近60年历史作用标准与道德标准关系问题述评——以20世纪后半期中国大陆史学为重心

发布时间：2018-03-02 19:27

本文选题：历史人物评价　切入点：历史作用　出处：《兰州学刊》2011年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：自20世纪50年代以来,历史作用标准与道德标准之间的关系主要表现为:历史作用标准被首肯,而道德标准被忽略;在肯定历史作用是首要或根本标准的前提下,有限地主张道德标准;以历史进步标准消除道德标准的独立性;把道德标准附庸于生产力发展标准;以历史作用标准为历史人物翻案。这些观念及其在历史人物评价中的实践,造成了对历史人物评价的诸多困境。至于对如何处理两者之间的矛盾问题,文章认为:首先,不一定非得给历史人物做出一个整体性的评价,特别是对历史人物在事功和道德方面各有千秋,难以作出总体评价时;其次,不能因为历史人物在事功方面的贡献而否定、忽略、开脱其道德的不足与问题,反之亦然;最后,评价历史人物,并非以"成王败寇"论英雄。
[Abstract]:Since 1950s, the relationship between the historical function standard and the moral standard has been mainly manifested as: the historical function standard has been accepted, while the moral standard has been ignored. Limited advocacy of moral standards; the elimination of the independence of moral standards by the standard of historical progress; the subordination of moral standards to the standards of the development of productive forces; the reversal of cases by historical figures based on the criterion of historical role; these concepts and their practice in the evaluation of historical figures, As to how to deal with the contradiction between the two, the article thinks: first of all, it is not necessary to make a holistic evaluation of historical figures. In particular, when it is difficult to make a general assessment of historical figures in terms of their merits and morals; secondly, they should not be denied, ignored and excused from their moral shortcomings and problems because of their contributions to their achievements; and finally, vice versa. To evaluate historical figures, we should not discuss heroes in terms of "becoming a king and losing the invaders."
【作者单位】：南开大学历史学院;
【分类号】：K03

【参考文献】