本文選題：錢穆 + 清代學術史��； 參考：《南京大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文主旨通過細讀文本入手,梳理相關文獻,嘗試勾勒出錢穆(1895-1990)學術思想的發(fā)展進程。錢穆的學思進程可分三期：第一期,從古文轉治理學繼而轉向考據學(上個世紀初在中小學教書至三十年代初大學任教前)；第二期,從樸學再轉向理學(三十年代初入大學任教至四十年代離開大陸前)；第三期,從理學到晚年歸宗朱子(四十年代末旅居港臺至九十年代初去世止)。此文以錢穆研究清代學術的治學歷程為主,對其學思進程中若干關節(jié)點進行考察,從而探討其學術思想的三期發(fā)展過程及相關問題。全文共分四章,以下簡要介紹各章論述要旨： 第一章以《師友雜憶》、《墨子》等撰述為考察中心,通過探討錢穆對其早年治學次第的建構、墨學的研究,闡述他從古文轉治理學再轉向考據學的發(fā)展過程及其原因。錢穆轉向考據學,源于當時風靡學術界的諸子研究,而其諸子研究又導源于胡適《中國哲學史大綱》所展示的史學革命典范。錢穆深受此典范影響,但又能借鑒胡適“科學的方法”與梁啟超等學人的思想資源,并超越胡適的研究典范,最終建構出自成一格的諸子學研究體系,在三十年代以考據學名家,躋身主流學術界。 第二章以《論語要略》、《先秦諸子系年》、《老子辨》等撰述為考察中心,以二三十年代的《老子》成書問題之爭論作為切入點,探討錢穆轉向考據學的具體過程、考據觀點的形成原因及相關問題。因錢穆早期撰述不足徵,目前學界對其早年轉向考據學及考據觀點形成等具體細節(jié)的論述,基本上都處于語焉不詳的狀態(tài)。此章通過梳理相關文獻,同時對錢穆撰述的不同版本進行對勘,發(fā)掘出被作者刪掉的關鍵材料,解讀論述中的言外之意,對此問題進行考辨,并闡發(fā)其學術意義。錢穆的《老子》研究有兩個重要觀點：一者,《老子》成書后于《莊子》內篇；二者,孔子不撰《易傳》。錢穆觀點的形成,一方面是其自身學思進程發(fā)展的必然結果；另一方面又與當時各種新舊思潮,尤其與梁啟超和胡適二人觀點的影響是分不開的。 第三章以《國學概論》、《中國近三百年學術史》、《清儒學案》、《中國學術思想史論叢(八)》等撰述為考察中心,通過探討三十年代錢穆清代學術研究體系之建構,及其與梁啟超、胡適思想觀點的差異等問題,從而闡述其第二期學思進程,即從樸學再轉向理學的變化過程及相關問題。錢穆的清代學術研究有三個重點,其一,提出黃宗羲亦是清學開山之一,反對顧炎武是清學唯一開山說；其二,提出吳皖不分幟,且重新評價乾嘉考據學；其三,提出“每轉益進”說,取代“理學反動”說。 第四章以錢穆《中國學術思想史論叢(八)》、《素書樓余瀋》等撰述為考察中心,通過細讀文本,比較《論叢八》版本流傳與差異、文章增刪修改等具體情況,從而探討錢穆旅居港臺后,他在大陸時期所建構清代學術研究體系的后續(xù)發(fā)展變化,以及他晚年學術思想從理學到以朱子學術作為最后歸宿的轉折過程及相關問題。 以上所述,大致概括了錢穆三期學思進程的主要范疇。文章撰寫方面,則以鋪陳材料與考訂分析相結合,將錢穆撰述中最主要與鮮為人知的材料提煉出來進行組織,嘗試還原與展現錢穆學思進程的若干關節(jié)點,勾勒其發(fā)展脈絡。為此,本篇還針對各章內容需求,制作成若干附表,附錄于各章節(jié)后,以供相關論述之參考。另外,為便于對錢穆學術思想發(fā)展進行考察,筆者根據所掌握材料,對其生平著述版本、撰述與刊載時間、編纂情況、學術活動、學思進程等問題,進行較為詳密的考訂,糾正錢穆《師友雜憶》的誤記以及目前研究的若干失誤,編纂成八萬余字的《錢穆著述編年》,附錄于全文后,為學術界的錢穆研究“拾遺補闕”及解決相關問題。
[Abstract]:The main purpose of this article is to review the relevant literature and try to outline the development process of Qian Muwei (1895-1990) academic thought. The course of Qian Muwei's academic thought can be divided into three stages: the first stage, from the ancient literature to the textual research and then to the textual research (before the beginning of the last century, before the primary and secondary school teaching to the beginning of the early 30s); the second period, from the park and again In the third period, the third period, from the beginning of the year to 40s, was returned to Zong Zhu Xi (after the death of Hong Kong and Taiwan to the beginning of 90s in the late 40s). This article is based on the study of the academic history of the Qing Dynasty by Qian Muwei. The three stage of development and related issues are divided into four chapters.
The first chapter is written as the center of investigation, including "teachers and friends", "Mo-tse >" and so on. By discussing the construction of the secondary school in his early years, Qian Muwei studies the development process and the reasons of his transition from the ancient Chinese to the textual research. Qian Muwei turned to the textual research, which originated from all the scholars in the academic circles at that time. Qian Muwei was deeply influenced by Hu Shi's outline of the history of China's philosophy of philosophy. But Qian Muwei was deeply influenced by this model, but it could also learn from Hu Shi's "scientific method" and Liang Qichao's ideological resources, and surpassed Hu Shi's model of research, and finally constructed a systematic study system of the scholars. In the 30s, it took the famous scholars into the mainstream study. The operation boundary.
The second chapter, based on the theory of "the Analects of Confucius", "the year of the pre-Qin scholars", "Lao Zi's discrimination" and so on as the investigation center, takes the dispute of the question of "Lao Tzu >" as the starting point in 20s and 30s, to discuss the specific process of Qian Muwei's turning to the textual research, to examine the reasons for the formation of the viewpoint and the related problems. Because of the deficiency of Qian Muwei's early writing, the academic circles now turn to his early turn. The elaboration of specific details, such as textual research and the formation of textual opinions, is basically in an unknown state of