求真与致用的两全和两难——以顾颉刚、傅斯年等民国史家的选择为例  

Fulfillment and Failure of Historians' Dual Mission of Seeking both Truth and Utility:Exemplified by the Choices Made by Republican Historians such as Gu Jiegang and Fu Sixian

作　　者：李帆[1] Li Fan

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学历史学院

出　　处：《近代史研究》2018年第3期4-23,160,共21页Modern Chinese History Studies

基　　金：2016年度国家社会科学基金重点项目"清末民国时期的中国历史教科书与中华民族认同研究"(16AZS012)的阶段性成果;2015年度北京师范大学"中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助"项目成果

摘　　要：历史学本系求真之学,但当史家基于求真理念所形成的主张与社会现实需求相违时,围绕价值判断所生之困境则如影随形。民国年间,顾颉刚、傅斯年等史家皆曾遭逢此困境,其中以两个案例最具代表性:初中教科书《本国史》所涉之风波和关于"中华民族是一个"的学术论争。这两个案例集中体现了学者个体学术主张和时代需求之间的纠葛,其实质反映出史家求真与致用的双重情怀如何展现,学术追求和现实政治如何协调,专业研究和大众普及的关系如何处理等带有普遍意义的命题。抗战时期的顾颉刚、傅斯年等史家以不同方式实现了历史研究的价值理性,似在史学的求真与致用两途获得了统一,实现了两全,然此两全伴随着两难,内里深刻的矛盾纠结仍始终存在。When historians commitment to seeking truth conflicts with the practical needs of the society, they tend to be trapped in the dilemma caused by their bifurcated value judgment. In the Republican period, some historians such as Gu Jiegang and Fu Sinian experienced such a dilemma. Two exemplary controversies illustrate their paradox: the one on the middleschool textbook on “National History” and the other on the argument that “the Chinese nation is one.” These two cases show how scholars individual academic pursuits entangled with the needs of the age, and furthermore, they reflect the universal issues such as how to reconcile independent scholarship and pragmatic politics, how to deal with the relationship between specialized research and popular education, and so on. During the Chinese War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression, historians such as Gu Jiegang and Fu Sinian fulfilled the value ration of historical research in different ways, which seemed to find a way to unify their mission of seeking both truth and utility. However, the internal contradiction in their underlying dilemma still existed and frustrated them.

关 键 词：求真与致用 顾颉刚 傅斯年 费孝通 历史教科书 中华民族是一个 

分 类 号：K092[历史地理—历史学]