摘要： 孙榆慧、孙国东在《跳出“平等和理性的双重狡计”》一文中揭示了平台资本主义下数字公共领域面临的结构性困境，然而其“双重狡计”的分析范式在强调平台资本与算法理性的宰制性力量时，亦有将数字公共领域描绘为一幅铁板一块的悲观图景之嫌，暗含一种结构决定论倾向，从而在一定程度上遮蔽了行动者的多元能动性、理性的复杂调适以及治理实践的动态博弈。因此，有必要超越“双重狡计”的二元对立框架，提出一个更具生成性与过程性的分析视角，即将数字公共领域概念化为一个多方力量持续互动、规则在协商与冲突中不断被重塑的“治理场域”。平台用户并非全然被动的“数字劳工”，而是日益展现出“平台公民”的能动面向，通过集体抵抗、文化共创与权利伸张，对平台权力进行反制。沟通理性并未被算法理性单向度地侵蚀殆尽，二者之间呈现出一种复杂的“算法博弈”与共生演化关系，催生了新的沟通策略与公共交往形态。数字公共领域的功能重塑并非简单诉诸“公共服务媒体”或“新公民”培养的外部方案，而应聚焦于场域内部的治理机制创新，其关键在于构建一种赋能多元主体、促进程序正义和培育协商性“惯习”的过程性治理框架。

关键词: 数字公共领域, 治理场域, 平台公民, 算法博弈, 惯习

Abstract: In their article “Breaking Free from the ‘Double Cunning of Equality and Rationality’”, Sun Yuhui and Sun Guodong expose the structural dilemmas faced by the digital public sphere under platform capitalism. However, their “double cunning” analytical paradigm, while emphasizing the dominant forces of platform capital and algorithmic rationality, risks portraying the digital public sphere as a monolithic and pessimistic scenario, implying a structural determinism that to some extent obscures the diverse agency of actors, the complex adaptation of rationality, and the dynamic game of governance practices. It is necessary to transcend the binary oppositional framework of the “double cunning” and propose a more generative and process-oriented analytical perspective, conceptualizing the digital public sphere as a “field of governance” where multiple forces continuously interact and rules are constantly reshaped through negotiation and conflict. Users are not entirely passive “digital laborers”; instead, they increasingly demonstrate the agentic aspects of “platform citizens”, countering platform power through collective resistance, cultural co-creation, and rights assertion. Communicative rationality has not been unilaterally eroded by algorithmic rationality; rather, they exhibit a complex “algorithmic game” and symbiotic evolutionary relationship, giving rise to new communication strategies and forms of public interaction. The functional reshaping of the digital public sphere cannot be simply achieved through external solutions such as promoting “public service media” or cultivating “new citizens”; instead, it should focus on innovation in governance mechanisms within the field. The key lies in constructing a processual governance framework that empowers diverse actors, promotes procedural justice, and cultivates deliberative “habitus”.

Key words: digital public sphere, governance field, platform citizen, algorithmic gaming, habitus