论文部分内容阅读
对郭沫若抗战时期的重要论著《十批判书》的撰著动机做出新解,由此梳理其论学宗旨,再评其学术成就,有着重要的意义。《十批判书》不仅意在反对当时国民党的统治,同时也有与马克思主义史学同行商讨之意。郭沫若不赞同一些马克思主义史学家对先秦诸子的某些评价,曾在《群众》上发文批评以墨子为“工农革命的代表”的观点。此文在马克思主义史学内部引发了争论,《群众》刊发了对郭文的商榷文章。同志间的批评让郭沫若感觉不安,他对先秦诸子的思想进行了总清算,以作为对批评的总答复。《十批判书》是以实事求是精神开展学术研究的典范,今人须联系创作的具体情境来研讨其丰富的学术史内涵和思想意义。
It is of great significance to make a new solution to the motive of Guo Moruo’s important treatise “The Ten Criticisms” in the period of Anti-Japanese War, and then to sort out its academic purposes and then to review its academic achievements. The “Ten Criticisms” are not only intended to oppose the Kuomintang rule at that time, but also to discuss with Marxist historians. Guo Moruo disagreed with some Marxist historians’ comments on pre-Qin philosophers and criticized Mohist as “the representative of the worker-peasant revolution” on “the masses.” This article triggered controversy within the Marxist historiography, “mass” published a debut article Guo Wen. Comrades criticized Guo Moruo for feeling uneasy. He carried out total liquidation of pre-Qin philosophers’ thoughts as the general reply to criticism. “Ten Criticisms of the Book” is a model for carrying out academic research in the spirit of seeking truth from facts. Today, people must discuss the rich context of academic history and the significance of their ideas in connection with the specific circumstances of their creation.