分析《上书正文体》一文的局限和缺失。_爱下问搜题

搜题请搜索小程序“爱下问搜题”

问题问答题简答题

分析《上书正文体》一文的局限和缺失。

答案

参考答案：

从公文写作指导思想来看，《上书正文体》有其局限性：

（1）没有明确指出文艺、公文两者有不同的写作规律，而一味指责崇尚文词就是“雕虫之小艺”，欠全面。反之，如用写公文的标准，去进行文艺创作，同样不妥。

（2）强调公文应有实在内容、正确意见，当然有积极意义。但仅将其解释为儒家学说、古代典籍，则是其历史局限性。

（3）从矫往必先过正的策略看，为有效地遏止华而不实的文风，提出“弃绝华绮”有其必要。但就写作指导思想而论，在内容充实、观点正确、措施得力的前提下，适当追求结构巧、文句工、辞采华，有时更能增强公文的表述效果。从内容与形式两方面统一认识：就文学欣赏意义上的好文章，未必就是好公文；就实施行政效能角度看的好公文，不必就是好文章。但优秀公文，就应该既是好公文，又是好文章。《上书正文体》的缺失是：

（1）对“魏之三祖，更尚文词”，批评为“忽君人之大道，好雕虫之小艺”，有些过分。曹操的公文，意实词雄，被誉为“建安风骨”。

（2）曹丕在《典论•论文》中对奏议、书论、铭诔、诗赋的写作提出了不同的要求，并非一味地追求文字的华丽。

（3）至于魏明帝曹睿也一网收之，实属冤枉。他在文章写作上的主张与李谔是一致的。

单项选择题

异动管理中，何种操作可使原线路成为两条线路（）

A、开剖

B、增加电缆段

C、更换导线、地线

D、增加杆塔

问答题

(46)Within the modern study of religion the division between philosophy of reli- gion and the histolw of religions-long regarded as a truism insofar as it reflects the distinction between universal and particular-has become increasingly blurred in recent years with the growing influence of’ cultural and critical theory on the humanities and social sciences. Unlike the earaier paradigmatic split between theology and anthropology (or social science methodology) , cultural theory has helped not only to dismantle well worn dualisms such as religion/politics, theism/atheism, sacred/secular, but more importantly has helped to narrow the gap between academic practices and cultural practices such as religion that scholars seek to study. (47)That is to say, cultural theory has simultaneously problematized and challenged essentialist and theological tendencies (such as dreams of absolute principles, supernatural origins, ahistorical authorities, pure traditions etc. ) as well as scholars’ claims to methodological objectivity and impartiality, since the academy far from being a site of neutral value-free analysis, is itself thoroughly implicated in cultural realities. Indeed in what might seen as a reversal of critical theory’s atheistic roots in the "masters of suspicion" contemporary cultural theory has been adapted by scholars not only to successfully dispute the atheistic presuppositions of modern secular thinking in the social sciences, thereby revitalizing religious and theological reflection in the Christian and Judaic traditions, but, more surprisingly perhaps, it has legitimized the use of phenomena from these particular traditions as resources for critical thinking about religion per se.

(48) By contrast, however, the effects of critical theory on the study of nonWestern religions has not only been far more modest, in many cases it seems also to have had precisely the opposite effect. In the study of South Asian religions, for example, the effect of critical theory seems to have reinforced the priority of the secular. In his recent work "Provincialising Europe" Dipesh Chakrabarty points out the very different interventions of critical theory in the two traditions. (49) Whereas in the Western intellectual traditions fundamental thinkers who are long dead and gone are treated not only as people belonging to their own times but also as though they were our contemporaries, the thinkers and traditions of South Asia, once unbroken and alive in their native languages, are now matters of historical research. These traditions are treated as truly dead, as history. Few if any social scientists working in the history of religions would ever try to make the concepts of these traditions into resources for contemporary critical theory. (50) And yet "past Western thinkers and their categories are never quite dead for us in the same way. South Asian(ist) social scientists would argue passionately with a Marx or a Weber without feeling any need to historicize them or to place them in their European intellectual contexts".

(50) And yet "past Western thinkers and their categories are never quite dead for us in the same way. South Asian(ist) social scientists would argue passionately with a Marx or a Weber without feeling any need to historicize them or to place them in their European intellectual contexts".