文藝復興還是啟蒙運動？－－對胡適「中國的文藝復興」思想的再評價

Renaissance or Enlightenment?: Re-evaluating Hu Shih’s Concept of “The Chinese Renaissance”

美國學者格里德認為，胡適「中國的文藝復興」思想，更接近於歐洲的啟蒙運動，而不是文藝復興；余英時先生也認為，相較於義大利的人文主義，胡適更直接是法國啟蒙思潮的繼承者。本文根據胡適英文論著中有關「中國的文藝復興」的系統論述，將胡適與「五四」時期留日知識分子進行了區分，將歐洲文藝復興和啟蒙運動進行了區分，並將胡適「中國的文藝復興」思想與法國和德國兩種啟蒙主義思想資源進行比較，提出了與格里德和余英時先生不同的看法，論證了胡適「中國的文藝復興」思想並非來自18世紀歐洲的啟蒙運動，他所闡述的是中國宋代以來的人文主義和理智主義的再生運動，這一運動與歐洲14-16世紀的文藝復興具有歷史的內在一致性。

"American scholar J. B. Grieder argued that Hu Shih’s concept of the “Chinese Renaissance” is more similar to the European Enlightenment than to the Renaissance; Mr. Yu Ying-shih also agreed that, when compared with Italian humanism, Hu Shih was a more direct heir to the French Enlightenment. Based on a systematical analysis of the “Chinese Renaissance” in Hu Shih’s English works, this article first distinguishes Hu Shih from other intellectuals who studied in Japan during the May Fourth Movement and establishes the differences between the European Renaissance and the Enlightenment. It then offers a different perspective from those of J. B. Grieder and Yu Ying-shih by comparing Hu Shih’s concept of the “Chinese Renaissance” with similar materials discussing the French and German Enlightenments. In doing so, this article demonstrates that Hu Shih’s concept of the “Chinese Renaissance” did not originate from the 18th century European Enlightenment, as Hu Shih argued China was experiencing a rebirth of humanism and rationalism that could be traced back to the Song Dynasty, and this movement is parallel with the European Renaissance from the 14th century to the 16th century."