課程資訊
課程名稱
英文漢學中的問題與爭論一
Controversies and Debates in Anglophonic Sinology (Ⅰ) 
開課學期
103-1 
授課對象
文學院  歷史學研究所  
授課教師
宋家復 
課號
Hist5018 
課程識別碼
123 U8410 
班次
 
學分
全/半年
半年 
必/選修
選修 
上課時間
星期三3,4(10:20~12:10) 
上課地點
歷史研討室 
備註
限學士班三年級以上
總人數上限:15人 
Ceiba 課程網頁
http://ceiba.ntu.edu.tw/1031Hist5018_ 
課程簡介影片
 
核心能力關聯
核心能力與課程規劃關聯圖
課程大綱
為確保您我的權利,請尊重智慧財產權及不得非法影印
課程概述

123 U8410
這是一門開給大學部高年級與碩博士班同學的英文課。
中國研究的海內外分進合流近年來已經蔚為風潮,在研究課題和取徑上中外學者分享共通的機會愈見頻繁。本課程的目的,在於藉著閱讀過去半世紀以來英文中國研究學界內(外)所生產的一系列論辯文獻,接引大學部高年級主修歷史(或人文社會科學)的同學平順進入問題取向的跨國語境。這不是一門二次大戰後西方漢學研究的通史或文獻回顧,因為著重的只限於曾經引發學者之間公開爭議辯論的課題。 

課程目標
希望在精讀前輩學者們彼此針鋒相對、砥礪琢磨的論述之中,我們學會欣賞學界的多元喧嘩與有情眾生的有限性,並且幫助我們自身研究問題意識的形塑與反思。 
課程要求
基本的學術英文閱讀能力,審問深思暨自我問題化的意願。 
預期每週課後學習時數
 
Office Hours
另約時間 
參考書目
待補 
指定閱讀
1.中國思想中有自然法概念嗎?
Joseph Needham, Science and Civilization in China, vol. II, pp. 518-83.

2.中國思想中有自然法概念嗎?
Derk Bodde, “Evidence of ‘Laws of Nature’ in Chinese Thought,” HJAS 20:3 & 4 (1957), pp. 709-27.

3.科學革命發生在中國嗎?
Joseph Needham, Science and Civilization in China, vol. V, part 2, pp. xxii-xxvii.

4.科學革命發生在中國嗎?
Nathan Sivin, “Why the Scientific Revolution did not take place in China – or did it?” Chinese Science 5 (1982), 45-66; The Environmentalist 5:1 (1985), pp. 39-50; http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~nsivin/scirev.pdf (2005.8.24 revised).

5.為什麼中國沒有自發性資本主義?
Max Weber, trans. and ed. by Hans H. Gerth, The Religion of China, The Free Press, 1951, pp. 226-49, “Conclusion.”
Gary G. Hamilton, “Why no Capitalism in China? Negative Questions in Historical, Comparative Research,” in Max Weber in Asian Studies, ed. by Andrew E. Buss, pp. 65-89.

6.為什麼中國沒有自發性資本主義?
Mark Elvin, “Why China Failed to Create an Endogenous Industrial Capitalism? A Critique of Max Weber’s Explanation,” Theory and Society 13 (1984), pp. 379-91.

7.中國歷史的空間結構,成立嗎?
G. W. Skinner, “The Structure of Chinese History,” JAS 44:2 (1985), pp. 271-92.
Barbara Sands and Ramon H. Myers, “The Spatial Approach to Chinese History: A Test,” JAS 45:4, pp. 721-43.

8.中國歷史的空間結構,成立嗎?
Daniel Little and Joseph W. Esherick, “ Testing the Testers: A Reply to Barbara Sands and Ramon Myers’s Critique of G. W. Skinner’s Regional Systems Approach to China,” JAS 48:1, pp. 90-99.
Barbara Sands and Ramon H. Myers, “Economics and Macroregions: A Reply to Our Critics,” JAS 49:2 (1990), p. 344-46.

9.孔子:聖凡之間與漢學的箍套(sinological torque)?
Herbert Fingarette, Confucius – The Secular as Sacred, 1972.

10.孔子:聖凡之間與漢學的箍套(sinological torque)?
Charles Wei-hsun Fu, “Fingarette and Munro on Early Confucianism: A Methodological Examination,” PEW 28:2 (1978), pp. 181-98. Fingarette’s reply, pp. 223-26.

11.尋找論語原本的樣貌?
E. B. Brooks & A. T. Brooks, The Original Analects: Sayings of Confucius and His Successors, Columbia UP, 2001.

12.尋找論語原本的樣貌?
Edward Slingerland, “Why Philosophy is not “Extra” in Understanding the Analects,” PEW 50:1 (2000), pp. 137-41. Brooks’ response, pp. 141-46. Slingerland’s reply, pp. 146-47.

13.世界詩還是中國詩?
Stephen Owen, “The Anxiety of Global Influence: What is World Poetry,” The New Republic (Nov. 1990), pp. 28-32.

14.世界詩還是中國詩?
Stephen Owen, “The Anxiety of Global Influence: What is World Poetry,” The New Republic (Nov. 1990), pp. 28-32.

15.「新儒學」乎?「道學」乎?
Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, “ A New Direction in Confucian Scholarship: Approaches to Examining the Differences between Neo-Confucianism and Tao-hsueh,” PEW 42:3 (1992), pp. 455-74.
W. Theodore de Bary, “The Uses of Neo-Confucianism: A Response to Professor Tillman,” PEW 43:3 (1993), pp. 541-55.

16.「新儒學」乎?「道學」乎?
Tillman’s response, 44:1 (1994), pp. 135-42. De Bary’s reply, pp. 143-44.
Hilde de Weerdt, “Canon formation and examination culture: the construction of guwen and daoxue traditions,” Journal of Sung-Yuan Studies (Albany, NY) 29 (1999) 91-134.

(課題可視選課同學興趣增刪,課程進度亦將依實際上課狀況調整) 
評量方式
(僅供參考)
 
No.
項目
百分比
說明
1. 
上課 
50% 
含出席、平時作業、隨堂測驗與課堂討論 
2. 
期末(考試&作業)  
50% 
內容繳交方式另行宣佈 
 
課程進度
週次
日期
單元主題