年1月12日,https://www.ccps.gov.cn/xxsxk/zyls/201812/t20181216_125664_2.shtml,2023年6月5日。 27 李禹阶: 《论阳明心学的“心即理”与“心”非“理”——基于认识论的“心”“理”关系再思考》,《重庆师范大学学报(社会科学版)》2021年第4期,第67-76页。 28 陆永胜译注: 《传习录》,北京:中华书局,2021年。 29 董平: 《象山“心即理”说的本体论诠释》,《孔子研究》1999年第2期,第76-83页。 30 冯友兰: 《中国哲学简史》,北京:北京大学出版社,2013年。 31 李承贵: 《“心即理”的效应——兼及“心即理”的意识形态特性》,《社会科学研究》2021年第3期,第130-135页。 32 李浩: 《“心即理”与“良心自由”之比较研究——兼论近代中西伦理体系中的核心思想》,《内蒙古社会科学》2020年第3期,第74-80页。 33 Norberg-Schulz C., Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture, New York: Rizzoli, 1980. 34 王双桥: 《人学概论》,长沙:湖南大学出版社,2004年。 35 Marx K., Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, trans. by Milligan M., New York: Dover Publications, 2007. 36 吴次芳: 《国土空间规划的三个基本属性解读》,《土地科学动态》2019年第4期,第9-11页。 37 丁丽燕: 《“生活的艺术”与“诗意地栖居”——论林语堂闲适哲学的生态学价值》,《浙江学刊》2005年第1期,第4页。 38 吴次芳、叶艳妹、吴宇哲等: 《国土空间规划》,北京:地质出版社,2019年。 39 程大林、张京祥: 《城市更新:超越物质规划的行动与思考》,《城市规划》2004年第2期,第70-73页。 40 叶超、吴佩瑾: 《朝向人文主义的世界:段义孚的思想遗产》,《人文地理》2023年第2期,第44-50,96页。 41 肖剑平: 《王阳明“知行合一”本体论解读》,《求索》2010年第4期,第120-121,155页。 42 鲁枢元: 《生态时代的文化反思》,北京:东方出版社,2020年。 43 鲁枢元: 《生态批评的空间》,上海:华东师范大学出版社,2006年。 44 谷玮、王梦婧、吴次芳等: 《统筹发展与安全战略下的国土空间规划:范式、学理和实践逻辑的反思与回应》,《中国土地科学》2022年第6期,第11-20页。 45 Sara M. & Adams J., “Parenthood and psychological well-being,” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 13, No. 1 (2023), pp. 237-257. 46 James W., “The principles of psychology,” The American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 103, No. 4 (1990), pp. 433-447. 47 Gallagher S. & Zahavi D., “Phenomenological Approaches to Self-consciousness,” 2005-02-19, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/self-consciousness-phenomenological, 2023-06-05. 48 Perets H. B., Gal-Yam A. & Mazzali P. A. et al., “A faint type of supernova from a white dwarf with a helium-rich companion,” Nature, Vol. 465 (2010), pp. 322-325. 49 Helen E. H. & Camila G. S., “Rethinking ‘future nature’ through a transatlantic research collaboration: climate-adapted urban green infrastructure for human wellbeing and biodiversity,” Landscape Research, Vol. 48 (2023), pp. 460-476. 50 Katherine N. I., Jessica C. F. & Phoebe R. B. et al., “Bio-well: the development and validation of a human wellbeing scale that measures responses to biodiversity,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 85 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101921. 51 Kesebir P. & Diener E., “In pursuit of happiness: empirical answers to philosophical questions,” Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 3, No. 2 (2008), pp. 117-125. 52 Costanza R., Fisher B. & Ali S. et al., “Quality of life: an approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 61, No. 1 (2007), pp. 267-276. 53 陈明星、周园、汤青等: 《新型城镇化、居民福祉与国土空间规划应对》,《自然资源学报》2020年第6期,第1273-1287页。 54 德]海德格尔: 《人,诗意地安居:海德格尔语要》,上海:上海远东出版社,2004年。 55 德]黑格尔: 《美学》,北京:商务印书馆,2020年。 56 Richard S., “Entertainment: a question for aesthetics,” The British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol. 43, No. 3 (2003), pp. 289-307. 57 Wheeler S. M., Planning for Sustainability: Creating Livable, Equitable and Ecological Communities, London: Routledge, 2013. 58 Rose M. A., The Post-modern and the Post-industrial: A Critical Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. 59 Chiesura A., “The role of urban parks for the sustainable city,” Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 68, No. 1 (2004), pp. 129-138. 60 陈来仪、郑祥福: 《谈文化空间对幸福感的影响》,《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》2007年第3期,第139-140页。 61 冯雷: 《心理学路径对空间哲学的影响——从形而上学空间到知觉空间》,《马克思主义与现实》2008年第1期,第124-135页。 62 严标宾、郑雪、邱林: 《主观幸福感研究综述》,《自然辩证法通讯》2004第2期,第96-100,109页。 63 Charles M., Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design, London: Penguin, 2015. 64 杨艺瑶、朱文一: 《西方快乐街道理论研究初探》,《城市设计》2020年第3期,第36-53页。 65 Stefanie B., The Founding of Aesthetics in the German Enlightenment: The Art of Invention and the Invention of Art, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. 66 Moore R., “Ecology without nature: rethinking environmental aesthetics,” British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol. 42, No. 2 (2007), pp. 123-127. 67 李先逵、刘晓晖: 《诗意规划论》,北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2017年。 68 Creanza N., Kolodny O. & Feldman M. W., “Cultural evolutionary theory: how culture evolves and why it matters,” Anthropology, Vol. 114, No. 30 (2017), pp. 7782-7789. 69 Gintis H., “Gene-culture coevolution and the nature of human sociality,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Vol. 366, No. 1566 (2011), pp. 878-888.