查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 劉知幾以史論經之平議=Textual Criticism of Liu Chi-Ji Using "Shi Tong" to Comment Confucian Writings |
---|---|
作 者 | 李威熊; | 書刊名 | 逢甲人文社會學報 |
卷 期 | 16 2008.06[民97.06] |
頁 次 | 頁1-23 |
分類號 | 610.81 |
關鍵詞 | 劉知幾; 史通; 典範; 以史論經; 可議性; Liu Chi-ji; Shi Tong; Paradigm; Using Shi Tong to comment Confucian writings; Controversial; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 劉知幾《史通》是中國史學發展史上第一部評論史的著作;書成後各家的批評不一,呂思勉說它「長於精覈」,(〈史通評〉),柳璨說它「妄誣聖哲」(《史通析微》),章學誠說它「得史法,而不得史意」,近人的評述更多,但大多持論偏頗,不得其要。本文以《史通》為其本素材,先探討其史觀:源經入史、秉筆直書、史有三才等三項,是他的主要論點,然後分析他在新史學典範下的經論,基本上他是尊經尊孔;但史學是需講究史料的真實,所以他從史料真假,懷疑經書,而有〈疑古〉、〈惑經〉等篇,本文應用傅偉勳「創造詮釋學」的詮釋層次,來檢驗《史通》的說法,發現有許多的可議處,如他忽略了經文背後大義所在,那才是真實的歷史;劉氏不能以經學的準則去討論史學,反而以史學的典範去論經,難免會產生偏差。不過他把經學視為史料,建立史學的獨立地位,這一點貢獻,是可以肯定的。 |
英文摘要 | Liu Chi-ji’s “Shi Tong” is the first publication of historical commentary in the development of the science of Chinese history. The book received varied comments. Lyu Si-mian described it as “skilled in criticism” (“Review of ‘Shi Tong’”), while Liu Can called it “absurd accusation of the sages and saints” (“Analysis of ‘Shi Tong’”), and Chang Hsue-cheng commented as “knowing the law of history without knowing the meaning of history”. There are even more commentaries on “Shi Tong” in the modern time, yet most held biased view. This paper reviews the viewpoint of history of “Shi Tong”, including deriving from Confucian writings, factual records, and three talents of the history, which were his main arguments. It then analyzes his discourses on Confucian writings under the paradigm of the new science of history. He respected Confucius and his writings, yet since the science of history is based on facts, he challenged the truth of Confucius writings based on the authenticity of the writings, and wrote “Doubts on history” and “Confused with Confucius Writings”. This paper applies the interpretation dimensions of Fu Wei-hsun’s creative hermeneutics to verify the discourses of “Shi Tong”, and finds that there are many controversial parts. For example, he neglected the meaning of the Confucius writings, which was the true history. Liu did not use the criteria of Confucius writings to discuss the history, but used the paradigm of history to discuss Confucius writings, which then resulted in biased views. However, he regarded Confucius writings as historical materials, which then established the unique status of the science of history. His contribution was commonly recognized. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。