实验主义哲学史书写中的“争鸣论”与“反向道统论”——胡著中国哲学史的叙事分析

"Contention"and"Reverse Orthodoxy of Dao"in the PragmatisticWriting of History of Chinese Philosophy——A Narrative Analysis of HU Shi's History of Chinese Philosophy

“范式”不是一个良好的哲学史学史术语,应采用叙事结构分析的方法。这一叙事结构分析框架包括时代任务意识、情节化解释、形式论证解释、意识形态蕴涵解释、哲学气质这五个层次。在这一框架内的分析表明,中国哲学史书写中存在着三种理想类型,根据其所受指引的古代范例,前两种可以被称为争鸣书写模式和道统书写模式,第三种则是作为两者之混合形态的反向道统模式。在实验主义的研究传统内,胡著中国哲学史一方面开辟了现代中国哲学史书写中的争鸣模式,另一方面又具备了此后在“斗争史”书写那里得到发展的反向道统模式的雏形。

"Paradigm"is not a good term for historical research in the writing of history of Chinese philosophy,which should be approached using a narrative structural analysis.This framework of narrative structural analysis includes five levels:consciousness of the task of the times,interpretation by emplotment,interpretation by formal argument,interpretation by ideological implication,and philosophical disposition.Analysis within this framework suggests that there are three ideal types of writing in history of Chinese philosophy,the first two of which can be referred to as the(争鸣)and"Orthodoxy of Dao"(道统)writing model,depending on the ancient examples they are following,and the third,"Reverse Orthodoxy of Dao"mode,which is a hybrid of both.Within the research tradition of pragmatism(“实验主义”),Hu Shi's history of Chinese philosophy opens up,on the one hand,the"Contention"model in the writing of the history of Chinese philosophy,and,on the other hand,the"Reverse Orthodoxy of Dao"which was later developed in the writing of the"history of struggle".