中国社会史论战的学术定位再认识  

Rethinking the Nature of the Controversy over Chinese Social History

作　　者：陈峰[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东大学文史哲研究院副教授,济南250100

出　　处：《山东大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2009年第1期133-139,共7页Journal of Shandong University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：山东省社会科学规划研究项目(06CFZ006)

摘　　要：关于20世纪30年代的中国社会史论战,主流学界将其视之为一场马克思主义与非马克思主义之间的论争。这一定位以政治立场界分学术派别,武断地缩小了马克思主义史家范围,没有认清马克思主义史学的真正对手。毛泽东的"文化围剿"说是形成这一看法的重要依据。然而,若从纯粹学术的角度看,论战是在马克思主义的话语系统内进行的,是唯物史观的内部争论。这是因为:第一,依据马克思主义、唯物史观研治中国史是论战各方共同的理论立场;第二,论战各方基本遵循和使用了唯物史观的原理和术语。总之,视角在政治与学术之间的切换,造成了论战学术定位的巨大差异。The mainstream opinion regarding the controversy over Chinese social history as a fight between Marxism and non-Marxism. Such an opinion is heavily influenced by politics, that is, academic schools are classified by their political standings. Consequently, it significantly reduced the number of Marxist historians. It also failed to recognize the real adversary of Marxist history. The theory of ＂culture besiege＇of Mao Ze-dong is a very important basis for the view. However, judging from the pure academic angle, the controversy went on within the Marxist discourse system and was an internal debate over historical materialism. For one thing, both parties of the controversy upheld the principle of studying Chinese history according to Marxism and historical materialism. For another, both parties followed the principles and used the terms of historical materialism.

关 键 词：社会史论战 唯物史观 学术 政治 

分 类 号：K092[历史地理—历史学]