摘要
笔者针对周久凤先生关于"‘研究对象’之争源于不同视角"的分析提出不同看法,认为"图书馆学研究对象"必须是对图书馆本质的准确揭示,而图书馆的本质是微观的、固有的、稳定的和惟一的,它不会随时空变化、图书馆形态变化而变化,"研究对象"也不会随研究者视角的不同而呈现为多样化。笔者关于以往"对象说"类型的划分是合理的。周先生没有真正理解"馆藏知识的传播"。"研究对象"之争并非源于"不同视角",而是源于尚未准确揭示出图书馆的本质。
The are different views against Mr.Zhou Jiufeng,s analysis about ＂＇library science study object＇ from different perspectives＂,considered library science study object must be accurately reveal the essence of library,the essence of library is micro,intrinsic,steady and sole,it not change along with change of time,space,and form of library,＂study object＂ also not appear varied along with different perspectives。The differentiate of the type the author about formerly ＂object theory＂ is sensible。Mr.Zhou Jiufeng no come to fully realize about ＂the communication of the collections knowledge＂。The controversy about ＂library science study object＂ not from ＂ different perspectives＂,but from these ＂object theory＂ not accurately reveal the essence of library。
出处
《图书馆》
CSSCI
北大核心
2009年第6期63-64,76,共3页
Library
