单向度历史视野的局限及其克服——关于中国近代史研究范式的演变与论争  

Limitation and Overcoming of One-dimensional Historical Views:on the Evolution and Argument of China's Modern History Research Paradigm

作　　者：牛方玉[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东大学(威海)法学院

出　　处：《山东大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2013年第4期147-160,共14页Journal of Shandong University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：教育部社科基金规划项目"20世纪中国马克思主义史学的学术地位研究"(项目编号10YJA770051)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：一个史学范式大体包含三个要素或三个层面,即价值信念、历史理念、叙事结构或方法。在中国近代史学史上,先后诞生了"革命化"与"现代化"两大研究范式。"革命化"范式侧重于表达主体性价值取向,"现代化"范式侧重于表达客体性价值取向。在交互性的视域范围内,两大范式互融互通,都有存在的理由。然而,把其中某一视角或视野片面化、绝对化,便失却了历史审视的科学性和公正性立场。在马克思主义史学范畴内重新审视两大范式之间的关系,可以说两大范式之间既是一种时代性关系,又是一种结构性关系。而后者,更具有根本性。克服单向度历史视野的局限,需要重新回到马克思主义史学审视历史的双向视野,准确把握主体性价值与客体性价值既对立又统一的"度"量。A history paradigm is composed of three elements or levels by and large,that is,values and beliefs,historical views,and narrative structure or style.In the modern history of China,there successively appeared two research paradigms:revolutionization and modernization.Revolutionization paradigm emphasizes subjective value orientation,and modernization underlines objective value orientation.Within the interactive fusion of horizons between the two paradigms,they exchange with each other and prove the reason for their existence.However,making any of the perspectives or views absolute or one-sided would lead to losing of the scientific and fair position of history examination.Reexamining the relationship between the two paradigms within the Marxist historiography aspects,the article suggests that the relationship between the two paradigms is not only contemporary,but also structural.Furthermore,the latter is more fundamental.To overcome the limits of one-dimensional historical views,we should return to the bilateral views of Marxist historiography examination and accurately grasp the contradictory and interdependent degree between the subjective value orientation and objective value orientation.

关 键 词：中国近代史 革命化 现代化 主体性价值 客体性价值 范式 

分 类 号：K25[历史地理—历史学]