On the Comparative Research Method of Ideological and Political Education

Since the 1980s, the comparative research method has entered the field of vision of the discipline of ideological and political education. As a general method of ideological and political education research, the comparative research method plays an increasingly important role in expanding academic horizons, exploring developmental laws, and solving practical problems. To advance the construction of an independent knowledge system of ideological and political education at a new starting point, it is necessary to further clarify the basic issues of what the comparative research method of ideological and political education "is," "why it stands," and "how to apply it," so as to continuously raise the scientific level of the comparative research method.

自上世纪80年代起，比较研究方法就已进入思想政治教育学科视野。作为思想政治教育研究的一般方法，比较研究方法在拓展学术视域、探究发展规律、破解现实难题等方面发挥着越来越重要的作用。在新起点上推进思想政治教育自主知识体系建构，需要进一步厘清思想政治教育比较研究方法“是什么”“缘何而立”“如何运用”等基本问题，不断提升比较研究方法的科学化水平。

I. Theoretical Elucidation of the Comparative Research Method of Ideological and Political Education

一、思想政治教育比较研究方法的学理阐释

Comparison is a common mode of thinking and method of cognition in people's daily lives. People often compare things to distinguish the primary from the secondary, the bright from the dark, the empty from the solid, the crude from the refined, and the transient from the eternal. When comparison is used as a research method, it is generally understood as contrasting two or more related things according to a certain standard, seeking their similarities and differences, and exploring universal laws and special laws. It needs to be clarified what exactly "a certain standard" and "related things" are; these are the basic issues that the comparative research method of ideological and political education must elucidate. In ideological and political education, the comparative standard of the comparative research method is based on China's mainstream ideology, dynamically adjusted in the dialectical examination of tradition and modernity, China and the West, and the native and the foreign. The "two or more related things" refer to content within the forms of ideological and political education theory, practice, and institutions across different times and spaces that possesses comparability. Generally speaking, the main objects of comparative research in ideological and political education are the diverse forms of facts of ideological and political education across different times and spaces. The purpose of comparative research in ideological and political education is to determine the similarities and differences among different forms of ideological and political education based on the comparison of multiple facts of ideological and political education, to distinguish the good from the bad and identify the superior from the inferior, thereby forming a rational understanding of the essence, characteristics, and laws of development and change of ideological and political education.

比较是人们在日常生活中常用的思维方式和认识方法。人们常常通过对事物进行比较，辨清主与次、明与暗、虚与实、粗陋与精美、短暂与永恒。当比较作为一种研究方法时，通常理解为按照一定的标准对两个或两个以上有联系的事物加以对比，寻找其相似性与差异性，探求普遍规律与特殊规律。需要明确的是，“一定的标准”和“有联系的事物”到底是什么，是思想政治教育比较研究方法需要阐明的基本问题。在思想政治教育中，比较研究方法的比较标准是以我国主流意识形态为基点，在传统与现代、中国与西方、本土与外来的辩证审视中动态调整的。而“两个或两个以上有联系的事物”，是指不同时空下思想政治教育理论、实践、制度等形态中具有可比性的内容。一般来说，思想政治教育比较研究的主要对象是不同时空下多样态的思想政治教育事实，而思想政治教育比较研究的目的就是基于对多种思想政治教育事实的比较，确定不同形态思想政治教育的相同点与不同点，区分其良莠，鉴别其优劣，从而形成对思想政治教育的本质、特征和发展变化规律的理性认识。

