思想史的“史”与“思”：从何炳棣与新儒家关于“克己复礼”真诠之争说起

“History” and “Thinking” in Intellectual History:A Debate between Pingti Ho and New Confucianism about the True Interpretation of Confucius“keji and fuli%”

思想史的研究是注重训诂之学,强调历史的"真实"性,以达到恢复历史本来面貌的目的;还是注重哲理性的反思,强调观念的系统性,以达到义理的推陈出新?这个"史"与"思"的问题历来争论不断。上世纪90年代在香港《二十一世纪》上引发的何炳棣与新儒家关于"克己复礼"真诠的一场大争论,正是这一争议的典型表现。虽然他们各说各话,少有交集,终让这场论战无果而终,但观战者中也有学者提出一些新的思维,有助于我们对思想史的"史"与"思"问题做进一步的思考。

There are lots of controversies on the issues of “history”and “thinking”in the study of intellectual history. Some academics pay attention to exegesis, emphasizing of history in order to restore true history. Others, however, focus on philosophical reflection and emphasize the systematic characteristics of concepts so as to be creative in philosophical interpretation. In 1990s, the debate between Ping-ti Ho and New Confucianism scholars on the true interpretation of Confucius’ “keji and fuli （克己复礼）” in Hong Kong’s 21st Century was a typical discussion in this field. Although the debate came to nought as they both hold onto their opinions and showed little agreement with each other, the new ideas put forward by some of the scholars who closely followed this debate help us make further reflection upon the issues of“history”and“thinking”in intellectual history.