中国古代社会形态研究的方法论问题

发布时间：2018-06-01 07:32

本文选题：中国古代社会 + 中国历史实际　；参考：《史学月刊》2011年03期

【摘要】：从上世纪90年代以来,关于中国社会形态问题的研究引起了学界的极大关注。特别是冯天瑜《"封建"考论》一书出版以来,赞成废弃中国中古时代为"封建社会"的人日益增多,并相继提出各种提法来取代"封建社会"这一概念。2010年5月,《文史哲》编辑部举办的"秦至清末:中国社会形态问题"专题学术研讨会,更是推动了这一进程。到目前为止,学界关于中古中国社会形态或社会性质,已经提出了诸如"封建帝制时代"、"帝国时代"、"帝制时代"、"专制个体型家国同构农耕社会"、"皇权社会"、"帝制农民社会"、"郡县制时代"、"选举社会"、"专制社会"等等各种提法,而每一种提法都没有赢得多数人的认可,相关研究呈现出理论解放之初百家争鸣、莫衷一是的局面。在不同提法背后所潜藏着的是不同的判断标准、不同的方法论思想,如果就此问题展开探讨,则可能有助于这一问题的解决。因此,本刊邀请相关学者撰文,就中国中古社会性质研究的方法论问题进行探讨,并希望有更多学人参与进来。
[Abstract]:Since 1990's, the research on Chinese social formation has attracted great attention. Especially since the publication of Feng Tianyu's "feudal" book, the number of people who support the abandonment of the "feudal society" in the middle ancient times of China has been increasing day by day. In May 2010, the editorial department of "Literature, History and philosophy" held a special symposium on "Qin to the end of Qing Dynasty: the problem of Chinese Social formation", which promoted this process. So far, scholars have talked about the social form or nature of medieval China. Such terms as "feudal imperial era", "autocratic individual family country isomorphic farming society", "imperial peasant society", "county system era", "election society", "autocratic society" and so on have been put forward. However, each of them did not win the approval of the majority, and the related research presented the situation of a hundred schools of thought contending at the beginning of the liberation of theory. Behind different formulations are different criteria of judgment and different thoughts of methodology. If this problem is discussed, it may be helpful to solve this problem. Therefore, we invite relevant scholars to write articles to discuss the methodological issues in the study of the nature of the Middle Paleozoic in China, and hope that more scholars will participate in the study.
【作者单位】：山东大学历史文化学院;
【分类号】：K207

【相似文献】