From the perspective of research types, it is difficult to classify the comparative research method as belonging exclusively to either qualitative or quantitative research methods. First, the comparative research method of ideological and political education is a fusion of qualitative and quantitative research methods. Based on the thinking, principles, and purposes of comparison, it comprehensively applies qualitative comparison and quantitative comparison among different facts of ideological and political education. It determines the commonalities and individualities of ideological and political education through the comparison of essential attributes among different forms of ideological and political education, and it determines the universal laws and special laws of change in ideological and political education through quantitative analysis of the attributes of different forms of ideological and political education. Second, comparative research in ideological and political education is the unity of horizontal synchronicity and vertical diachronicity. Horizontally, it compares and differentiates ideological and political education across countries, regions, ethnic groups, and cultures, embodying a strong cross-cultural nature and commensurability. Vertically, it compares and differentiates ideological and political education at different stages, reflecting a certain continuity and periodicity. Whether horizontal or vertical comparison, possibility, comparability, and referentiality are the prerequisite characteristics of comparative research in ideological and political education. Finally, there exists a necessary tension between objectivity and subjectivity in comparative research in ideological and political education. On the one hand, sorting out and describing the situation of different forms of ideological and political education is itself an objective study. This requires comprehensively collecting documentary materials on different forms of ideological and political education, truthfully presenting the original appearance of each form of ideological and political education, and providing a basis for comparison and differentiation between two or more parties. On the other hand, when applying the comparative research method, the research subject will inevitably proceed from their own needs, purposes, and positions, thereby enabling the results of comparative research to serve the correct solution of practical problems. In a word, the necessary tension between the subjective and objective in the comparative research method is to both "cast a cold eye on the world from across the ocean" and "let the hot wind and rain sprinkle over the rivers and skies." [1]1 Mao Zedong, *On Contradiction* (August 1937).

从研究类型看，很难将比较研究方法归属于定性研究方法或定量研究方法某一类别。首先，思想政治教育比较研究方法是定性研究方法和定量研究方法的融合。基于比较的思维、原则和目的，对不同思想政治教育事实间综合运用定性比较与定量比较，既通过对不同思想政治教育间本质属性的比较确定思想政治教育的共性与个性，又通过对不同思想政治教育属性进行量的分析确定思想政治教育变化的普遍规律与特殊规律。其次，思想政治教育比较研究是横向共时性与纵向历时性的统一。在横向上对跨国家、跨地区、跨民族、跨文化的思想政治教育进行比较鉴别，蕴含着浓厚的跨文化性与可通约性；在纵向上对不同阶段的思想政治教育进行比较鉴别，体现出一定的连续性与阶段性。无论是横向比较抑或纵向比较，可能性、可比性与可借鉴性都是思想政治教育比较研究的前提特性。最后，思想政治教育比较研究存在着客观性与主观性之间必要的张力。一方面，对不同样态思想政治教育情况进行梳理和描述，其本身就是一种客观的研究。这需要全面搜集不同样态思想政治教育的文献材料，真实呈现各样态思想政治教育的原本面貌，为两者或多者之间的比较和鉴别提供基础。另一方面，研究主体在运用比较研究方法时必然会出于自身的需要、目的与立场，从而使比较研究结果能够服务于正确解决实际问题。一言以蔽之，比较研究方法主客观之间的必要张力就是既要“冷眼向洋看世界”，又要“热风吹雨洒江天”。

The comparative research method is a universal and important research method in modern scientific research. When discussing comparative anatomy, comparative botany, and comparative linguistics, Marx and Engels stated: "These sciences have achieved great success precisely through comparison and by determining the differences between the objects being compared; in these sciences, comparison has universal significance." [2]2 Alexis de Tocqueville, *Democracy in America*, Introduction (1835). In ideological and political education, the value of comparative research is reflected in at least the following three aspects: First, it expands the knowledge horizon of ideological and political education. In a certain sense, the development and progress of a discipline are built on the basis of absorbing other outstanding achievements, and such development and progress are inseparable from dialogue, exchange, critical reference, and learning from others. The mature development of ideological and political education is not isolated but is based on the reasonable reference to forms of ideological and political education across different times and spaces. Comparative research in ideological and political education focuses on the various forms of ideological and political education across different times and spaces. It can, through comparison, relatively objectively and deeply understand and recognize the content, carriers, methods, etc., of ideological and political education across different times and spaces, broadening people's understanding of other forms of ideological and political education and providing the necessary basis for people to understand ideological and political education from different angles, levels, and aspects. Second, it strengthens the recognition of the disciplinary independence of ideological and political education. Comparison is a basic method for establishing the concept of things and enhancing the understanding of things. On the basis of comparing and differentiating the various forms of ideological and political education, it helps to strengthen attention to the value of ideological and political education and deepen the value identification with ideological and political education. Using other forms of ideological and political education as a mirror, one can grasp that the discipline of ideological and political education is a universal existence directed at the state of human existence and the spiritual world, providing material support and case samples for in-depth exploration of the disciplinary object, disciplinary foundation, disciplinary value, and disciplinary status of ideological and political education. Third, it enhances the cognition of the laws of ideological and political education. "When two blades cut against each other, their sharpness or dullness becomes known; when two theories are set against each other, their rightness or wrongness becomes apparent." (Lunheng · Anshu) [3]3 Mao Zedong, *On Contradiction* (August 1937). Only through comparison can there be differentiation; only through differentiation can there be correct understanding. The process of comparing and differentiating the various forms of ideological and political education under different temporal and spatial conditions is also a process of continuously verifying and falsifying existing knowledge. In the continuous verification and falsification of existing theories and practices of ideological and political education, it directly acts to bridge the gap between the actual form and the ideal form of ideological and political education, gradually forming a correct cognition of the laws of ideological and political education in the deepening progression of understanding and practice.

