Note: The author of this article is a professor at China University of Political Science and Law.
At present, whether it is the state, the Ministry of Education or universities, there are many humanities and social sciences projects and the amount is also highIs the research of the subject an academic one?Can humanities and social sciences engage in research like science?Can a person who does a project be called a scholar?
1. "Academic" must be about ideas
Although the word "academic" is also broadly understood when it comes to "academic" issues, and even the words "learning", "thought", "research", and "exploration" are consciously or unintentionally replaced by it in order to facilitate thinking about the problem, the real meaning of the word "academic" must be related to thought.
In other words, what really qualifies as academic must be the product of thought, otherwise, I prefer not to think of it as academic.
So,What does it mean to be thoughtful?I think there are two aspects involved: one is to think hard and the other is to have results.
The so-called "hardship" can be roughly described as follows: in terms of intensity, "the belt gradually widens and never regrets" is its literary expression, that is, thinking is not only long-term, but also requires a lot of mental and physical expenditure;In terms of difficulty, it is not something that ordinary people can afford, it needs to be trained in rational thinking, and the effort may be fruitless;In terms of breadth, it may be a popular subject, but the scope of the contemplation must be able to reach where it can reach, and the object of contemplation must have an uncertainty beyond existence.
As for "having results", it means that there must be something conclusive, whether it is a point of view or an opinion, it must be beyond the ideas of previous people, and it will directly or indirectly contribute to the well-being of mankind, and most importantly, it will never be conclusively expected.
2. Academia and Science
Scholarship is about ideas and the results of academic inquiry are not conclusively predictable, which is perhaps the most significant difference between academia and science.
Of course, academia and science are not unrelated, and the part about scientific ideas can be called academic about science, but the purpose of science being needed is the applicability of scientific achievements, and the results are related to the closeness of human welfare and the safety of the application of results. The object of science is always a perceptible being, although it is always there. Unknown problems, but once the problem is solved, even if there are doubts, the doubts are just for the predictable conclusion, because of this characteristic of scientific achievements, therefore, for utilitarian purposes, people may be some unknown problems that need to be clarified in the form of project establishment to encourage scientists to tackle key problems, plus the way of scientific research can not rely on hard thinking, it needs experiments, it needs funds, needs group cooperation and joint research, and it is inevitable to provide project funding.
So why can't scholarship about ideas be studied in the same way as science?Isn't its work applicable?
It should be understood in this way, first of all, the object of academia is often a non-existent thing, unlike science, which can designate a real object of study, and the nature of academia is freedom, and the taboo of its research is the restraint of thought, if it has to designate a certain object of study, it can only be the end of academics.
Some people say that academic achievements are also applicable, and academic ideas can also be used to improve people's living conditions, although it is true, but academic ideas themselves have no conclusive conclusions, and application is only a risky attempt, besides, the application of ideas to a certain field of society, there are no new ideas in themselves, which has ended academics when ideas are applied, just like the issue of fairness and justice, any study of fairness and justice itself can be called academic, but issues such as educational fairness and judicial justice, although they can also be said to be the application of ideas, but in fact they are like a set of formulas, and this kind of problem can never get out of the ideas contained in the formula itselfApplications are no longer academic.
Besides, is it worth it for scholars in universities to apply existing ideas, and the money should be used to support scholars in conducting the most basic academic research, and it is better to have some research institute that undertakes this function to do it. Although serving the community is one of the functions of the university, service should be indirect, directly involved in social affairs, and not conducive to the achievement of the university's goals.
3. Academics and research
Academics and research should not be confused, although we often say "academic research", in fact, many studies can not be called academic, the word "academic research" makes people feel that research is academic, in view of this, we may as well call the situation of research and non-learning "academic research" or "research related to academics", academic development does need research as a premise, but lack of thought, it should not be called academic, many studies are indeed related to the further development of academic basic research, such as comparative research, Evidence-based research, introductory research ("must-remember") Note: the introduction of academic thoughts), etc., academic progress must be carried out in this kind of research, but at present, many studies in China's universities are just research, which may hurt the feelings of some real scholars (it doesn't matter, the rules allow exceptions), but I have my reasons, I think: whether it is to find someone to do it with a proposed topic, or to seek a project for academic purposes (may be referred to as a reward project and a funding project), this kind of research is the end of scholarship in the current scientific research environment in China.
