从“时代精神的对立”到“方法论的冲突”:人文主义-经院哲学之争研究范式的演变

From"Opposition Between Two Zeitgeists"to"Clash of Methodologies":The Evolution of Research Paradigms on the Debate Between Humanism and Scholasticism

西方学界围绕人文主义-经院哲学之争的研究,经历了传统学派、修正学派和新修正学派三种范式。19世纪末,受布克哈特文艺复兴观影响的现代化叙事范式,将该论争解释为两种时代精神的对立与冲突;20世纪40年代,受克里斯特勒去意识形态化的人文主义观念影响的修正学派,主张人文学科与经院哲学是大学中两个相互独立、共存的学科,二者之间并无实质的冲突;20世纪70年代,意识到“巴伦-加林路线”合理性的新修正学派,既承认双方在意大利文艺复兴阶段共存的合理性,也正视二者在北方文艺复兴阶段由于方法论的对立而引发的矛盾与冲突。这三种研究范式及其演变,体现了百余年间西方学界对文艺复兴时期人文主义的构建与意识形态之间紧密而复杂的关联,呈现了史学与时代的互动。

Research on the debate between humanism and scholasticism has undergone three paradigms in the western historical academia:the traditional school,the revisionist school,and the new revisionist school.In the late nineteenth century,the modernization narrative paradigm,influenced by Jacob Burckhardt,interpreted the debate as the opposition and conflict between two Zeitgeists.In the 1940s,the revisionist school,influenced by Paul Oskar Kristeller's theory on de-ideologized humanism,argued that Studia Humanitatis and Scholasticism were two independent but co-existing disciplines in the university,and there was no substantial conflict between them.In the 1970s,the new revisionist school,which was influenced by Hans Baron and Eugenio Garin,not only acknowledged the coexistence of the two sides during the Italian Renaissance,but also addressed the contradictions and conflicts arising from the methodological opposition between the two sides during the Northern Renaissance.These three research paradigms and their evolution reflect the close and complex relationship between the construction of Renaissance humanism and ideology in the western historical academia for more than a century.It is a result of the interaction between historiography and the times.