比较研究方法是现代科学研究中普遍且重要的研究方法。马克思、恩格斯在谈到比较解剖学、比较植物学和比较语言学时说：“这些科学正是由于比较和确定了被比较对象之间的差别而获得了巨大的成就，在这些科学中比较具有普遍意义。”在思想政治教育中，比较研究的价值至少体现在以下三个方面：一是拓展思想政治教育知识视野。从一定意义上讲，学科的发展进步是建立在汲取其他优秀成果基础上的，这种发展进步离不开与他者的对话交流与批判借鉴。思想政治教育的成熟发展并非孤立的，而是建立在对不同时空形态之思想政治教育的合理借鉴基础上。思想政治教育比较研究聚焦不同时空下思想政治教育诸形态，能够在比较中相对客观地深入了解认识不同时空下思想政治教育的内容、载体、方法等,拓宽了人们对其他思想政治教育样态的认识，为人们从不同角度、不同层次、不同侧面认识思想政治教育提供必要基础。二是强化对思想政治教育学科独立性的认同。比较是确立事物概念、增强事物认识的一种基本方法，在比较和鉴别思想政治教育诸形态的基础上，有助于强化对思想政治教育价值的关注，深化对思想政治教育的价值认同。以其他思想政治教育形态为镜鉴，可以把握到思想政治教育学科是一种指向人的生存状态与精神世界的普遍存在，为深入探析思想政治教育的学科对象、学科基础、学科价值、学科地位等提供材料支撑与案例样本。三是增强对思想政治教育规律的认知。“两刃相割，利钝乃知；两论相订，是非乃见。”（《论衡·案书》）有比较，才有鉴别；有鉴别，才有正确的认识。对不同时空条件下思想政治教育诸形态进行比较和鉴别的过程也是对已有认识不断证实与证伪的过程，在对既有思想政治教育理论与实践的不断证实和证伪中，直接作用于弥合思想政治教育现实样态与理想样态间的差距，在认识与实践的不断深化递进中逐渐形成对思想政治教育规律的正确认知。

The method of comparative research in ideological and political education has its scientific theoretical basis. The first is the principle of the dialectical unity of universality and particularity. The comparative research method is a generalized reflection of the principle of the dialectical relationship between the universality and particularity of things. On the one hand, “people always first come to know the particular essence of many different things, and only then can they proceed further to generalize and come to know the common essence of various things.” [1]1 Mao Zedong, *On Contradiction* (August 1937). In comparative research, by understanding the differences in content, objectives, and methods of ideological and political education phenomena in one or more countries under different temporal and spatial conditions, grasping the causal relationships between various forms of ideological and political education and their social systems, economic levels, historical traditions, cultural customs, and national psychology, and excavating the particular essence of ideological and political education in one or more countries under different temporal and spatial conditions, it is only then possible, on the basis of grasping the particularity, diversity, and locality of ideological and political education, to summarize and refine the commonalities and shared points among various forms of ideological and political education, thereby forming a basic understanding of the essence of ideological and political education. Tocqueville wrote in the introduction to *Democracy in America*, “I confess that in America I saw more than America itself... I sought to understand the nature of democracy, so that we might at least know what we ought to hope from it and what we ought to fear.” [2]2 Alexis de Tocqueville, *Democracy in America*, Introduction (1835). On the other hand, “when people have already come to know this common essence, they use this common knowledge as a guide to continue researching various specific things that have not yet been studied or have not been deeply studied, to find their particular essence, so that this common knowledge can be supplemented, enriched, and developed, and so that this common knowledge does not become withered and ossified.” [3]3 Mao Zedong, *On Contradiction* (August 1937). On the basis of having a certain understanding of the common essence of various forms of ideological and political education, it is still necessary to continue to grasp certain aspects and the latest developments of each form of ideological and political education, to identify the particular essential characteristics of different aspects of ideological and political education through its various different phenomena, and to continuously supplement, enrich, and deepen the understanding of the common essence of ideological and political education.

