|
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 |
100-1 |
|
授課對象 |
學程 經典人文學程 |
|
授課教師 |
宋家復 |
|
課號 |
Hist5018 |
|
課程識別碼 |
123 U8410 |
|
班次 |
|
|
學分 |
2 |
|
全/半年 |
半年 |
|
必/選修 |
選修 |
|
上課時間 |
星期四3,4(10:20~12:10) |
|
上課地點 |
歷史研討室 |
|
備註 |
領域：歷史。
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/1001SinologicalDebat |
|
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
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 |
|
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.中國也有一個人文自由傳統？
Wm Theodore de Bary, The Liberal Tradition in China, Columbia UP, 1983.
16.中國也有一個人文自由傳統？
F. W. Mote, “The Limits of Intellectual History?” Ming Studies 19 (1984), pp. 15-25. De Bary’s reply, 27 (1986), pp. 77-92. Mote surrejoinder, pp. 93-94.
17.「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-hsüeh,” 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.
18.「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) |
|
參考書目 |
|
|
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 |
|
|