【作者】 彭公璞；

【导师】 吴根友；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 中国哲学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 汪中,字容甫,是清代乾隆时期的著名学者。他一生命途多舛,但能勤学自立,在清代乾嘉学术中卓然成一家之言。其才、学、识三者皆有过人之处,为士林所推重,时人多以“通儒"称之。汪中学术及其思想既是他基于人生个体体验,刻苦自学的心灵独创,也是在其所处时代的社会外缘影响与学术发展内因交互作用下的历史产物：在乾隆时期政治、经济、社会等多方面因素影响下,朴学研究之风大盛,出现了类似库恩提出的“科学共同体”意义的朴学研究社会群体(“学术共同体”)；朴学研究的水平发展至乾隆、嘉庆时期也走向了高峰。由此,清代朴学发展如日中天,成为清代学术的主要代表形态。在这一过程中,戴震学术具有集前人大成、继往开来的重要地位,对朴学的发展产生了深远影响。有鉴于此,我们引用库恩的“范式”理论到人文研究领域,将戴氏学术视为朴学运动的“范式”理论,以进一步认识清代朴学的社会学意义及其内部发展机制等问题。而“后戴震时代”——范式确立后的常规学术阶段,正是汪中及其同辈学者所处的主要学术背景。在“后戴震时代”,学者们集中精力对于戴震学术范式内部遗留的问题做了更为细致、具体的研究,使得学术研究的范围不断拓展、研究水平进一步深化；同时也在戴氏学术的基础上对义理领域做了新的建构。在这一过程中,朴学研究的一些学术流弊也开始渐次显露,对朴学运动的健康发展产生了消极影响。作为“后戴震时代”的学者,汪中在推动纯学术研究的深入方面做出了自己的贡献,而他更大的贡献则在于他在治学实践中坚持“学以用世、学而能思”,提出了不少具有启迪意义的精到见解,表现出鲜明的思想性,对于促进朴学运动的健康发展起到了积极作用。以汪中学术整体为背景,重点阐释其具有思想史意义的创新成果是本论文的写作目的所在。其思想性成果主要体现在以下几方面：一、汪中的治学特点与方法论对于朴学研究的重要启迪价值在治学过程中,汪中既重视“实事求是”,又强调“心知其意髓,复能在治学实践中实现两者的贯通。故其学术成果多洗练精要之作,以识力超拔超拔见长。汪中继承了朴学严谨求实的学风,又特别重视对研究主体心知的功能,要求学者克服语言表意功能的局限性,不拘泥于语言文字本身去理解经文大义,以实现考据与经义的会通。这是他的可贵之处。他通过自己的精粹成果表达了博而能约、道艺一体、经史会通等重要见解,对于当时朴学研究一味征实、固陋不通的弊病进行了有力的矫正,对于学者治学有指导示范意义。二、汪中对于清代朴学深入发展、更新自立的贡献汪中特别重视学术风气的建设。对于宋明以来末学的空疏教条学风,他给予了严厉的批判；同时他大力复兴子学,并突破了经、史、子、集的学术分类传统,以史为经纬,在周代文明的广阔背景下考镜学术流变,将史官文化、六艺、诸子之学连为一体。一方面他恢复了儒家孔荀一系学术源流,为清代学者打破宋代理学的理论权威地位提供了重要理论支持。另一方面,他通过对诸子学术源流的梳理,从中抽绎出学术平等、经世实学、礼学传统等一系列重要思想,作为现实中的为学之道。这体现了他整合百家文化,再建学术新风的闳大学术理想,这对于清代学术从整体上摆脱传统羁绊,以新的面貌自立于学术史林有重要意义。三、汪中对于清代朴学运动发展方向、治学宗旨的把握汪中志在经世,关注民生,始终把自己的学术面向现实生活,努力实现经术与“用世”的会通。这使得他的学术能在广阔的现实生活中得到进一步淬炼,锻造出新锐的思想,成为真正的“有用之学”。它表达了汪中在“求实”基础上“求善”的学术追求,是对戴震“求是”原则的自觉继承和发扬,体现了朴学运动正确的发展方向。这对于克服朴学发展过程中出现的,研究成果脱离社会现实,琐碎无用、求之愈实而用之愈虚等弊病具有极强的针砭意义。汪中的学术思想具有“闳通经世”的总体特点,其精粹的思想性成果体现了其学术思想在朴学运动的“后戴震时代”所具有的独特价值。通过对汪中学术思想的个案研究,也带动了我们对其所处时代若干学术问题的宏观思考。关于清代朴学。我们认为,清代朴学的产生与发展是由政治、经济、社会等外部因素和学术内在逻辑发展理路交互作用的产物,具有一定的历史必然性和进步性。清廷的文字狱政策对于清代朴学的发展的确产生了恶劣影响,但不是清代朴学产生的主要原因。关于清代朴学家。从本文对汪中及其同辈学者的事迹和性格描述可见,乾嘉学者中不乏磊落慷慨、通达世务的豪杰之士。他们有独立的人格、严谨的治学态度、充满人道主义精神的社会关怀,决非一般庸碌之辈可比。长期以来对他们的历史评价相对偏低,是不符合历史事实的。库恩“范式”理论关于科学家集团的主观意愿在选择范式过程中起到决定性作用的论述也启示我们,要重视清代朴学家群体在朴学发展中发挥的主体性作用,自觉从人文的维度深入挖掘清代朴学的思想史内涵。关于朴学分派。当我们把戴震学术理解为代表清代学术共同体的共同信念的范式理论时,我们就更倾向于“由惠学到戴学是一个历史过程”的观点,而不赞成简单地以地域分派,将乾嘉朴学解释为不同学派相互对峙、彼此对立的意见。同时我们也没有接受存在有“扬州学派”的观点,认为这不足以涵盖汪中、王念孙、阮元、焦循等这些有历史影响的重要学者的学术。对于汪中,我们主要是将其放在“后戴震时代”这一具体历史背景下考察其学术特点和学术价值的。此外,从“范式”理论的角度出发,我们认为在以戴震学术为范式的清代朴学在乾嘉学界确立了主流地位,学术共同体的形成说明朴学业已成为社会化运动的背景下,以宋儒学说为代表的传统义理学日趋式微,根本不足以作为朴学势均力敌的敌手,与朴学竞争。所谓激烈的“汉、宋相争”并不是事实。用“汉学”代指清代朴学也并不恰当。我们主要从范式的产生→常规→危机→转换的角度理解朴学运动的发展历程；汪中所处的乾隆时代是朴学的常规发展阶段,此时朴学在回应传统义理学的挑战的同时,对出现的弊病也有所调适。至嘉庆时期,朴学运动仍然得到较快发展,向纵深拓展,可以理解为“范式增生”阶段；嘉、道以下,朴学则出现明显危机；之后今文经学在晚清学界逐渐占据了主要地位,取代了以戴震范式为中心的清代朴学。这其中,世运变迁,经世诉求是造成这一范式转换的重要原因。更多还原

