关于历史考据方法的几点辩正  

Several Arguments on the Method of Historical Examination

作　　者：乔治忠[1,2] QIAO Zhi-zhong(School of Social Development,Langfiang Normal University,Langfang Hebei 065000,China;School of History,Nankai University,Tianjin 300071,China)

机构地区：[1]廊坊师范学院社会发展学院 [2]南开大学历史学院

出　　处：《廊坊师范学院学报（社会科学版）》2019年第4期51-59,共9页Journal of Langfang Normal University(Social Sciences Edition)

摘　　要：在历史学的发展中,历史考据及其方法,具有十分重要的地位。然而,关于历史考据,学术界流行不少似是而非的观念,对于考据方法的概括,也不乏粗浅的命题,这些都有必要予以辩正。诸如"孤证不为定说"的说法,片面而不利于治学,在所谓"默证法""二重证据法"等问题上,也多年流行着是非颠倒的论断。人们往往偏信出土资料,往往盲从用特殊知识与技能考证的结论,这都是需要克服的倾向。对于历史考据,不应当仅仅视为低层次的治史方式,不能单线地认为历史考据服务于宏观评论,实际上历史考据与理论思维之间,是互动互益、互有渗透的,历史考据,同样可以运用辩证逻辑这一高级的思维方式。In the development of historiography,the historical examination and its methods have a very important position.However,in the academic community,there are many implausible ideas about the historical evidence.For the generalization of the method of examination,there are some crude propositions that need correction.For example,the"lonely evidence is not fixed"argument is one-sided and not conducive to governance;as for the so-called"silent evidence","double evidence law"and other issues,there have been confused arguments for many years.People tend to believe in unearthed data,often blindly follow the conclusion of the test with special knowledge and skills,which is a tendency to be overcome.The historical data should not only be regarded as a low-level way of history,or single-line to think that the historical evidence serves macro-comments.In fact,there is interactive mutual benefit and mutual penetration between the historical test and theoretical thinking.Similarly,historical examination can use this advanced way of thinking-dialectical logic.

关 键 词：历史考据 逻辑 理念 特殊知识与技能 

分 类 号：K05[历史地理—历史学]