《史记》为何不载董仲舒的“三对策”  

Why Tian Ren San Ce of Tung Chung⁃shu Was Undocumented in Shiji

作　　者：王建军[1] WANG Jianjun

机构地区：[1]华南师范大学政治与公共管理学院,广东广州510631

出　　处：《现代教育论丛》2020年第4期17-24,共8页Modern Education Review

摘　　要：西汉时期,董仲舒应贤良方正举,根据汉武帝的要求,对策三篇,提出了有关文教政策的三条建议,今人将其概括为“兴太学”“重选举”“罢黜百家,独尊儒术”。但《史记》却对此事只字未提。本文试从司马迁教育理念的角度来探讨其中原因。从《史记》记载的事实看,董仲舒的“三对策”对汉代教育发展并无直接影响。更为重要的是,汉代教育与汉儒人格都已丧失了先秦儒家教育精神,汉武帝推行的“独尊儒术”政策偏离了传统文教政策的方向,而董仲舒的“三对策”对此未作任何回应,反而为其推波助澜。这种态度与司马迁的教育立场相悖,这应该是《史记》对此事只字未提的深层原因。Tung Chung-shu,in response to the requirements of Emperor Wu-di of the Han Dynasty,put forward Three Ce concerning cultural and educational policies in the examination of Hsien Liang Fang Cheng which were summarized as"establishment of Imperial university","importance of examination"and "Removing Hundreds of Schools of Thought and Respecting Confucianism Exclusively". But Shiji said nothing about it. This paper tries to explore the reasons from the perspective of educational idea of Sima Qian. Three Ce of Tung Chungshu had no direct influence on education in Han Dynasty according to the facts recorded in Shiji. More importantly,both Confucian Scholars’ personality spirit and the principle of education in the Han Dynasty had lost the spirit of Confucianism in pre-Qin. The policy of " Respecting Confucianism Exclusively "carried out by Emperor Wudi deviated from traditional cultural and educational policies. Three Ce of Tung Chung-shu contributed to it instead of responding to it. Shiji never mentioned this matter because of Sima Qian’s opposite educational standpoint.

关 键 词：司马迁 《史记》 董仲舒 “三对策” 

分 类 号：G40-09[文化科学—教育学原理]