论文部分内容阅读
在世界史的建构中,世界史中心问题一直是学界无法回避的问题。然而,“中心”一词歧义百出,不对其做一番辨析,有关的研讨就无法达成一致。实际上,世界史的中心是指世界史的重要部分或主要趋势,也即其含义具有两重性;在史家的建构中,表现中心的形式是多样的,世界史在同一历史时期存在不同中心,不同历史时期也存在不同中心,也即具有多样性;在不同历史时期,中心对世界历史的影响存在着广度与深度上的差别,也即具有层次性。由于世界史中心是史家根据一定的客观史实建构的,所以它既具有主体性也具有客观性。目前学界虽未在“欧洲中心论”的定义上普遍达成一致,但对其所包含的不合时宜、明显落伍的观点进行了普遍的批判,这已经构成了一种特殊性的客观。
In the construction of world history, the problem of world history center has always been an unavoidable problem in the academic circle. However, the word “center” is ambiguous and can not be disambiguated. Therefore, the relevant discussions can not be agreed upon. In fact, the center of world history refers to the important part or major trend of world history, that is, its meaning is dualistic. In the construction of historians, the forms of performance centers are diverse. World history has different centers and different periods in the same historical period In the historical period, there are also different centers, that is, they have diversity. In different historical periods, the center has a difference in breadth and depth with respect to the history of the world, that is, it has a hierarchy. Because the world history center is a historian constructed according to certain objective facts, it has both subjectivity and objectivity. Although the academic circles generally have not reached a consensus on the definition of “European centralism,” they have generally criticized the outdated and obviously outdated views they contain, which has constituted a kind of particular objective.