论康熙科学政策的失误

ON THE MISTAKES OF EMPEROR KANGXI'SSCIENTIFIC POLICY

文章以新的视角，对清代康熙帝予以重新评价，认为他虽然勤奋地学习过数学、天文学和医学，著有《几暇格物编》，但最多只能算是一位科学爱好者。作为一国之君，不但与同时代的法国路易十四和俄国彼得大帝相比，就是与比他早１００年的明末科学家兼宰相徐光启相比，也显得他在发展科学方面没有采取重要措施，而且有一系列的政策失误，诸如用人不当、不培养人才、不建立学术机构、不制造望远镜，把中外交流局限于宫廷之内，倡导“西学中源”说等，从而使中国失去了有可能在科学上与欧洲近似于“同步起跑”的机会。

During the 67 years before the fall of the Ming Dynasty in 1644, therehad appeared in China 7 scientific monographs of world level of academic standards,such as Bencao Gangmu (Compendium of Materia Medica, 1578) and Luxue Xinshuo (ANew Account of Musical Acoustics, 1584), but after the foundation of the Qing Dynasty China did not make any important contribution to science. This paper considersthat Kangxi, the second emperor of the Qing Dynasty, should bear the blame for thishistorical fact to some extent. Being a ruler of the longest reign, Kangxi had been onthe throne for 61 years from 1662 to 1722, during which period modern science developed rapidly in Europe. Although he diligently learned astronomy, mathematics andmedicine from the Jesuits and wrote a book entitled Jixia Gewubian about naturalknowledge, Kangxi can at most be regarded as a sincere amateur of science. In comparison with King Louis XIV of France and Peter I of Russia, as the leader of a country hedid not take any important step in developing sciences but made a series of mistakes inscientific policy: (l) Only believing Jesuits, he did not make use of such qualified Hanscholars as Wang Xishan and Xue Fengzuo; (2) He did not have a telescope or a microscope made, though both had already been introduced into China; (3) He neither trainedforeign language personnel nor sent people to study abroad; (4) He did not establish anyscientific institution and even did not set up a single school for Manchu children to studyscientifc knowledge; (5) He insisted that such scientific books as the Xiyang XinfaLishu (Treatise on Calendrical Science According to the New Western Methods) and theLixiang Kaocheng (Compendium of Calendrical Science and Astronomy) to be written'under the leadership of the Emperor', which made discussions impossible; (6) He advocated the theory that 'Western learning originated from China'. This caused the situation that Chinese academic research took the way returning to the ancients, and scholars did not study nature but buried themselves in outdated writings. The defeat in theOpium War made Chinese intellectuals begin to realize that this way is wrong.