摘要： 构建中国自主知识体系，是新时代中国哲学社会科学发展的核心命题与战略任务。2016年5月17日，习近平总书记在哲学社会科学工作座谈会上发表重要讲话。十年来，我国哲学社会科学事业在讲话精神的指引下取得了显著成就。但波澜壮阔的中国式现代化实践对知识创新、理论创新、方法创新提出了新的更高要求。如何准确把握“自主知识体系”的理论内涵，如何从当代中国实践与深厚历史传统中提炼具有原创性的标识性概念和理论范式，如何加快构建彰显主体性、原创性的学科体系、学术体系和话语体系，是哲学社会科学界依然面临的任务。为进一步凝聚共识、探索前路，习近平总书记“5·17”重要讲话发表十周年之际，《探索与争鸣》编辑部邀请相关领域的名家学者从理论阐释、路径探索、历史反思与学科建构等多重维度，共同探讨这一关乎中国学术未来与文明发展的根本性问题。李凤亮教授从何为知识、如何自主、怎样体系三个基本问题出发，对中国自主知识体系的内涵要义、建构核心与实现路径进行了阐释。他指出，需要实现知识来源、立场与表达的三重根本性转变，其核心路径在于，以“两个结合”推动马克思主义“魂脉”与中华优秀传统文化“根脉”发生“化学反应”，从而锻造出理论创新的坚实内核。解超教授紧扣“加快构建”的战略要求，深刻剖析了其三重动因。他强调，“加快”的核心是在坚守正确方向与学术规律的前提下，立足中国式现代化的实践基础与哲学社会科学发展的内在规律，阐明“加快构建”的内在依据，探讨如何提升知识生产的效率与质量，并在“加快构建”与“久久为功”之间寻求速度与质量的辩证统一。孟钟捷教授指出，“持续创新现代化理论将为中国世界史自主知识体系提供更为坚实的根基”，其核心在于通过持续性地质疑、思考与重构，完成三重递进任务：破除所谓“经典现代化”理论的错误认知，推进解释道路多样性的“一元多线”现代化理论，并最终运用“中国式现代化”理论来突破西方叙事，为应对全球现代性危机开辟新空间。雷启立教授指出，数智时代的知识生产正经历深刻重构，在技术既带来效率亦引发焦虑的双重境遇下，必须推动育人范式与研究范式的根本转向：从“知识传授”与“知识存量”的度量，转向“高阶思维与情感培育”以及“协同创新能力”的认证，以此在智能浪潮中捍卫人的主体性与创造性。陈丹教授指出，智能时代的知识建构正经历从“体系”到“生态”的范式革命，其核心矛盾在于算法、平台与流量重塑的生产逻辑对“慢智慧”与“共识”的挤压。对此，出版应超越传统角色，主动成为“深时间”的创设者与“共识基础设施”的构建者，在技术驱动的生态中守护文明的价值基石。于文秀教授强调，构建中国自主知识体系，必须以“两个结合”与当代中国实践为根本，同时对域外经验进行批判性“祛魅”与“解构—适配—重构”式的借鉴，最终在视域融合中贡献中国智慧。郭庆松教授指出，当前存在“依附性自主悖论”及其导致的“自主知识生产的结构性障碍”。破解之道在于建构“概念—文化—传播”的动态调适机制，即从提炼标识性概念与提出原创理论、在“两个结合”中筑牢文化根基以及通过提升国际传播效能化解认可困境三个维度综合发力。

Abstract: Building China’s independent knowledge system is the core proposition and strategic task for the development of Chinese philosophy and social sciences in the new era. Over the past ten years, China’s philosophy and social sciences have made remarkable achievements. However, the magnificent practice of the Chinese path to modernization has raised new and higher demands for knowledge innovation, theoretical innovation and method innovation. To further build consensus and explore the way forward, the Exploration and Free Views invited renowned scholars from related fields to jointly explore this fundamental issue concerning China’s academic future and civilizational development from multiple dimensions, including theoretical interpretation, path exploration, historical reflection, and discipline construction. Professor Li Fengliang elaborated on the connotation, core construction, and implementation path of China’s independent knowledge system from three basic questions: what knowledge is, how to be autonomous, and how to establish a system. Professor Xie Chao stressed that the core of “accelerating” is to clarify the internal basis of “accelerating the construction”, explore how to improve the efficiency and quality of knowledge production, and seek the dialectical unity of speed and quality between “accelerating the construction” and “long-term efforts”, based on the practical basis of Chinese path to modernization and the internal law of the development of philosophy and social sciences, on the premise of adhering to the correct direction and academic laws. Professor Meng Zhongjie pointed out that the theory of continuous innovation and modernization will provide a more solid foundation for China’s independent knowledge system of world history, and its core lies in completing the triple progressive task through continuous questioning, thinking, and reconstructing. Professor Lei Qili pointed out that knowledge production in the era of digital intelligence is undergoing profound restructuring. In the dual situation of technology bringing efficiency and causing anxiety, it is necessary to promote a fundamental shift in the paradigm of education and research. Professor Chen Dan pointed out that the knowledge construction in the era of intelligence is undergoing a paradigm revolution from “system” to “ecology”. Publishing should go beyond traditional roles and actively become the creator of “deep time” and the builder of “consensus infrastructure”, guarding the value cornerstone of civilization in the technology driven ecology. Professor Yu Wenxiu emphasized that it is necessary to take the “two combinations” and contemporary Chinese practice as the foundation, and at the same time, critically “demystify” and “deconstruct adapt reconstruct” foreign experiences, ultimately contributing universal Chinese wisdom in the fusion of perspectives. Professor Guo Qingsong pointed out that there is currently a “dependency autonomy paradox” and the resulting “structural barriers to autonomous knowledge production”. The solution lies in constructing a dynamic adjustment mechanism of “concept culture dissemination”.