黄宗智“实践历史”研究方法的两个逻辑困境  

Two Logical Dilemmas on Philip Huang's Research Method of“Practical History”

作　　者：郑莉[1] 杨国庆[1] 

机构地区：[1]哈尔滨工程大学人文社会科学学院,黑龙江哈尔滨150001

出　　处：《学术界》2015年第12期108-117,326,共10页Academics

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目"韦伯与中国文化"(14ASH002);哈尔滨工程大学中央高校自由探索项目"中国传统法律文化‘多值逻辑’与现代法治建设"(HEUCF20151306)的研究成果

摘　　要：为了建构符合中国社会实际的概念和理论,黄宗智提出了一种"实践历史"的经验式研究方法;这种研究方法包含从悖论现象、实践逻辑、理论对话到理论建构的具体研究步骤。从分析这些具体研究步骤中可以发现,这种研究方法存在着两个逻辑上的困境:一是警惕西方中心主义的理论表达与践履西方中心主义的理论实践之间的逻辑困境,一是为"实践逻辑"注入道德理念的良好期待与实现之不可能性之间的逻辑困境。本文从分析这两个逻辑上的困境出发,指出我们不能期待依赖西方知识传统来建构分析中国社会的概念和理论,我们只能在西方理论的参照下依靠自己的知识传统来进行概念和理论的构建。To build a set of concepts and theories that match the social reality of China,Philip Huang proposes a kind of empirical research methods on'practical history'.This kind of research method tries to cover all the research steps including paradox phenomenon,practice logic,theory dialogue and theoretical construction.However,after analyzing these steps,we can find at least two logic dilemmas with this method.One is the logical contradiction between alerting the expression of western centralism and practicing the western theory,the other the logical contradiction between the good wish of'practical logic'leading to moral ideal and the impossibility in reality.This article starts from analyzing these two dilemmas to make a point that we can't rely on western traditional knowledge to build concepts and theories to study China society.Instead,we have to rely on our own traditional knowledge to do so with the help of western theory.

关 键 词：实践历史 实体理性 实践逻辑 理想图景 

分 类 号：B812[哲学宗教—逻辑学]