论文部分内容阅读
不少古典名著社会意义的评价,存在着无据可依、歧义丛生的现象。本文认为,原因之一,是由于方法上的差异或对立。为了求得较为统一的认识,本文认为,经马克思批判改造了的辩证思维方法是“科学上的正确的方法”,依然具有指导意义。沿着辩证思维方法的方向研究文学作品,则需要综合运用美学的、辩证的、历史的方法。这种方法反映看作品整体构成及诸构成方面的内在联系,能帮助人们自觉地从抽象上升到具体,避免庸俗社会学或形式主义的倾向,比较合乎实际地把握作品的社会意义。本文就此作了初步的论述,并对几部古典作品社会意义的评价提出了一些不同的看法。
Many social classics famous classic evaluation, there is no evidence to be based, ambiguous phenomenon. This article argues that one of the reasons is due to methodological differences or contradictions. In order to get a more unified understanding, this paper argues that the dialectical thinking method transformed by Marx’s critique is “the correct method in science” and still has guiding significance. Studying literary works in the direction of dialectical thinking requires the integrated application of aesthetic, dialectical, and historical methods. This method reflects the intrinsic connection between the overall composition and composition of works, helps people consciously ascend from abstract to concrete, avoids the tendency of vulgar sociology or formalism, and grasps the social significance of the work in a more realistic way. This article made a preliminary discussion of this, and put forward some different opinions on the evaluation of the social significance of several classical works.