speech. By combing the relevant documents, this chapter explores the different versions of Qian Muwei's writings, excavates the key materials that the author has deleted, interprets the meaning of the discourse, examines the question, and elucidates its academic significance. There are two important points of view in the study of Lao Tzu. One, "Lao Tzu" after the book in Chuang-tzu, and the two, Confucius does not write < Yi Zhuan >. The formation of Qian Muwei's viewpoint is the inevitable result of the development of his own learning process; on the other hand, it is inseparable from the influence of all kinds of new and old thoughts, especially the views of Liang Qichao and Hu Shi, in particular. Yes.
The third chapter, based on the introduction of the outline of Chinese studies, the academic history of China in the past three hundred years, the case of the Qing Dynasty and the history of Chinese academic thought (eight), has been written as an investigation center, by discussing the construction of the academic research system of Qian Muwei in the Qing Dynasty in 30s and the differences between Liang Qichao and Hu Shi's ideas. There are three key points in the study of Qian Muwei's Qing Dynasty academic research. First, it is suggested that Huang Zongxi is one of the opening mountains of the Qing Dynasty, and the opposition to Gu Yanwu is the only opening theory of the Qing Dynasty, and secondly, to put forward Wu and Anhui, and to reevaluate the textual research of Qianlong and Qianlong, and thirdly, to put forward the theory of "every revolution" to replace the "reactionaries of Neo Confucianism". "Say.
The fourth chapter, based on Qian Muwei < eight of Chinese academic thought history (eight) >, "Shu Shu Lou Yu >" as an investigation center, compares and compares the spread and difference between the version eight > version and the revision of the text, and then discusses the subsequent development and changes of the academic research system of the Qing Dynasty, which he constructed in the mainland of Hong Kong after Qian Muwei was in Hong Kong and Taiwan. And his academic thoughts in his later years, from the theory to the turning process of Zhu Xi's academic end as well as related issues.
As described above, the main category of Qian Muwei's three period learning process is roughly summed up. In the writing of the article, we combine the material with the textual research, and organize the most important and little-known materials in Qian Muwei's writing, try to restore and show some of the joint points of the Mu Xuesi process and outline its development context. In addition to the requirements of each chapter, a number of appendices are made and appendix to each chapter for reference. In addition, in order to facilitate the investigation of the development of Qian Muwei's academic thought, the author makes a more detailed description of his life, writing and editing, academic activities and course of thinking in order to facilitate the investigation of the development of academic thought. To correct Qian Muwei's miscellaneous reminiscences and some mistakes in the present study, compiling more than 80 million words of "Qian Muwei writing", after the appendix to the full text, for the academic circle of Qian Muwei to "pick up the gap" and solve the related problems.
【學位授予單位】：南京大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：G256;B2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 陳祖武;錢賓四先生與《清儒學案》[J];北京師范大學學報(社會科學版);2004年01期

2 徐雁平;錢穆先生的清代學術思想史研究 以《中國學術思想史論叢》(八)為例[J];博覽群書;2005年03期

3 趙燦鵬;;錢穆早年的幾篇佚文[J];讀書;2010年03期

4 廖名春;錢穆孔子與《周易》關系說考辨[J];河北學刊;2004年02期

5 羅檢秋;;學術調融與晚清禮學的思想活力[J];近代史研究;2007年05期

6 路新生;錢穆《中國近三百年學術史》中幾個值得商榷的問題[J];歷史教學問題;2001年03期

7 劉巍;二三十年代清學史整理中錢穆與梁啟超胡適的學術思想交涉──以戴震研究為例[J];清華大學學報(哲學社會科學版);1999年04期

8 羅志田;;道咸“新學”與清代學術史研究——《論中國近三百年學術史》導讀[J];四川大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2006年05期

9 陳勇;;錢穆與新考據派關系略論——以錢穆與傅斯年的交往為考察中心[J];上海大學學報(社會科學版);2007年05期

10 陳勇;“不知宋學,則無以評漢宋之是非”——錢穆與清代學術史研究[J];史學理論研究;2003年01期

，

本文編號：2035695