历史比较研究的合理性及其限度  

The Rationality of Comparative Study in History and Its Limits

作　　者：黄越 蒋重跃[1] HUANG Yue;JIANG Chongyue(School of History,Beijing Normal University,Beijing 100875,China)

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学历史学院,北京100875

出　　处：《山西大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2023年第5期120-130,共11页Journal of Shanxi University(Philosophy and Social Science Edition)

基　　金：国家社科基金委托专项项目“新时代中国特色历史学基本理论问题研究”(18VXK006)。

摘　　要：比较研究是历史研究者经常使用的方法。20世纪80年代以来,中国学者对于历史比较研究的合理性及其限度做了深入思考,提出了一系列观点,包括:通过比较同异以发现历史规律或本质是比较方法的基本内容;历史比较研究方法所具有的“辨同异”构成了世界历史研究“明一多”的充分必要条件;事物的本质是可公度性与不可公度性的统一,种概念加属差的本质定义就是探寻事物本质的比较研究方法。但是,也有人认为不同文明间的许多重要社会现象没有可比性,因为它们只是偶然的或经验(特别是格式塔或视觉)意义上的,就像托马斯·库恩所说的鸭子和兔子没有可公度性一样。不过,我们所说的比较研究是超越经验的概念性思维。亚里士多德在《范畴篇》中用种概念加属差表现主体(主词)的属性,就是通过对概念在同种之属间的同异做比较研究以呈现事物本质的方法;黑格尔认为本质是存在投射到中介后的反映,探寻事物的本质其实是在做与中介的比较研究。历史事件/现象是经验的,但历史研究却必须上升到本质和概念的领域,这是历史比较研究之所以可能的理论根据。不过,作为概念思维活动,比较研究在某种意义上又具有知性属性,难免会有一定的抽象性,会有与经验的历史相疏离的倾向,因此,它的合理性也是有限度的。Comparative research is a method often used by historical researchers.Since the 1980s,some Chinese scholars have thought deeply about the rationality of comparative study in history and its limits,and put forward a series of views,such as:Discovering historical laws or essences by comparing similarities and contrasting differences is the basic content of comparative method;The“distinction between similarities and differences”of comparative study method in history constitutes a sufficient and necessary conditions for the study of world history whose goal is to clarify“One and ones”;The essence of everything is the unity of being commeasurable and in-commeasurable,and the essential definition method of a genus plus the difference of species is a comparative study to explore the nature of things.However,it has also been argued that many important social phenomena among civilizations are not comparable because they are only incidental or in an experiential(especially Gestalt or visual)sense,just as Thomas Kuhn argues that ducks and rabbits cannot be commeasured.However,what we call comparative study is conceptual thinking that goes beyond experience.Aristotle used the concept genus plus difference of species to express the properties of the subject(subject word)in his Categories,that is,by comparing the similarities and contrasting differences between species of concepts in order to search for the nature of subjects;Hegel believed that essence is the reflection of some feature of existing things which has been projected onto a mediation,and exploring the nature of things is actually doing a comparative study between an existing being and its mediation.Historical events/phenomena are empirical,but historical study must rise to the realm of essence and concept,which is the theoretical basis for the possibility of comparative historical research.However,as a conceptual thinking,comparative research in history has intellectual characteristics in a certain sense.Therefore,it is bound to be of certain abstract natu

关 键 词：比较方法 可公度性 不可公度性 世界历史 范式 本质 

分 类 号：K01[历史地理—历史学]