思想政治教育比较研究方法有其科学的理论依据。一是共性与个性辩证统一的原理。比较研究方法是事物的共性和个性辩证关系原理的概括反映。一方面，“人们总是首先认识了许多不同事物的特殊的本质，然后才有可能更进一步地进行概括工作，认识诸种事物的共同的本质”。在比较研究中，了解某国或多国不同时空条件下思想政治教育现象在内容、目标、方法诸方面的差异，把握思想政治教育各形态与其社会制度、经济水平、历史传统、文化习俗、民族心理间的因果关系，挖掘某国或多国不同时空下思想政治教育的特殊本质，才能够在把握思想政治教育特殊性、多样性、地方性的基础上，概括提炼出思想政治教育各形态的共同点与共通点，形成对思想政治教育本质的基本认识。托克维尔在《论美国的民主》绪论中写道，“我自信，我在美国看到的超过了美国自身持有的……我想弄清民主的究竟，以使我们至少知道应当希望它如何和害怕它什么。”另一方面，“当人们已经认识了这种共同的本质以后，就以这种共同的认识为指导，继续地向着尚未研究过的或者尚未深入地研究过的各种具体的事物进行研究，找出其特殊的本质，这样才可以补充、丰富和发展这种共同的本质的认识，而使这种共同的本质的认识不致变成枯槁的和僵死的东西”。在对思想政治教育各形态共同本质具有一定认识的基础上，仍需要继续把握思想政治教育各形态的某一切面和最新动态，透过思想政治教育的各种不同现象找出思想政治教育不同方面的特殊的本质特征，不断补充、丰富和深化对思想政治教育的共同本质的认识。

The second is the Marxist theory of world history. Marx and Engels pointed out: “The more the spheres of mutual interaction expand in the course of this development, the more the original closed state of each nation is eliminated by the increasingly perfected mode of production, intercourse, and the division of labor between different nations that naturally arises from intercourse, the more history becomes world history.” [4]4 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The German Ideology* (1845-1846). The Marxist theory of world history elucidates that, on the basis of the development of productive forces and universal intercourse, the mutual connections and interactions between countries and nations become increasingly frequent and close, gradually forming an organic whole within various historical and real relations. “World history is a whole, and each nation is its ‘organ’.” [5]5 G.W.F. Hegel, *Lectures on the Philosophy of World History*, as cited and adapted by Marx and Engels. The development of each country and nation is, to varying degrees, constrained by the overall development of the world, and in turn influences the process of world history. Correspondingly, the mutual connections and interactions of different forms of ideological and political education in worldwide universal intercourse also increase, gradually evolving into a common spiritual property in the course of movement and development. Each form of ideological and political education is both constrained by the development of ideological and political education as a whole and, in turn, reacts upon the process of the development of ideological and political education. Specifically, in the temporal sequence, it explores the changes and developments of each form and the overall form of ideological and political education, reveals the laws of development of ideological and political education, and further predicts the development trends of ideological and political education; in the spatial sequence, it regards each form of ideological and political education as an interconnected and interactive whole, focusing on studying the content within different forms of ideological and political education that possesses world-historical significance, referential value, and commonality, thereby promoting the development of world-historical spiritual intercourse and spiritual-cultural products toward a higher level.

二是马克思主义世界历史理论。马克思、恩格斯指出：“各个相互影响的活动范围在这个发展进程中越是扩大，各民族的原始封闭状态由于日益完善的生产方式、交往以及因交往而自然形成的不同民族之间的分工消灭得越是彻底，历史也就越是成为世界历史。”马克思主义世界历史理论阐明了在生产力发展和普遍交往基础上，各国家与各民族间的相互联系、相互作用愈加频繁紧密，在各种历史和现实关系中逐渐形成一个有机整体。“世界历史是个整体，而各个民族是它的‘器官’。”各个国家与民族的发展在不同程度上受到世界整体发展的制约，反过来又影响世界历史进程。相应地，不同样态的思想政治教育在世界性普遍交往中的相互联系、相互作用也愈加增强，在运动发展中逐渐衍变成公共的精神财产，思想政治教育各样态既受到思想政治教育发展的制约，同时也反作用于思想政治教育发展的进程。具体来说，在时间序列上，探究思想政治教育各样态与总样态的发展变化，揭示思想政治教育的发展规律，并进一步预测思想政治教育的发展态势；在空间序列上，将思想政治教育各样态看作一个相互联系、相互作用的整体，着重研究思想政治教育不同样态中具有世界历史性和可借鉴性与共通性的内容，推动世界历史性的精神交往与精神文化产品朝着更高水平发展。