For (1) both types of issues necessarily involve the act of the state, because money belongs to the state. The reward topic has been analyzed above, so imagine that you should study it within the scope of the proposed topic, what should you do?If you don't know each other like this, then eighty percent of the subject will not be yours, so it is understandable to speak for money, what else can we expect from such research?In the same way, it is impossible to get rid of the state's screening of the subject you declare, even if the screening is not carried out by state staff who have nothing to do with academics, but by some learned experts invited by the state, can we expect good academic projects to be funded?Not to mention that the interlacing is like a mountain, even if the same problems in similar disciplines, the so-called peer experts are difficult to identify whether the declared subject is valuable, and the really valuable things will not be perfectly reflected in several declaration forms, and the spark of ideas often appears in the research process, that is to say, if the peer expert can evaluate the value of the declared project, he must have a higher education in this field, in other words, he has studied, then the batch of such projects is a waste of money to repeat the research, if the peer experts really see the value of your declared project, know that your idea is there, it is indeed worth studying, then it is not more troublesome, shouldn't the group of doctoral and master's workers under the same experts take advantage. Therefore, if you want to conduct research in the form of a project, it is really difficult to say what ideas will appear.
2) Even if the research project is completed, whether it is really related to academics has to be carefully analyzed, I think the reward for the project, if the project is purely for money, the project will be over, and we can expect it to become the basis for other people's researchIf it is not only for money, unless the person who is doing the subject can continue on his own, this is a fortunate thing, otherwise don't expect this kind of research to be grafted onto others, the real thinking mainly depends on the thinker himself to inherit the lineage, and the result of grafting the general works of the general generation can only be general, and the ideas cannot be grafted, and even the ideas of famous masters can only be auxiliary, reference, and suggestive.
3) Those who publish projects now only do so for practical purposes, and it goes without saying that academics end up, but those who want to do projects often have this purpose, which is another reason for the end of academics. I often hear scholars say that some issues cannot be studied, and what cannot be studied is often thought, so scholars have also learned to be obedient, and only do some research that does not bring trouble to themselves, although some scholars with a conscience may think that they are doing this to accumulate some experience for future generations, such as comparative research, and introduce how foreign countries do it every day (which can guarantee that research can be carried out), and the latent consciousness is that China can also do this in the future, maybe they can learn from others and take fewer detours, and the wish is good, but in the long run, without academics, I am afraid that they will be farther and farther away after following others' butts, and it is okay to learn from ideas, but they can't produce their own thoughtsIn order to make the things for reference effective, we must practice it, and in the process of practice, it is possible to develop ideas that match our own soil. It can be seen that the Chinese pragmatism of self-preservation is another reason for the end of scholarship.
4. Academics and Scholars
By scholars, I mean "scholars", that is, people who are really engaged in academic work. This should be different from the scholars we often mention, those who use research as academics, who only know how to study but not think, who only dare to study and do not have the courage to think, are not the scholars I am referring to, they can only be called scholars at best, they are the terminators of scholarship.
So, how exactly can a person be called a true scholar?I think it is the idea that makes the scholar, and the real scholar should first assume the responsibility for the thought, that is, he must have the ability and courage to let his thought reach wherever it can reach, because to bear such a responsibility, the scholar must naturally have an independent will and a free spirit, otherwise how can the person who is dominated by money and speaks for money keep his mind in a free state?Only by being independent can we be free, and the non-existence of domination is the fundamental premise for the freedom of thought.
Of course, independence requires courage, and I think the words of Edmund Wilson, whom Russell Jacoby called "the last intellectual," are the best illustration of this independent courage: "Demond Wilson does not write the books or articles that others dictate......Don't show up ......Do not participate in any academic conferences. ”
Let's compare, are there still scholars in our universities?