摘要：

今天的中国，前所未有地接近实现中华民族伟大复兴的目标。这主要得益于40多年的改革开放，使中国发展成为全球第二大经济体，综合国力显著增强，为中华民族伟大复兴奠定了物质基础。然而从更高的要求和标准来看，中国在文化软实力尤其是国际话语权方面仍有较大不足。不仅西方世界对中国有误解、曲解，而且许多中国人自己也习惯了套用西方的概念和理论来解释中国，接受了西方对中国的误读。中华民族的复兴不仅仅是经济上的崛起，更重要的应是文明的复兴。而文明复兴的核心要素之一，当是中国自己的知识体系的形成。富起来的中国只有构建出具有解释力和说服力的知识体系，才能掌握国际话语权，才能使自己的文化软实力与经济硬实力相称，才能真正地全面地强起来。今日中国已经具备了构建自己知识体系的物质基础和理论需求，百年未有之大变局也为中国构建知识体系提供了历史机遇，接下来需要的是构建中国知识体系的理论自觉、理论自信和学术努力。为此，《探索与争鸣》编辑部组织了相关笔谈，探讨构建中国知识体系的内在逻辑、发展规律、突破方向等问题，力求为中国知识体系重建和中华文明复兴提供学者的一些思考和智慧。

解超教授指出，在中国特色社会主义进入新时代的背景下，构建具有中国特色的知识体系具有三重意义：一是解决当前中国理论落后于实践的问题；二是加强中国软实力建设的必由之路；三是加强对党和国家的政治认同的需要。郝宇青教授认为，近代以来中国基本上都是在西方文明的框架下来检视自己、认识自己，甚至指导自己的社会政治实践。但是经过40多年的改革开放，中国的发展在很多方面已经超出了基于西方历史经验的哲学社会科学结论，正是在这样的背景下才提出了构建中国知识体系的历史任务。刘京希教授主张，构建中国知识体系应立足于全球视野，以海纳百川的开放胸襟，抱持普遍性与特殊性有机统一的包容姿态，在特殊性文化形态之中，去寻求、发现、凝炼与升华具有普遍性、共通性的思想与知识成果。虞崇胜教授认为，知识体系是人类在不断适应事物发展规律中逐步形成的，我们应该做的或者说能够做的，是给知识生长提供适宜的环境，让知识在其中按照自己的发展规律茁壮成长。唐亚林教授认为，知识体系最终能否获得充足而成熟的自主性，一方面要看是否形成了主体性的知识原理与原创性的知识范式，另一方面要看是否形成了由人、组织、制度与治理四大要素共同构筑的知识体系应用场景和运作框架。蒲国良教授指出，我们所要构建的知识体系应该是“中国的”“当代的”“开放的”和“建设性的”，在知识体系的构建过程中应从古今中外的历史中汲取智慧和教训。杨龙芳教授从宏观层面将知识体系分解为知识资源化、知识科学化、知识民主化、知识制度化和知识时代化五个问题，从中解析出意义、胆识、学识、常识和智识五个结构元素，勾画出资源、文品、学风、信念和信心五个生长机制。瞿骏教授以历史学为例，认为中国知识体系建设须在“重识”世界与“发现”自己的交错互动中，承认文明多样性对于人类世界的意义，然后认真切实地去学习、认知中国文明和中华文化的“独特”。付长珍教授指出，当代中国伦理学知识体系建构，不仅需要熔铸古今、会通中西，更需要在全球化和人类命运共同体的视域下，面向生活世界，推进伦理学的知识创新和伦理学研究范式的新开拓，具体呈现为批判、会通和创新三个环节。

——主持人　叶祝弟　杜运泉　孙冠豪

Abstract:

Today, China has the material basis and theoretical needs to construct its own knowledge system. What is needed next is theoretical consciousness, theoretical self-confidence and academic efforts. Therefore, the journal organized relevant written talks to explore the logic, development law and breakthrough direction of the construction of China’s knowledge system, and strive to provide some thinking and wisdom of scholars for the reconstruction of China’s knowledge system and the rejuvenation of Chinese civilization?Professor Xie Chao pointed out that under the background of socialism with Chinese characteristics entering a new era, it is of triple significance to build a knowledge system with Chinese characteristics. Professor Hao Yuqing believes that after more than 40 years of reform and opening up, China’s development in many aspects has exceeded the conclusion of philosophy and social sciences based on Western historical experience. Professor Liu Jingxi pointed out that the construction of China’s knowledge system should be based on a global perspective, with an open mind of embracing all rivers, and holding an inclusive attitude of organic unity of universality and particularity. Professor Yu Chongsheng believes that what we should do or can do is to provide an appropriate environment for the growth of knowledge, so that knowledge can thrive in accordance with its own development law. Professor Tang Yalin believes that, on the one hand, the autonomy of knowledge system depends on the formation of subjective knowledge principle and original knowledge paradigm, and on the other hand, the formation of application scenarios and operational framework of knowledge system jointly constructed by human, organization, system and governance. Professor Pu Guoliang pointed out that the knowledge system we want to build should be“Chinese”,“contemporary”,“open”and“constructive”. Professor Yang Longfang analyzed the five structural elements of meaning, courage, knowledge, common sense and wisdom from the macro level, and outlined five growth mechanisms of resources, literature, style of study, faith and confidence. Professor Qu Jun believes that it is necessary to recognize the significance of the diversity of civilizations to the human world in the interactive interaction between“re-understanding”the world and“discovering”ourselves, and then learn and recognize the“uniqueness”of Chinese civilization and Chinese culture seriously, practically and respectfully. Professor Fu Changzhen pointed out that the construction of contemporary China’s ethical knowledge system not only needs to melt the past and the present, but also needs to face the life world under the vision of globalization and the community of human destiny, thus promote the innovation of ethics knowledge and the new development of ethics research paradigm, which is specifically manifested in three aspects: criticism, understanding and innovation.