【Abstract】 Wang Zhong (wang rong-fu), was one of the famous scholars in the Qianlong period Qing dynasty. Though his life was full of frustrations, he could diligently study to support himself and make great achivement in the academic research. He displayed the remarkable talent and won the widespread respect, when the Contemporary people called him by " the well-versed scholar".The academic thought of Wang Zhong is not only based on his individual experience and the original creation, but also based on the Contemporary social influence and the academic development internal cause.In politics, economy, society and so on under various factor influence, the research atmosphere of philology Performed extremely warm in the Qianlong period Qing dynasty. So the " academic community" Similar to the the meaning of "scientific community" according to Kuhn’s Suggestion made its appearance.The research level of philology had developed the peak to Qianlong and Jiaqing time.Thus, the philology become the main representative of the academic form of the Qing Dynasty.In this process,Dai zhen’s academy which derived the best of their predecessors, produced the profound influence and played an important role. In view of this, We quote Kuhn’s "paradigm" theory to the field of humanities,and regards as the Dai zhen’s academy is the "paradigm" theory in the philology movement in order to study on these issues in depth, Including the sociological significance and internal mechanisms, etc. "Latter Dai zhen time" which means the normal academic Stage was exactly Wang Zhong and his Co-researchers’s academic background.In the "Latter Dai zhen time", Scholars made more detailed, specific research on the the remaining issues within the academic paradigm. They Succeed to expand the scope of academic research and deepen the level of research; The new philosophical system had be Constructed based on the Dai zhen’s academic thought.But these defects also began to appear,and had a negative impact on the development of philology. As a Scholar of the "Latter Dai zhen time", Wang Zhong Contributed to the promotion of the level of pure research.He make a greater contribution to Provide insights to Promote the healthy development of philology by advocateing the principle of Learning to use the world, learning and thinking. His ideological achievement mainly manifested in the following several aspects:Firstly,the research characteristic and methodology of Wang Zhong has the very big profit to the philology research. In the doing academic research process, Wang Zhong both took seriously "realistically",and stressed"Knowsthe intrinsic meaning in the heart", (xin-zhi-qi-yi)which made His academic achievement very succinct and instructive. His valuable point is that he take a special emphasis on the the main function of mind of the researchers based on the strict and realistic style of study. He asked scholars to overcome the limitations of language expressive features, and are not limited language to understand the intrinsic textual meaning in the classical scriptures not only by language,but also by mind.He expressed such important insights that study should be extensiv and also be succinct, Principles and technology is integrated and the research of Confucian