“Globalized traditionalists” and “provincial globalizers” in non-Western intellectual fields: a multiscalar field analysis of the cultural fever debate

Abstract

Abstract This study’s primary objective is to investigate why “globalized traditionalists” (i.e., intellectuals who are highly globalized but adopt a traditionalist stance) and “provincial globalizers” (i.e., intellectuals who are hardly globalized but adopt a globalizing stance) are prevalent in some non-Western intellectual fields. These two groups feature counterintuitive intellectual characteristics and defy current studies’ findings on intellectual conflict. They have recurred in grand debates on Chinese culture since the 1920s; intellectual historians cannot explain them. This study’s secondary objective is to introduce the “multiscalar field perspective” and showcase its utility for the global sociology of knowledge. This study’s data were collected from primary documentary sources of the Cultural Fever debate, secondary studies, and in-depth interviews with participants of the debate.