论文部分内容阅读
“君择臣”,在浩瀚的中国典籍中,用过繁博的篇章,做过详尽的叙述,并且非常突出地描绘有道明君如何慧眼择臣、选贤任能。几乎所有开国皇帝,都有或多或少的善于择臣的美谈。 “臣择君”与“君择臣”相对应,构成双向选择中不可或缺的有机组成部分,它在我国史书上事例不少见,但大多如过眼烟云,史迹更为浅淡。 “君择臣”与“臣择君”这一“双向选择”中,重前轻后、浓墨淡写的反差,这是由封建专制的特质决定的。但毋庸置疑,是运用唯物史观研究中国古代政治思想史发生的偏颇,可以说是一种历史性的“遗憾”或“缺憾”。
In the vast collection of Chinese books, “Monarchs,” they used elaborate passages and made elaborate narratives, and they made a very prominent depiction of how Daoism monarchs choose their talents and choose their talents. Almost all founding emperors, there are more or less good at courtesan beauty. The “courtship king” and “king courtiers” correspond to each other and constitute an integral part of the two-way choice. It is not uncommon in China’s history books, but most of them are over-exposed and the history is even more mundane. The contrast between the “King Choi-min” and the “Choi-seon”, the “two-way choice,” is characterized by the feudal autocratic character. However, there is no doubt that it is a historical “regret” or “regret” that the historical biographical study of the history of ancient Chinese political thought took place.