查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 晚清學者對荀子的評價--論晚清學者的「反荀」浪潮=Hsuan Study in the Late Chin Dynasty |
---|---|
作 者 | 洪銘吉; | 書刊名 | 僑光技術學院通觀洞識學報 |
卷 期 | 1 民91.11 |
頁 次 | 頁61-68 |
分類號 | 128 |
關鍵詞 | 荀子; 章太炎; 梁啟超; 譚嗣同; 康有為; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 晚清時期的荀學發展特色不在學術思想上有超越前人之處,而是對政治改革有不同的主張。乾、嘉時期考證學興盛以後,對諸子學的研究一時蔚為風潮,其成就也頗超越前人,此時期學者亦著力於弭平漢宋學(孟、荀學)之爭議,然晚清時的康有為為其政治改革之目的,主張古文皆劉歆所偽造一說,引起軒然大波,梁啟超、譚嗣同無不因此抨擊荀學為改革之最大阻礙。章太炎在戊戌政改失敗後,政治立場由支持改革轉為提倡革命,對康、梁、譚之說法深不以為然,遂提出批判。可惜的是,這些有關荀學見解的出發點是在政治鬥爭,不是在研究方法與學理上的論辯,其成就當有別於前人。 |
英文摘要 | The academic development of Hsuan Study did not lay in the academic progress with surpassed the previous studies; rather, it has advancing progress because of its different idea about political revolution. Ever since the flourishing period of proof study in Kan, Chia Dynasties, there has been a popular trend for the study of Tsu-tse Study and their academic achievement has been better than the previous ones. The scholars during this period were in great effort to smooth the dispute the studies on Mon and Hsuan. However, Yo-wei Kan in the late Chin Dynasty, taking his position to argue for political revolution, stated that ancient studies were all faked by Liu-chin. This statement by Kan was criticized by Chi-chaou Lian and Tan-se Tan who considered it a great impediment the development of Hsuan study. Tai-ian Chan, after the failure of U-su Political Revolution, altered his position from supporting revolution to taking revolution as the only resolution; Chan had another view from Kan, Lian, or Tan and therefore had his own critical stance. Nevertheless, these criticism on Hsuan Study are based on the argument for political struggle, not on the debate on its methodology and research origin. That's the reason why these criticisms have different achievements from the previous studies. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。