经史尊卑论三题

在中国学术史上,经史关系源远流长,经史尊卑确有纷争。本文以《汉志》“史附于经”现象、宋代“荣经陋史”观和明清“六经皆史”说三个涉及到经史尊卑的重要论题展开讨论,认为《汉志》“史附于经”只是一种目录分类现象,没有反映汉代经学与史学已经学科分离的客观事实,不能作为汉代史学依附于经学的依据,也不能说明二者之间存在着先后、尊卑和主从依附的关系。宋代义理之学提倡以经为本、先经后史,有一种普遍重经、荣经的倾向,但就其代表性学派程朱理学的经史观念而言,其荣经是实,陋史则不确;尊经是实,卑史则不尽然。明清学者重视阐发“六经皆史”,普遍主张道器合一、理事合一与经史合一,然而与明代王阳明主张经与史同具于吾心、王世贞以经史区分典籍、李贽以否定儒学权威为目的的学说旨趣不同,清代章学诚“六经皆史”说的主旨思想,是要后世史学效法“六经”切于人事的学术精神、崇尚“六经”“圆而神”、“方以智”的撰述旨趣,以经世致用和史学变革为目的;明儒不以尊卑论经史,章学诚的“六经皆史”说也无贬低经学之意蕴。     

Searching for the Material in Peter K. Andersson’s ‘How Civilized Were the Victorians?’

This article is a response to Peter K. Andersson’s arguments about the ‘civilizing thesis’ in Victorian Studies. It examines his approach in relation to class, discourse, and structure, particularly in relation to the working classes and future directions in approaches to nineteenth-century sources. It suggests that Victorian scholars can learn from labour geographers, who offer new models that highlight structural inequalities while maintaining a sensitivity to post-structural cultural understandings of gender, race, and class.     

Forty‐Five Years of Pacific Island Studies: some reflections

Looking back on our own times, we have seen a rise and fall of interest in Pacific Island studies. Our careers, which have led us currently to the Centre for Samoa Studies at the National University of Samoa, retrospectively illustrate transformations in Pacific Studies over the past half century.     

Living with instrumentalism: the academic commitment to cultural diplomacy

Despite the influence of cultural policy studies and other theoretical approaches ‘after critique’, the dominant paradigm across much of the humanities remains anti-governmental especially when ‘culture’ is the other term in the equation. This paper argues instead for a positive relationship between humanities academics/intellectuals and the governmental agendas of cultural diplomacy, and for ways of accommodating critical perspectives on both the concept of ‘the national interest’ and the instrumentalisation of culture. It examines the policy objectives of the Australian government’s main cultural diplomacy agencies together with practical examples from its bilateral bodies, in particular the Australia-China Council and its program of support for Australian Studies in China.     

When climate justice goes wrong: Maladaptation and deep co-production in transformative environmental science and policy

Maladaptation to climate change is often portrayed as arising from the unjust exclusion of vulnerable people. In turn, analysts have proposed knowledge co-production with marginalized groups as a form of transformative climate justice. This paper argues instead that maladaptation arises from a much deeper exclusion based upon the projection of inappropriate understandings of risk and social identity that are treated as unquestioned circumstances of justice. Drawing on social studies of science, the paper argues that the focus on co-production as an intentional act of inclusion needs to be considered alongside “deep” or “reflexive” co-production, which instead refers to the non-cognitive and unavoidable simultaneous generation of knowledge and social order. These processes have linked visions of planetary justice with an understanding of climate risk based on global atmospheric change, and an assumption that community forms an antidote to individualism. The paper uses a discussion of adaptation in western Nepal to illustrate how such deep forms of co-production have significantly reduced understandings of “what” adaptation is for, and “who” is included. Maladaptation, therefore, is not simply unjust implementations of an essentially fair model of adaptation, but also the allocation of exclusionary visions of what and for whom adaptation is for. Debates about transformative climate justice therefore need to understand how their critiques of classical liberal justice generate exclusions of their own, and to engage vulnerable people in reframing, rather than just receiving, circumstances of justice. There is also a need to examine how these circumstances remain unchallenged within environmental science and policy.     

拜占庭的“展示”研究

本文是2006年伦敦第21届世界拜占庭大会开幕式上的主题发言。从公开、自觉的夸示,世俗生活模式的展示和教俗势力所禁止的习俗表现等3个方面阐释了拜占庭帝国在历史上和现实中“展示”（display）自己的方式,并指出,21世纪拜占庭研究者的任务就是探寻拜占庭文明对其周边世界的影响,将其“展示”于天下。     

2000年中国的美国问题研究定量分析

通过对2000年中国的4594篇美国问题文章的定量分析,可以发现该年度中国的美国问题研究有七个方面的特点：全方位研究态势进一步发展;经济、政治、文化为三大研究热点;军事研究凸现;教育研究引人注目,历史和社会研究相对薄弱;普及文章独占鳌头,学术文章和译文比例减小：中美关系占有重要地位,借鉴性文章也大幅度增加;某些课题研究亟待充实。但同时也存在着若干明显的不足。今后中国的美国问题研究,应重视普及工作,坚持实事求是的思想路线,重视跟踪考察和理论创新,全方位、多侧面地关注美国问题,加强学术评论,完善学术规范,加快信息库建设,从而提高中国的美国问题研究的学术水平。     

形而下之器:古代中国疆域史研究的方法与取径

当下古代中国边疆研究应建立起以区域史观、断代史观与整体史观三维度三变量相互联结的以时间与结构为核心的研究方法体系。区域史观视阈下古代中国疆域史研究长时段之规律、特征的抽象与断代史观视阈下古代中国疆域史研究的短时段的内地族群与边疆族群互动与交融的特性之归纳,都属碎片化的古代中国疆域史研究,唯有以区域史观、断代史观为基础的整体史观视阈下古代中国疆域史研究,才能将碎片化的古代中国疆域史各种材料议题之问题意识与科学实证有机地统合起来,才能实现古代中国疆域史之特殊性、普遍性、规律性认知的可能性,达成中国学者话语体系下的具有“中国化”的古代中国疆域史的学术认知。     

Pacific Studies in China: Policies,Structure and Research

ABSTRACT

The expansion of Chinese influence in the Pacific has aroused growing attention from academics and policymakers. Although China has established six main Pacific research centres, there has been little investigation into what motivates this increasing interest. Building on the author's recent interviews with 39 Chinese mainstream scholars on the subject of Pacific Studies, this paper aims to fill this gap by providing an in-depth analysis of Pacific Studies in China, especially how centres are structured and what motivated their establishment. It is argued that the initiation, structure and scholarly focus of academic research on the Pacific in China has been largely driven by government policies, but also that government interest has fluctuated under President Xi Jinping. Government policy dependence is a double-edged sword that both promotes and hinders Pacific scholarship.     

The Atlas of the Languages of Iran (ALI): A Research Overview

There have been a number of important efforts to map out the languages of Iran, but until now no language atlas, or even a comprehensive and detailed country-level language map, has been produced. One of the recent initiatives which aims to fill this gap is the online Atlas of the Languages of Iran (ALI) (http://iranatlas.net). This article delineates objectives of the ALI research programme, atlas architecture, research methodology, and preliminary results that have been generated. Specific topics of interest are the structure and content of the linguistic data questionnaire; the handling of contrasting perspectives about the status of “languages” and “dialects” through a flexible multi-dimensional classification web; and the role of ongoing comparisons between language distribution assessments and hard linguistic data.