亞裔美國學者的中國觀—以金淳基與入江昭為例

Abstract

金淳基與入江昭兩位亞裔美國學者，長期以來從事有關「中國」的研究，並分別以「綜合性解釋」及「中間主義」立論。金氏不採取單一因素解釋方式，而企圖綜合不同（或多種）理論、觀點、立場及因素兼而論之。入江則是以文化為基礎，嘗試在各家之外找到各方都接受的領域。相較於其他學者，兩位亞裔學者除了出於學術生涯的考量外，更有在美國中國學知識社群中尋求自我定位的需要。因此，本篇論文以金淳基與入江昭的口述歷史為基礎，同時試圖在兩人專書、期刊或演講等，找出他們根據何種中國觀與他人進行學術性的對話。不論是「綜合性解釋」或是「中間主義」，都是兩人從原屬知識社群進入美國後所發展出理解「中國」的方式。由於他們都具有離散的經驗，同時亦未完全接受美國知識社群的理論與研究方法，從其論述之中，可以察覺出兩人試圖有所調和的心情，且需藉由觀察其在美國知識社群學術生涯發展的過程，發掘其身分策略。

Both Samuel Kim and Akira Iriye are Asian American scholars and have conducted researches regarding China in the United States over 40 years. The synthetic-interactive explanation adopted by Kim is not based on mono-causal approach. Instead, various factors would be synthesized in his study. When discussing bilateral or multilateral relations, Iriye would rather take no specific viewpoint and tends to be centrist. Furthermore, he tries to find out a sphere based on culture where each party could accept. In explicit or implicit way, Kim and Iriye claim they belong to the second generation of American scholarship on China studies. Therefore, with the synthetic or centrist approach, those two Asian American scholars not only grab the opportunity to enter the community on China Study, but also initiate the dialogues with other scholars.