The third is Marx’s theoretical perspective on the “other.” Marx believed that humans are objective beings. Human existence cannot be separated from objects, that is, “generally speaking, any relationship of man to himself is realized and expressed only through his relationship to other men.” [6]6 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*. However, under conditions of alienation, when the relationship between the self and the object is inverted, it leads to the erroneous tendency that “the existence of the self” is “existence for others,” that is, “each man measures his fellow men by the standard and relationship in which he himself finds himself as a worker.” [7]7 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*. In the objective relationship between “self and other,” observing the “other” with the “self” as the yardstick, and observing the “other” also for the existence and development of the “self,” comparative research is not a transplantation of the theoretical concepts of the “other” in ideological and political education, but rather a critical reference to the “other” based on the yardstick of China’s ideological and political education, using the “other” as a mirror for self-examination and self-development, thereby clarifying what China’s ideological and political education is like and how it should develop. For example, in recent years, relevant teams in China’s ideological and political education academic community have organized and carried out rolling surveys of global values education, depicting the overall situation of values education abroad from aspects such as effect evaluation, key content, methods and measures, and basic characteristics, summarizing and grasping the beneficial experiences and limitations and shortcomings of foreign values education, providing a mirror for cultivating and practicing the core socialist values.

三是马克思关于“他者”的理论观点。马克思认为，人是对象性的存在物。人的存在离不开对象，即“一般地说，人对自身的任何关系，只有通过人对他人的关系才得到实现和表现”。然而在异化条件下，当自我和对象的关系颠倒时，就会导致“自我的存在”是“为他的存在”的错误倾向，即“每个人都按照他自己作为工人所具有的那种尺度和关系来观察他人”。在“自我与他者”的对象性关系中，以“自我”为尺度去观察“他者”，观察“他者”也是为了“自我”的存在发展，比较研究并非是对思想政治教育“他者”理论概念等的迁移，而是基于我国思想政治教育的尺度对“他者”进行批判性借鉴，将“他者”作为自我审视和自我发展的镜像参照，从而明确我国思想政治教育是什么样以及如何发展。例如，近年来我国思想政治教育学界的相关团队组织开展了全球价值观教育滚动调查，从效果评价、重点内容、方式举措与基本特征等方面刻画当前国外价值观教育的总体状况，总结与把握国外价值观教育的有益经验和局限不足，为培育和践行社会主义核心价值观提供镜鉴。

II. The Systematic Construction of the Comparative Research Method in Ideological and Political Education

二、思想政治教育比较研究方法的体系建构

The system of comparative research methods in ideological and political education refers to the comprehensive method system composed of various types and levels of methods applied in comparative research in ideological and political education. Systematically constructing the increasingly rich and complex comparative research methods according to the boundaries and logic of comparative research in ideological and political education, providing support and guarantee for the scientific and standardized application of comparative research methods in ideological and political education, is an important foundation for promoting the deepening and innovation of comparative research methods in ideological and political education.

思想政治教育比较研究方法体系，是指思想政治教育比较研究中应用到的各种类型与层次的方法所构成的综合方法系统。将渐趋丰富、日益庞杂的比较研究方法依照思想政治教育比较研究边界与逻辑进行体系建构，为科学规范运用思想政治教育比较研究方法提供支撑与保障，是推动思想政治教育比较研究方法深化创新的重要基础。

Synthesizing the existing academic definitions of comparative research methods in ideological and political education, there are roughly the following five types: First, according to social science research methods, discussing the method system from three levels: methodology, research approach, and specific methods and techniques; second, according to the basic classification of comparative research, exploring the system of comparative research methods from descriptive comparison, analytical comparison, and explanatory comparison; third, according to stratification theory, discussing from the macro, meso, and micro hierarchical structures; fourth, setting research methods according to research steps, discussing from steps such as data collection, data analysis, and comparative research; fifth, selecting and discussing some commonly used specific methods of comparative research, roughly involving the comparative identification method, the recollection-comparison method, the analogy method, the longitudinal comparison method, the horizontal comparison method, the comprehensive comparison method, etc. In summary, it can be seen that current comparative research methods are increasingly rich and diverse, and the paths for defining comparative research methods in ideological and political education each have their own basis.

