Soviet Sinology and Two Approaches to an Understanding of Chinese History

淡江大學機構典藏 > 國際事務學院 > 歐洲研究所 > 期刊論文 > Item 987654321/99505

請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw/dspace/handle/987654321/99505

題名:	Soviet Sinology and Two Approaches to an Understanding of Chinese History
作者:	Pisarev, Alexander
貢獻者:	淡江大學歐洲研究所
日期:	2014-10
上傳時間:	2014-11-13 13:55:44 (UTC+8)
出版者:	香港：中文大學出版社
摘要:	The theoretical foundation for Soviet studies of social relations in traditional and semi-traditional China was based on Lenin’s version of the Marxist theory of social-economic formations. Unlike Marx, who identified two different trends in world history, which represented the unique Western and Eastern historical experiences, Lenin emphasized the universal character of the development of human civilization. In his view, the “feudal mode of production” was the basis for the system of social-economic relations in all parts of the world prior to the emergence of the “capitalist mode of production” in the West. This approach to the world in general, and to Chinese history in particular, became an unchallengeable paradigm in the late 1930s, when the partisans of the “Asiatic mode of production” among Soviet historians were defeated. Nevertheless, even after the concept of the “Asiatic mode of production” was declared to be “anti-Marxist and anti-scientific,” the latent controversy between these two paradigms in Soviet sinology became the essence of the polemics on the nature of the Chinese form of feudalism and the driving social force behind the Chinese revolution. Recently, Russian Sinology has demonstrated a retreat to some of the arguments of the partisans of the “Asiatic mode of production” under the framework of “Chinese traditional society.”
關聯:	The China Review 14(2), p.113-130
顯示於類別:	[歐洲研究所] 期刊論文

文件中的檔案:

檔案	描述	大小	格式	瀏覽次數
index.html		0Kb	HTML	81	檢視/開啟
Soviet Sinology and Two Approaches to an Understanding of Chinese history.pdf		394Kb	Adobe PDF	2	檢視/開啟

在機構典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

TAIR相關文章

資料載入中.....