【摘要】：一、馬克思主義歷史學和海外中國學本不在同一層面,卻因同樣需要不斷吸取全人類的最新智慧、需要"實證"及"解讀"歷史現(xiàn)象而存在諸多共同點,并因中國研究而融入中國歷史學。二、將馬克思主義歷史學等同于馬克思主義,將中國大陸的歷史學等同于馬克思主義歷史學,將某些流派及范式視為海外中國學的基本潮流及范式并試圖將其奉為判斷學術(shù)價值的標準,都是片面的。三、中國歷史學與中國歷史一樣,有其自身的特點,學術(shù)研究必須與國際"接軌",卻不能和中國"脫軌"。四、當前中國歷史學研究已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)并將持續(xù)如下三個動向:拓展視野,開辟新的領(lǐng)域;博采眾長,創(chuàng)建新的學科;強行突破,在傳統(tǒng)領(lǐng)域攻占新的制高點。在這個過程中,國學為體、馬學為基、西學為用的基本格局也逐漸明朗。
[Abstract]:First, Marxist history and overseas Chinese studies are not on the same plane, but because of the same need to constantly absorb the latest wisdom of all mankind, the need for "empirical" and "interpretation" of historical phenomena and there are many common ground. And as a result of the study of China and the integration of Chinese history. Second, to equate Marxist history with Marxism and the history of mainland China with Marxist history. It is unilateral to regard some schools and paradigms as the basic trends and paradigms of overseas Chinese studies and try to regard them as criteria for judging academic value. Third, Chinese history and Chinese history have their own characteristics, academic research must be "in line with the international", but can not be "derailed" with China. Fourth, the research of Chinese history has appeared and will continue to follow the following three trends: to expand the field of vision, to open up new fields; to learn from the masses, to create new disciplines; to break through by force; to seize the new commanding heights in the traditional fields. In this process, the basic pattern of Chinese culture as body, Ma as the basis and western learning as the use is gradually clear.
【作者單位】： 江西師范大學歷史系;
【分類號】：K091

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 方志遠;谷霽光先生的學術(shù)經(jīng)歷與學術(shù)個性[J];江西社會科學;2005年09期

2 王學典;;“二十世紀中國史學”是如何被敘述的——對學術(shù)史書寫客觀性的一種探討[J];清華大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2008年02期

3 楊念群;美國中國學研究的范式轉(zhuǎn)變與中國史研究的現(xiàn)實處境[J];清史研究;2000年04期

4 何平;近年來西方漢學清史研究若干范式[J];史學月刊;2005年08期

5 嚴紹t，

本文編號：2131202