综合学界现有对思想政治教育比较研究方法的界说，大致有以下五种：一是依照社会科学研究方法，从方法论、研究方式、具体方法与技术三个层次论述方法体系；二是依照比较研究的基本分类，从描述性比较、分析性比较和解释性比较探讨比较研究方法体系；三是依照分层理论，从宏观、中观、微观的层次结构加以探讨；四是依照研究步骤设定研究方法，从资料搜集、资料分析、比较研究等步骤论述；五是遴选一些常用的比较研究具体方法进行列举讨论，大致涉及比较鉴别法、回忆对比法、类比法、纵向比较法、横向比较法、综合比较法等。综上可知，当前比较研究方法愈发丰富多样，思想政治教育比较研究方法的界说路径也各有依据。

In a general sense, a method is a means used by a subject to achieve a specific purpose. Comparison is not aimless; it needs to be guided by a clear purpose. Different comparative research purposes differ, and the research methods used also differ accordingly. In this regard, we will take the purpose of comparative research as the main basis to systematically construct the comparative research methods in ideological and political education, with the specific types divided as follows:

从一般意义上说，方法是主体为了达到特定目的所借助的手段。比较不是漫无目的的，需要以明确的目的作为指引，不同的比较研究目的各有不同，所使用的研究方法也各不相同。对此，我们将以比较研究目的为主要依据，对思想政治教育比较研究方法进行体系化建构，具体类型划分如下：

The first is the “comparison-description type.” Through comparative description, it elucidates the overall overview, basic characteristics, main structure, and other aspects of the research object. This is widely used in comparative research in ideological and political education, covering a large scope, especially in the initial stage of comparative research. This type of research method focuses on describing the phenomena of ideological and political education, aiming to completely and accurately present the objective appearance of ideological and political education under different temporal and spatial conditions. Its specific applications include the following: conducting values questionnaire surveys in other countries or regions based on a basic understanding of cultural background, national policies, and customary concepts, and adjusting specific questionnaire items according to the specific conditions of different countries, thereby effectively analyzing the values tendencies and influencing factors of the people in that country or region; focusing on a specific research topic in ideological and political education, conducting large-scale collection, purposeful screening, orderly classification, and generalized extraction of literature across national boundaries, languages, cultures, and disciplines.

一是“比较—描述型”。通过比较描述阐明研究对象的整体概况、基本特征、主要结构等多方面信息，这在思想政治教育比较研究中的运用较为广泛，覆盖面较大，尤其是在比较研究的初期阶段。这类研究方法注重对思想政治教育现象的描述，旨在完整准确地呈现不同时空下思想政治教育的客观样貌，其具体运用有以下表现：在基本了解文化背景、国家政策、习俗观念基础上对其他国家或地区进行价值观问卷调查，并依据不同国家的具体情况调整问卷具体项目，从而能够有效分析该国家或地区民众的价值观倾向与影响因素；聚焦思想政治教育某一研究主题，对跨国别、跨语言、跨文化、跨学科的文献进行大范围搜集、目的性筛选、条理性归类、概括性提炼等。

Second is the “comparison-causal attribution type.” The “comparison-descriptive type” focuses on depicting and delineating the objective forms of ideological and political education across different times and spaces, whereas the “comparison-causal attribution type” emphasizes exploring the reasons why these objective forms of ideological and political education exist as they do under different temporal and spatial conditions. This type of method, based on grasping the objective forms of things, proceeds from the surface to the interior, layer by layer, to clarify why different forms of ideological and political education are the same or different, and to summarize and extract the universal common essence and the particular individual essence of ideological and political education. Specifically, the internal logic, operational mechanisms, and practical rationale of various forms of ideological and political education can be analyzed through logical reasoning, deduction, and induction; typical cases of ideological and political education activities within specific social units under different national, cultural, and historical backgrounds can be described in detail and systematically understood, and case comparisons can be conducted to clarify the complex causal relationships behind the phenomena of ideological and political education; technical means such as set theory and Boolean algebra can be employed to combine data on all logically possible causal condition associations in matrix form, comparing case structures, aggregating similar cases, grasping the similarities and differences among comparable cases, and carrying out evaluations of multiple causal association combinations in ideological and political education activities.

