|
那曲翻译公司关键字：(The following is the text)Earlier, I criticized the article from Mr. Wang Jiafan "" and the revaluation of China's history, "" learned, that the American scholar Kenneth Pomeranz, until 1800, the United Kingdom of England and southern China, differences in degree of regional economic development not only because England has a suitable exploitation of coal and the North American colonies to ease the population pressure, which makes the industrial revolution, the British had, after what had just parted ways.
To tell the truth, the light of this conclusion from Pomeranz I have asserted, "Great Divergence," a book does not have research value, if it is to read for pleasure, that my will power will also be a serious test.
Recently, an enthusiastic reader give me a letter that he read on the "Great Divergence," a book of comments, feel Pomeranz discussion on the reasons for the rise of the United Kingdom, just to prove my "geographical conditions and the exogenous variables are the ultimate social development cause "theory of history (Xu Ping in:" Origin of Western History contrast ", China Radio and Television Press, 2004, published in August). I am the reader to "Great Divergence" and I was quite surprised to link the history of ideas. But carefully think about it, Pomeranz said the British Industrial Revolution two key reasons, just "corresponds to" I have explained in the "geographical conditions" and "exogenous variables." So readers misunderstand my theory of history is not surprising. But it also made me realize the need to emphasize again the reader, in my opinion, run history, the ultimate "cause" ("condition") is determined, are the geographical conditions and the exogenous variables. So the key task of historical research, not to find "what factors" to promote or delay the development and progress of society, but to clarify these factors, "how to" determine or influence the choice of economic man, so they created their own very different social and history.
To illustrate I Pomeranz different methods of historical research, I had to visit a site on the "Great Divergence," the introduction and commentary, but also a general understanding of Chinese scholars to study the economic history of the method. This article does not provide specific scholars on the history of economic data is reviewed, only on the research methods to present their views in order to teach economic history enthusiasts.
First, the macro history of the problem: why modern China "backward"?China's defeat in the Opium War, forcing the Chinese people aware of their backwardness, historians began to re-examine their traditional society. But it is to say, after 100 years of exploration, scholars did not find out why the historical process of China and Western Europe there is such a strong contrast. In my opinion, people and even traditional Chinese community is the "what" did not find out. The 19th century behind the West in China is an undeniable fact. However, this is due to the backward state of society from the Qin and Han dynasties since the "long-term development of slow", or traditional Chinese society, "has long been stagnant," or that the name has been living with the Chinese before the forefront of the world, but only behind the times in the Ming and Qing Dynasties?
Many people think that the "slow theory" and "stagnation theory" and "outdated" theory the difference between does not matter, but in fact, these three perspectives are not the same basis of understanding. If you think that Chinese society is "slow long-term development", it needs to run the social structure after the formation of power in society to find reasons; if that Chinese society "has long been stagnant," then there is no need from a traditional society on the potential for self-development to work on research; but if that has brilliant achievements of ancient China, but was falling behind in the Ming and Qing dynasties, the Ming and Qing Dynasties it only need any special factors that have explored the reasons behind the times.
|