读后无感还是读前有感——关于王路《研究还是读后感》的几点回应

Response before Reading or Non-Response after Reading——Some Response to Wang Lu’s Critique of My Comments on Critique of Pure Reason by Kant

王路教授的《研究还是读后感》一文从分析哲学的立场出发，对我的《康德（纯粹理性批判）句读》以及以“句读”方式做研究的做法提出了强烈的质疑和批评，认为这种做法缺乏二手文献且不严谨，不属于严格的学术研究。本文通过对这些批评进行逐个观点的分析证明，这些指责本身是建立在忽视康德的一手文献和很不严谨的论证方式上的。对哲学经典著作的“句读”是学术研究进入到深层次的必然要求。也是当今时代不可或缺的一种严肃的做学问的方式，已经得到国内外学术界的普遍认可；它的重要意义大大超出了单纯分析哲学的狭隘眼光，在康德、黑格尔哲学等德国古典哲学领域开创了一种行之有效的新方法。

In his paper of ＂Research or Feeling after Reading cisms against my comments on Kant＇s Critique of Pure Reason , Wang Lu put forward questions and criti- sentence by sentence as well as my way of comments. I think that his criticism lacks used literature and is not strict, which does not belong to strict academic research. In my opinion, comments on the classic philosophy sentence by sentence is the inevi- table requirement that academic research goes into the deep meaning, and also an indispensable way of doing academic researches today which is universally recognized by academia both at home and abroad. Its significance is far beyond the narrow view of philosophy. In the fields of classical. German philosophy of Kant and Hegel, a new and effective method is created.