作为“整理国故运动”的三大中坚主体 ,北大研究所国学门、“古史辨派”、史语所的学术路向虽有所歧异 ,但他们的方法大都不脱考据。由此出发 ,这个运动明显呈现出一种“非哲学”、“非史观”的倾向。今天看来 ,这固然对纠正当时的空疏学风起到了一定作用 ,却也使“整理国故运动”带有了考据史学的弊端 ,因此而遭致一些学者的严厉批评。这说明曾经风靡一时的考据史学延续至此 ,已不适应时势的需要。与此同时 ,其阵营内部成员的纷纷转向和唯物史观派的崛起 ,更宣告了“整理国故运动”的最终衰歇。 Although there are some differences in the academic directions of the three core subjects of the “National Movement to Organize the National Heritage”, such as Guo Xue Men at Peking University Institute, “School of Penetration of Ancient History” and Shi language, most of them do not take the test for reference. From this, the movement clearly showed a tendency of “non-philosophical” and “non-historical”. It seems today that although this has played a certain role in correcting the blanket style of study at the time, it has also caused some shortcomings in the “Sorting out the National Heritage Movement” of the historical examination of the examination. Therefore, it has been severely criticized by some scholars. This shows that the once popular historical studies continue to this point, no longer meet the needs of the times. In the meantime, members of its camp have been turning to the rise of the historical materialism group and declaring the final collapse of the “campaign to organize the national security incident.”