论文部分内容阅读
前记 :后现代学术作为对近半个世纪以来社会文化转型中存在的现实问题的一种回应 ,一方面提出了许多有意义、有价值的真问题 ,另一方面还带来了一种新的学术话语方式 ,并由此引起学术规范的转型。由索卡尔的《伪学术》对后现代学术的批评作为导火线 ,后现代与学术规范的问题突显出来。倒底如何理解后现代学术转型 ?后现代学术倒底要不要规范 ?有没有规范 ?后现代学术与现代主义的学术规范有何区别 ?中国语境中的后现代学术现状是怎样的 ?围绕着“后现代与学术规范”这一话题 ,2 0 0 0年 3月 15日和 3月 2 9日 ,华中师范大学文艺学博士生展开了讨论。其中 ,周泉、方喜针对后现代学术转型 ,曾军、章辉、姜金元针对后现代学术规范 ,徐敏、梅兰针对后现代学术的中国语境问题分别阐述了自己的意见 ,并展开了热烈的讨论。参加讨论的还有文艺学专业的老师王先霈、邱紫华、张玉能、孙文宪、胡亚敏、李建中、王耀辉等
Preface: As a response to the real problems that have existed in social and cultural transformations in the past half century, postmodern scholarship has put forward many meaningful and valuable real problems on the one hand, and has on the other brought a new Academic discourse, which led to the transformation of academic norms. From Sochar’s “pseudo-academic” criticism of post-modern scholarship as a fuse, the problems of postmodernism and academic norms are highlighted. How to Understand Postmodern Academic Transformation? Postmodern Academic Needless to Regulate? Are There any Norms? What is the difference between the academic norms of postmodern academic and modernist? What is the status quo of postmodern academic in Chinese context? “Postmodern and academic norms” this topic, March 15, 2000 and March 29, Central China Normal University doctoral students started discussions. Among them, Zhou Quan and Fang Xi aimed at the academic transformation of post-modernism. Zeng Jun, Zhang Hui, and Jiang Jinyuan elaborated their own opinions on the Chinese context of post-modern scholarship in light of the post-modern academic norms and Xu Min and Mei Lan respectively Warm discussion. Also participating in the discussion were the art teachers Wang Xiangyu, Qiu Zihua, Zhang Yuneng, Sun Wenxian, Hu Yamin, Li Jianzhong, Wang Yaohui, etc.