思想史的现代策略:论福柯、斯金纳、徐复观之同异

发布时间：2018-04-25 03:01

本文选题：思想史 + 福柯　；参考：《天府新论》2017年04期

【摘要】：现代史学的两项基础,即史料考证编纂方法与历史因果解释,已备受后现代史学质疑。福柯的谱系学与斯金纳、徐复观的思想史在这种语境下兴起,其均对历史稳定结构、观念与叙事的连贯性提出质疑。三者的核心手法主要有两点:首先,将权力和政治引入思想分析,注重讨论具体时空中话语、政治、行动的关系;其次,将以往连续性的学术史叙述解构为不同情境下的政治行动。由此其呈现概念本身的断裂性,以古代的知识作为现代的参照,挖掘断裂的历史面来批判现实。但是福柯与斯金纳、徐复观仍有区分,福柯注重权力的策略、网络、机制,而后两者的思想史则继承现代史学的史料分析手法,对作者主体性怀有敬重,且徐复观的经史之学更有助于纾解后现代的困境。
[Abstract]:The two bases of modern historiography, that is, the compilation method of historical data textual research and historical causality explanation, have been questioned by postmodern historiography. Foucault's genealogy and Skinner's and Xu Fuguan's ideological history rose in this context, which questioned the consistency of historical stability, ideas and narration. The core techniques of the three are as follows: first, introducing power and politics into ideological analysis, focusing on the relationship between discourse, politics, and action in specific time and space; and secondly, The continuous academic history of the past is deconstructed into political action in different contexts. Thus it presents the fracture of the concept itself and criticizes the reality with ancient knowledge as the modern reference and excavating the historical surface of the fracture. But Foucault and Skinner and Xu Fuguan still have a distinction. Foucault pays attention to the strategy, network and mechanism of power, while the ideological history of the latter two inherits the method of historical data analysis of modern history and respects the author's subjectivity. And Xu Fuguan's study of classics history is helpful to relieve the plight of post-modern.
【作者单位】：武汉大学哲学学院;
【基金】：中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助重点项目(编号:2015113010201)阶段性成果
【分类号】：K091

【相似文献】