董时进是民国时期乡村建设学派的一员,他对当时乡村建设的关怀,主要集中在如何“治贫”和如何“治愚”上。他的看法在当时具有一定的典型性,是一种与旧有社会运行逻辑完全不同的新路径。这一路径以发展合作社为重要手段,但消泯了传统乡村生产中宗族和家庭的地位,遭遇到乡村地区浓厚的“乡土”性特征的“民情”的抵抗;而以董时进为代表的知识分子在当时社会结构中的游离地位,使其无法真正贯彻其建设策略,反而令新式知识分子、乡土精英和虚弱的国家政权三者呈现出暧昧纠缠的复杂关系。外来的建设路径和作为“外来者”的知识分子,在没有强力的国家政权的保障下,最终使乡村建设运动陷入了困境。当时的乡村问题,在当下的中国乡村依然存续着,这正是董时进等人观点的合理性之所在;而传统伦理对现代性困境的补益之可能,也许更加凸显出涵养“新礼俗”、“新民情”的重要性。 Dong Shijin was a member of the village construction school during the Republic of China. His concern for the village construction at that time mainly concentrated on how to cure the poverty and how to cure the fool. His view was typical at that time, and it was a completely different new path from that of the old society. This approach takes the development of cooperatives as an important measure, but eliminates the clan and family status in traditional rural production and encounters the resistance of the “local people” with strong “nativeity” characteristics in the rural areas. However, The representative intellectuals’ free status in the social structure of the time prevented them from truly carrying out their construction strategy. On the contrary, the complex relationship between the neo-intellectuals, native elites and weak state power was ambiguously entangled. The external construction path and the intellectuals who are “outsiders” eventually brought the rural construction movement into a dilemma without the guarantee of a mighty state power. At that time, the rural problems still existed in the current Chinese countryside. This is exactly the rationality of Dong Shijin’s viewpoint. However, the possibility of the traditional ethics in replenishing the dilemma of modernity may further highlight the “new customs and customs” , “New People ” importance.