Analyzing And Responding To The Dilemma Of Post-doctoral Positioning In China

China’s postdoctoral system is formulated as a special zone of the planned economic system, which contains reform demands of personnel, technology and education system. From the perspective of the allocation of talents, the government has granted postdoctoral "the official state employees" for protecting the legitimate interests in the process of postdoctoral mobility, which is a legitimate identity positioning. In the aspect of science and technology, the positioning is based on the identity positioning of "high-tech talent". Postdoctoral participate in studies with research projects as the basis, who are high creative, high mobile, high collaborative and strong timed. Finally, the original intention of China’s postdoctoral system is to select and train academic technology leaders, which makes post-doctoral also contain the identity position of the "learner". Summarizing the positioning logic of postdoctoral system in the top aspect and bottom aspect, we can find that postdoctoral are "young scholars with mobility arranged by the government", which is a unified positioning based on a macro-perspective. However, with the gradual establishment of the socialist market economic system, reforms have generated the inertia, which resulted that some reality developed beyond the steps of the institutional reform and the advantages of post-doctoral system as a special zone began to be weakened. The unified positioning based on a macro-perspective begin to be deconstructed by micro-demands, and a bottom-up positioning is gradually germinate. University employment system reform, the rise of corporate postdoctoral, the diverse needs of postdoctoral individuals and doctoral stations and the different disciplines, different regional economic development require a non-equilibrium micro-positioning of post-doctoral construction.Postdoctoral is a complex group involving multi-class interest demands. Different interest groups will form many kinds of Special Fields dominated by these interest groups. Only if we put postdoctoral in these Fields and recognize the decisive capital type, power elite and behavior path, can we understand the reasonableness of postdoctoral positioning conflict, which seems to be contradictory. Postdoctoral in fact is under the common influence of the Political Field and Economic Field. Political Field is the original field that generates postdoctoral, and in which the Power capital as leading role is adapted to the attribute of postdoctoral that is considered as "public product" and positions postdoctoral as public interest people. The public interest requires for a top-down positioning way leaded by country. The border of the Economic field is expanding unceasingly in postdoctoral area. The competitive of economic capital is adapted to the attribute of the postdoctoral considered as "private product" and positions postdoctoral as micro interests people. The microscopic interest demands require for a bottom-up way leaded by market.By analyzing the basis of the postdoctoral existence we can find that postdoctoral Field is actually a growing autonomy of the sub-scientific Field, the dominance of cultural capital required for post-doctoral "scientific man" position. In this post-doctoral re-set on the basis of positioning system, must respect the postdoctoral Field of science, change ideas; recognize the impact of the different external and implement category management; understand the differences among these Field habits, adjust postdoctoral management authority; pay attention to the role of economic capital, establish a diversified investment channels; strengthen the autonomy of post-doctoral Field, and improve social trust for postdoctoral groups.