本文選題：科學(xué)與人生觀論戰(zhàn) + 科學(xué)��； 參考：《湖北大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：科學(xué)與人生觀論戰(zhàn)是20世紀(jì)思想史上一個非常重要的事件,它的發(fā)生有著深刻的國內(nèi)、外背景。從國內(nèi)背景上看,這場論戰(zhàn)是自1840年以來中國向西方學(xué)習(xí)的一種延續(xù)和深化。從國外背景上看,該論戰(zhàn)又受到了一戰(zhàn)后西方反理性主義思潮的影響。而論戰(zhàn)發(fā)生的直接原因則是張君勱于1923年2月14號在清華大學(xué)發(fā)表的關(guān)于“人生觀”的演講。 在張君勱的演講登報之后,其好友丁文江對該文中的諸多觀點頗不滿意,并隨即發(fā)文進(jìn)行了反駁。隨后,兩人在報紙上的辯論引起了當(dāng)時國內(nèi)許多知識分子的注意,他們紛紛就“人生觀”問題發(fā)表自己的觀點,由此,論戰(zhàn)全面爆發(fā)。后人將張君勱及他的支持者和丁文江及他的支持者分別稱為“玄學(xué)派”和“科學(xué)派”,所以科學(xué)與人生觀論戰(zhàn)又稱為“科玄論戰(zhàn)”。在科玄論戰(zhàn)發(fā)生的過程中,陳獨秀和瞿秋白等人也就“人生觀”問題發(fā)表了自己的觀點及對科、玄兩派諸人進(jìn)行了評價,但是他們并未真正參與到論戰(zhàn)中去。 科學(xué)與人生觀論戰(zhàn)討論的問題主要是：“科學(xué)是否能夠支配人生觀”與“科學(xué)是否萬能”�？茖W(xué)派認(rèn)為科學(xué)是能夠支配人生觀的和科學(xué)的萬能是在于它的方法萬能。玄學(xué)派對此則持否定態(tài)度,因為他們認(rèn)為科學(xué)不能夠解決人生中的情感和倫理問題。隨著論戰(zhàn)的深入,雙方從討論“人生觀”問題逐漸深入到了傳統(tǒng)文化是否能在中國的現(xiàn)代化建設(shè)中起作用的問題中來。其實,盡管論戰(zhàn)雙方觀點不一樣,但還是有些相同之處的。第 他們所針對的對像都是當(dāng)時的青年學(xué)生。第二、他們都受到了傳統(tǒng)文化思維模式的影響,認(rèn)為思想變革是其它社會變革的先決條件。 科學(xué)與人生觀論戰(zhàn)對當(dāng)時的影響也是深遠(yuǎn)的。首先,在這場論戰(zhàn)后,科學(xué)主義意識形態(tài)化,無論何種團(tuán)體都用其來為自己的行為進(jìn)行辯護(hù),從而披上合法性的外衣。其次,由于科學(xué)方法的引入,考據(jù)學(xué)獲得了極大的發(fā)展。最后,論戰(zhàn)擴(kuò)大了科學(xué)知識傳播的范圍,使科學(xué)觀念更加深入人心,這樣更有利于當(dāng)時的國人接受西方的現(xiàn)代化觀念。 今天,我們回顧這場論戰(zhàn),能從中獲得許多有益于現(xiàn)今中國現(xiàn)代化的啟示。首先,我們?nèi)匀灰哟罂茖W(xué)知識的普及,使科學(xué)觀念更加深入人心。但是,在傳播科學(xué)知識的過程中,要防止科學(xué)主義的產(chǎn)生。其次,要以客觀的態(tài)度對待傳統(tǒng)文化,真正做到吸其精華,去其糟粕。
[Abstract]:The controversy between science and life is a very important event in the history of thought in the 20 ~ (th) century. From the domestic background, this controversy is a continuation and deepening of China's learning from the West since 1840. From the perspective of foreign background, the controversy was influenced by the western anti-rationalism trend after the first World War. The direct cause of the controversy was Zhang Junmai's speech on outlook on life at Tsinghua University on February 14, 1923. After Zhang Junmai's speech appeared in the newspaper, his good friend Ding Wenjiang was dissatisfied with many of the views in the article and then issued a rebuttal. Subsequently, the debate in the newspaper attracted the attention of many intellectuals at that time, they one after another on the issue of "outlook on life", thus, the debate broke out. Later generations called Zhang Junmai and his supporters Ding Wenjiang and his supporters "metaphysical school" and "scientific school" respectively, so the controversy between science and life was also called "science and metaphysical debate". In the course of the debate on science and metaphysics, Chen Duxiu and Qu Qiubai also expressed their own views on the issue of "outlook on life" and appraised them, but they did not really participate in the debate. The main issues discussed in the debate between science and outlook on life are: whether science can dominate the outlook on life and whether science is omnipotent. The science school thinks that science is able to dominate the outlook on life and that the omnipotence of science lies in the omnipotence of its methods. Metaphysical schools deny this because they believe that science cannot solve emotional and ethical problems in life. With the deepening of the controversy, the discussion of "outlook on life" between the two sides gradually went deep into the question of whether traditional culture can play a role in the modernization of China. In fact, although the two sides of the controversy views are not the same, but there are some similarities. First, they are targeting young students at that time. Second, they are influenced by the traditional cultural mode of thinking and think that ideological change is a prerequisite for other social changes. The controversy between science and life also had a profound impact on that time. First, after this debate, scientism ideology, no matter what groups use it to justify their actions, thus putting on the coat of legitimacy. Secondly, because of the introduction of scientific methods, textual research has been greatly developed. Finally, the controversy expanded the scope of the spread of scientific knowledge, and made the scientific concept more popular, which was more conducive to the acceptance of the western modern concept by the people at that time. Today, looking back at this debate, we can get a lot of enlightenment for the modernization of China today. First of all, we still need to increase the popularization of scientific knowledge, so that the concept of science more popular. However, in the process of spreading scientific knowledge, we should prevent the emergence of scientism. Secondly, we should treat traditional culture objectively and really absorb its essence and discard its dross.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：B261

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 陳先初;;現(xiàn)代性視野下的“科玄論戰(zhàn)”[J];湖南大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2006年05期

2 鄒廣文;“科玄之爭”與中國文化的綜合創(chuàng)新[J];杭州師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(人文社會科學(xué)版);2001年04期

3 羅志田;從科學(xué)與人生觀之爭看后五四時期對五四基本理念的反思[J];歷史研究;1999年03期

4 程志華;;超越“科玄論戰(zhàn)”——“科玄論戰(zhàn)”85周年祭[J];陜西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2009年05期

5 何曉明;;“態(tài)度”、“思想”不可混淆,“民主”、“科學(xué)”互為前提——關(guān)于“五四”精神的再思考[J];天津社會科學(xué);2011年05期

6 李醒民;科玄論戰(zhàn)的主旋律、插曲及其當(dāng)代回響(上)[J];北京行政學(xué)院學(xué)報;2004年01期

7 李醒民;科玄論戰(zhàn)的主旋律、插曲及其當(dāng)代回響(下)[J];北京行政學(xué)院學(xué)報;2004年02期

8 李萍;“人生觀論戰(zhàn)”的反思與中國現(xiàn)代化的文化追求[J];中山大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2005年04期

9 歐陽哲生;;丁文江和“科學(xué)與人生觀論戰(zhàn)”芻議[J];中州學(xué)刊;2009年02期

，

本文編號：2081332