classics and the historical Research should be a fusion.these Constructive comments were helpful to rectify the defects of Qianjia school.Secondly, Wang Zhong Contributed to the Qing Dynasty Chinese philology to develop and renew. He paid attention to the academic atmosphere and had given the severe critique to Song-Ming confucian. He vigorously revivaed the study of Zi,and explores the history of academic changing Under Zhou Dynasty civilization broad background.He found that The official historian culture,and the academy of Jing and Zi were originally a body having a common source:Li.He resume the system of academic imparting named Kong-Xun,which was different from the famous system named Kong-Meng.The discovery provided a important theory support for the Qing Dynasty scholar to broke the theory authoritative status of Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism. He had also Summarized the academic equality, to govern the practical knowledge, the tradition of Li and so on a series of important thoughts,which was helpful to realize the independence and renewal in the Qing Dynasty. Thirdly,Wang Zhong Controled the movement of philology’s development direction,and the research objective. For Jingshi,Wang Zhong was engaged in scholarly research. He wanted to grasp the ture spirit of the Confucian ClassIcs and make it be useful to improve the Average people’s living conditions.So he work hard to realize the exchange between the research and Jingshi.His work provided a good example of useful research to society,and inspire the other scholars to Care about the social development and the people’s hardship,and then selected the useful research projects Consciously. This position had rectifid the defects of philological research target-orientedly.In brief, the General characteristic of Wang Zhong’s academic thought is "Hong Tong Jingshi", having the unique value In the "Latter Dai zhen time"of the Chinese philology movement in Qing Dynasty.Through the study on the academic thought of Wang Zhong,we also obtain some other macroscopic understanding about the philology in Qing Dynasty.We believed that Qing Dynasty Chinese philology’s production and the development are the Combined action result by the external social factors and the academic intrinsic logical development, having certain historical inevitability and progressive.About the Qing Dynasty scholars,there were many candid generous, diligent and Warm-hearted gentlemen in them. they Should be given the fair historical appraisal without the prejudice.From the "paradigm" theory point of view,we arenot in favor of the views of divideing different.schools simply based on the geographical distribution,and we also disagree that there were Violent confrontation between Han school and Song school.we think that The so-called radical "Han, Song resistance," is not true facts. on behalf of the philology in Qing Dynasty with the "Han" school is also not appropriate.更多还原