经济史研究中的文化偏见——对“大分流”之争的评述与反思

Cultural Prejudice behind Economic History Study——Reviewing and Reconsidering on the Great Divergence Debate

通过对于"大分流"问题不同研究成果的比较分析,本文发现关于该问题的争论反映了两种研究范式和学术取向上的根本性差异。一种坚持"欧洲中心主义",将大分流看作是由欧洲所具有的内在特质带来的必然结果,另一种则代表了对"欧洲中心主义"的反动,认为大分流来源于世界经济体系结构变迁及某些偶然因素交互作用的结果。而近年来在大分流阐释中占据主流地位的制度决定论,则代表了一种对二者进行整合的尝试。但从深层来看,以制度为中心的解释视角依旧没有脱离欧洲中心主义范式的窠臼。这表明在经济史研究中存在固有的文化偏见,需要研究者予以检视和反思。

Through comparing and synthesizing the recent advances in the Great Divergence debate,we find these studies reflect two competitive paradigms and approaches in the comparative research in social science. The one which hold the view of eurocentrism regard the Great Divergence as an inevitable result of some characteristics of Europe,while the other as opposed to it treat the Great Divergence as outcomes of interaction between structural transformation in World-system and serendipitous contingencies. Although the ascendancy of institutional approach of late embodies the intergration of these two paradigms to some extent,it still falls into the trap of eurocentrism in essence.