论科学主义史学与民族主义史学的融合——由钱穆对“科学派”的批评展开

On the Integration of Scientific Historiography and Nationalist Historiography:Departing from Qian Mu's Criticism of"the Scientific School"

钱穆在《国史大纲·引论》中,立足于民族主义的立场,批评以胡适、顾颉刚和傅斯年为代表的“科学派”所为,乃一种追求纯粹客观却不关现实亦无意义的史学研究。钱穆只看到此派科学主义史学的一面而忽视了其民族主义史学的一面,因而其所谓“科学派”是一种以偏概全的说法,不是一个完整的判断。同时,钱穆忽视了科学主义史学的价值与意义,亦未正视他自己在治史早期追随“科学派”时表现出来的科学主义倾向。基于历时性考察,作为现代性观念在历史学中的两种不同表现,科学主义史学与民族主义史学是融合共存于钱穆与“科学派”的著作中的。从这种融合的视角看,钱穆与被其批评的“科学派”在治史理念上同属现代史学的范畴,皆强调史学研究目标之致用与求真的结合,二者在史学思想上“大同而小异”。

In the introduction of The Outline of National History,based on the standpoint of nationalism,Qian Mu criticized"the Scientific School"represented by Hu Shi,Gu Jiegang and Fu Sinian,demonstrating that their historical research was a pursuit of pure objective,which was meaningless and had nothing to do with reality.Qian Mu only saw the side of scientific historiography in this school and ignored the side of nationalist historiography,so his so-called"the Scientific School"is a partial statement,not a complete judgment.At the same time,Qian Mu ignored the value and significance of scientific historiography,nor did he face up to his own scientific tendency when he followed"the Scientific School"in the early days of his historical research.Based on diachronic investigation,as the two different manifestations of the concept of modernity in historiography,scientific historiography and nationalist historiography are integrated in the works of Qian Mu and"the Scientific School".Viewing from the perspective of this integration,Qian Mu and"the Scientific School"criticized by him belong to the category of modern historiography as far as their concept of historical research is concerned.Both emphasize the combination of attaining practical use and seeking truth in the goal of historical research,and he and""the Scientific School"are""largely identical but with minor differences"in historical thoughts.