3.8 Article

Rewriting the History of Civilizations

期刊

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/25723618.2023.2263701

关键词

History of civilizations; discourse narration; clash of civilizations; Chinese discourse; mutual learning of civilizations

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article points out that Western scholars have dominated the definition of the concept of civilization and the writing of civilization history, resulting in a severe Western-centric tendency in current civilization history writing. Therefore, the article calls for the goal of rewriting civilization history, starting from the root of discourse narration, discourse speaking, and discourse interpretation, to establish a Chinese discourse and develop a Chinese viewpoint on the history of civilizations.
Depending on the viewpoint of the author, discourse is presented in narration, or rather, discourse is first formed in the perception, narration, and interpretation of the history of civilizations. However, Western scholars have dominated the definition of the concept of civilization in addition to the global output of this concept as well as the discourse about writing the history of civilization. As a result of this, there has been a severe Western-centric tendency in the current writing of the history of civilizations (both Western and Chinese). In order to address these problems in a meaningful way, the purpose of this article is to put forward a vital proposal: Re-writing the History of Civilizations. It is a call for a vital path and a major initiative to establish a Chinese discourse from the root of the discourse narration, discourse speaking, and discourse interpretation of the history of civilizations, and is a new issue of the time. They expect Chinese scholars to collaborate with international scholars and unite the entire academic world to rewrite the history of civilizations, re-study the historical facts of mutual learning of civilizations, and further establish a view of civilization with China's knowledge system in various disciplines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据