明清時期中西科技的比較研究：以耶穌會傳教士為主

Some Comparative Issues in the World History of Science and Technolog y: Jesuit Learning in Late Imperial China

過去一個世紀以來，歐洲人宣示西方科學的全面勝利。自1954 年起，李約瑟（Joseph Needham）便強調歐洲現代科學的發展是一枝獨秀，然而他也認同傳統中國在17 世紀之前的科學技術成就。在李約瑟回答「前現代的中國人為何不發展現代科學」這敏感問題之後的幾十年，我們漸漸認同，將重點放在「中國人錯失現代科學發展」確實具有啟發性，但卻是史學上的誤導，不得不重新評估科學史該如何全面重寫。這篇文章著重在中國人何以未曾於歐洲的「牛頓世紀」裡學到任何東西，並且直到鴉片戰爭（1839–1842）之前，依然使用自己的分析方式做數學運算。仍有些論點以1793 年訪問中國的馬戛爾尼使團為例而堅稱，是清廷太過於保守以致於未能在新興的近代世界有所斬獲。以事後之見而言，這些觀點無庸置疑。然而中國方面是受了許多外部因素影響，比如18 世紀中葉，中國與歐洲的耶穌會瓦解，這也能解釋為何亞洲的牛頓革命來得這麼遲，並且不在18 世紀發生。

For over a century, Europeans have heralded the success of Western science and assumed the failure of science elsewhere. Since 1954, Joseph Needham had stressed the unique rise of modern science in Europe, but at the same time he acknowledged the achievements in traditional Chinese science and technology until 1600. In the decades since Needham answered his provocative question, “why didn’t the pre-modern Chinese develop modern science?” we have increasingly acknowledged that our focus on the “failure” of Chinese science to develop into modern science is heuristically interesting but historiographically misguided. We are now forced to reassess how the history of science globally should be rewritten. T his article will focus on why the Chinese never learned about the “Newtonian Century” in Europe and its analytic style of mathematical reasoning until after the Opium War (1839–1842). Some still contend that the Qing state during the Macartney mission in 1793, for example, was too closed-minded to learn about the emerging early modern world. With hindsight, such views appear incontrovertible, but there were many external factors to China, such as the collapse of the Jesuit mission in China and Europe in the middle of the eighteenth century, which help explain why the Newtonian revolution came so late in Asia, and not in the eighteenth century.