马克思主义历史学与海外中国学
发布时间：2018-07-18 07:35
【摘要】：一、马克思主义历史学和海外中国学本不在同一层面,却因同样需要不断吸取全人类的最新智慧、需要"实证"及"解读"历史现象而存在诸多共同点,并因中国研究而融入中国历史学。二、将马克思主义历史学等同于马克思主义,将中国大陆的历史学等同于马克思主义历史学,将某些流派及范式视为海外中国学的基本潮流及范式并试图将其奉为判断学术价值的标准,都是片面的。三、中国历史学与中国历史一样,有其自身的特点,学术研究必须与国际"接轨",却不能和中国"脱轨"。四、当前中国历史学研究已经出现并将持续如下三个动向:拓展视野,开辟新的领域;博采众长,创建新的学科;强行突破,在传统领域攻占新的制高点。在这个过程中,国学为体、马学为基、西学为用的基本格局也逐渐明朗。
[Abstract]:First, Marxist history and overseas Chinese studies are not on the same plane, but because of the same need to constantly absorb the latest wisdom of all mankind, the need for "empirical" and "interpretation" of historical phenomena and there are many common ground. And as a result of the study of China and the integration of Chinese history. Second, to equate Marxist history with Marxism and the history of mainland China with Marxist history. It is unilateral to regard some schools and paradigms as the basic trends and paradigms of overseas Chinese studies and try to regard them as criteria for judging academic value. Third, Chinese history and Chinese history have their own characteristics, academic research must be "in line with the international", but can not be "derailed" with China. Fourth, the research of Chinese history has appeared and will continue to follow the following three trends: to expand the field of vision, to open up new fields; to learn from the masses, to create new disciplines; to break through by force; to seize the new commanding heights in the traditional fields. In this process, the basic pattern of Chinese culture as body, Ma as the basis and western learning as the use is gradually clear.
【作者单位】： 江西师范大学历史系;
【分类号】：K091
[Abstract]:First, Marxist history and overseas Chinese studies are not on the same plane, but because of the same need to constantly absorb the latest wisdom of all mankind, the need for "empirical" and "interpretation" of historical phenomena and there are many common ground. And as a result of the study of China and the integration of Chinese history. Second, to equate Marxist history with Marxism and the history of mainland China with Marxist history. It is unilateral to regard some schools and paradigms as the basic trends and paradigms of overseas Chinese studies and try to regard them as criteria for judging academic value. Third, Chinese history and Chinese history have their own characteristics, academic research must be "in line with the international", but can not be "derailed" with China. Fourth, the research of Chinese history has appeared and will continue to follow the following three trends: to expand the field of vision, to open up new fields; to learn from the masses, to create new disciplines; to break through by force; to seize the new commanding heights in the traditional fields. In this process, the basic pattern of Chinese culture as body, Ma as the basis and western learning as the use is gradually clear.
【作者单位】： 江西师范大学历史系;
【分类号】：K091
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前5条
1 方志远;谷霁光先生的学术经历与学术个性[J];江西社会科学;2005年09期
2 王学典;;“二十世纪中国史学”是如何被叙述的——对学术史书写客观性的一种探讨[J];清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2008年02期
3 杨念群;美国中国学研究的范式转变与中国史研究的现实处境[J];清史研究;2000年04期
4 何平;近年来西方汉学清史研究若干范式[J];史学月刊;2005年08期
5 严绍t，
本文编号：2131202
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/sxll/2131202.html
