一个社会科学的学术性刊物,能否为改革实践和理论建设提供高质量的服务,关键是刊物在学术上有否创新。而要做到这一条,固然要有一支思想解放,敢于开拓创新的作者队伍,但能否充分发挥这支作者队伍的作用,至关重要的是编辑要有崭新的思维方式。任何知识丰博的编辑,终难免有知识上的局限,因为编辑毕竟不是“万宝全书”。如果一个编辑有崭新的思维方式,那么知识上的局限可以得到弥补;反之,即使有丰博的知识,在鉴别稿件中也难免有所疏漏,有时甚至会适得其反。长期以来,社会科学界处于清规戒律繁多的闭锁环境里,自觉不自觉地形成了用经典条文演绎客观现实的习惯,合则心安理得,不合则视为异端。这样,人们的思维构成了一个封闭的回路,在这个回路中,只能把从经典作家挖掘一些新信息阐发一通见解 A scholarly publication of the social sciences can provide high-quality services for the reform practice and theoretical construction. The key is whether the publications are innovative in their academic fields. To accomplish this, though, we must have an author team that is emancipating our minds and daring to blaze new trails. However, it is of crucial importance for editors to have a completely new way of thinking if they can give full play to their role. Any knowledgeable editors will inevitably have the knowledge of limitations, because editing is not, after all, “Wanbao Book.” If an editor has a new way of thinking, then the limitations of knowledge can be remedied. Conversely, even with abundant knowledge, it is unavoidable and sometimes counterproductive to identify manuscripts. For a long time, the social sciences were in a closed environment with a lot of precepts and precepts, consciously and unconsciously formed the habit of deducing the objective reality by using the classical articles, whereas those who were in peace and well-being did not hesitate. In this way, people’s thinking constitutes a closed loop, in this circuit, only to dig some new information from the classic writers to elucidate a common understanding