摘要
为了查找郁达夫的真正死因,日本学者铃木正夫多年来调查采访、并引用大量资料证明自己的观点,这值得肯定;同时,其相关结论并非定论、仍然需要继续深入考证。我国学者罗以民坚持科学实证、独立思考、勇于献疑的精神,令人敬佩。这本来是一个用史实说话的学术探讨过程,而不是一场“口诛笔伐”的意气纠纷。然而,日本记者对铃木正夫的袒护和对中国学者的非理性批评,却造成了不良影响。为此,争论的双方都应当以学者直笔信史的严谨态度,心平气和地摆事实、讲道理,在学术对话中实现互补共进、深化认识,给读者提供一个令人信服的解答。
In order to uncover the mystery Yu Dafu＇s death, Japanese scholar Suzuki Masao made plenty of investigations for many years and came to a conclusion. Despite his efforts, his argument over Yu Dafu＇s death is not final and needs further evidence. Chinese scholar Luo Yimin has an inquiring mind and believes in the truth of academic research. The argument over Yu Dafu＇s death, rather than a personal dispute, reflects a process of academic research, which can only be justified by evidence. However, the Japanese journalists, due to their unprincipled protection of Suzuki Masao and irrational criticism against Chinese scholars, has had a negative elect. Therefore, both sides should take a scientific attitude to work together through academic dilogues and reach a convincing conclusion.
出处
《杭州师范学院学报（社会科学版）》
2006年第6期61-62,67,共3页
Journal of Hangzhou Teachers College(Humanities and Social Sciences)
关键词
学术探讨
实事求是
郁达夫死因
铃木正夫
academic research
seek truth through evidence
the mystery of Yu dafu＇s death
Suzuki Masao
