编辑学者化与编辑引领学术:两样的赋能,一样的迷思

Editorial Scholarization and Editorial Leading Academia:Two Types of Empowerment,Same Direction

学者化和引领学术除了皆是学术期刊编辑的自我赋能,在更深的层面上还有更多共同之处:主体都是因编辑职业化而告别学者身份独立掌控了学术期刊的编辑,都面临着自身身份和与学者关系的重建,学者化和引领学术既是身份重建的目标、也是与学者关系的基础,反复言说,不仅是自我激励,更是让学者接受其设计的新关系的游说,故而都将已是事实的、对学术期刊的独立掌控作为言说的依凭,并视之为新身份、新关系不可变更的前提。实际上,两者构建的新身份和新关系不仅起点相同,看似不同的目标,指向也是一致的,学者化不会是终点而只能是阶段性目标,它的逻辑结果必然是引领学术,故而与其说殊途同归,不如说原本就是同路人。从各自所立的“flag”皆无法逻辑自洽可知,这是一条永远也无法抵达终点的路,故而唯有走出学者化和引领学术的迷思,回归学术共同体,才是编辑和掌控于其手中学术期刊的根本进路。

Scholarisation and academic leadership are both self-empowerment of academic journal editors,but they have more in common at a deeper level:both are driven by the professionalisation of editors,leading to the abandonment of their scholarly identity and independent control of academic journals.Both face the reconstruction of their identity and their relationship with scholars,and scholarisation and academic leadership are both the goal of identity reconstruction and the basis of the relationship with scholars.In other words,they are not only self-motivating,but also persuading scholars to accept a new relationship designed by editors.Thus,they both rely on the established independent control of academic journals as the basis of their discourse and consider it as an unchanging premise of their new identity and relationship.In fact,the new identity and the new relationship that both are building have not only the same starting point,but also the same,seemingly different,goal.Scholarship can only be a stage goal,and its logical outcome is academic leadership.Instead of saying that they are on the same path,it is better to say that they are originally on the same path.From the fact that the“flags”set by each cannot be logically self-consistent,it can be seen that this is a road that will never reach its end.Therefore,the only fundamental path for academic journals and editors is to return to the academic community.