二是“比较—归因型”。“比较—描述型”在于描绘刻画不同时空下思想政治教育的客观样态，而“比较—归因型”着重探究不同时空条件下思想政治教育客观样态之所以如此的原因。这类方法在把握事物客观样态的基础上，由表及里、层层深入，阐明不同样态的思想政治教育为何相同、为何相异，归纳提炼出思想政治教育普遍的共性本质与特殊的个性本质。具体而言，可以通过逻辑思辨、演绎归纳等方式分析思想政治教育各样态的内在逻辑、运行机制和实践理路；可以通过对不同国家、文化、历史背景下特定社会单元中的思想政治教育活动典型案例进行翔实描述和系统理解，并进行案例比较，厘清思想政治教育现象背后复杂的因果关系；可以采用集合和布尔代数等技术手段，以矩阵形式将所有具备逻辑可能性的因果关联条件的数据进行组合，在比较案例结构、汇集类似案例，把握具有可比性案例的异同点，开展对思想政治教育活动的多重因果关联组合的评估。

Third is the “comparison-prediction type.” The comparative research method, by comparing diverse forms of ideological and political education facts across different times and spaces, aims to reveal the developmental laws of ideological and political education and to predict or deduce the trends of individual and common development in ideological and political education. The predictive content of the comparative research method includes predictions of the future direction of a particular research topic in ideological and political education, predictions of the implementation effects of a specific activity or measure in ideological and political education, and predictions of the behavioral development of the objects of ideological and political education. As for specific methods, one can select typical cases of ideological and political education, analyze and compare the temporal and process dimensions of the cases, explain the influencing factors, processes, and outcomes of ideological and political education activities from a macro-structural perspective, and while revealing the developmental laws of ideological and political education, predict the overall future situation of ideological and political education; when exploring the impact of a certain ideological and political education activity on students, multiple time points can be selected to conduct tracking surveys on students’ level of understanding of historical events, their degree of cognition of relevant spirit, and their personal ideals and beliefs. To a certain extent, this can determine the actual educational effectiveness of that ideological and political education activity and help predict and evaluate the educational effectiveness of other ideological and political education activities.

三是“比较—预测型”。比较研究方法通过对不同时空下多样态的思想政治教育事实进行比较，达到揭示思想政治教育发展规律、预测或推演思想政治教育的个性与共性发展趋势的目的。比较研究方法的预测内容包含对思想政治教育某一研究主题未来走向的预测，对思想政治教育某一活动措施实施效果的预测，对思想政治教育对象行为发展的预测等。就具体方法而言，可以通过选取思想政治教育的典型案例，分析比较案例时间和过程维度，从宏观结构的视角解释思想政治教育活动的影响因素、过程与成效，在揭示思想政治教育发展规律的同时，预测思想政治教育未来的整体态势；在探究思想政治教育某一活动对学生的影响时，可以选取多个时间点，就学生对历史事件的了解程度、对相关精神的认知程度以及个人理想信念状况等进行追踪调查，这在一定程度上可以判定该思想政治教育活动的实际育人效果，并有助于预测、评估其他思想政治教育活动的育人效果。

Fourth is the “comparison-mutual construction type.” This method aims, through comparison and discernment of ideological and political education theory and practice, to promote the mutual construction and co-variation of ideological and political education in cross-national, cross-regional, cross-ethnic, and cross-cultural multi-directional interactions and equal exchanges, thereby achieving the symbiotic development of ideological and political education. This includes the local transformation of outstanding achievements from other forms of ideological and political education, as well as the exchange, collision, and mutual influence among various forms of ideological and political education. Specifically, when drawing on effective measures and beneficial experiences from other forms of ideological and political education, it is necessary to grasp the heterogeneity among different forms of ideological and political education and to screen the heterogeneous cultural factors embedded within them; on the basis of considering the comprehensibility of the text content, the acceptability of the readers, and the readability of the translated content, the successful experiences of a certain form of ideological and political education can be translated cross-culturally, promoting equal dialogue and exchange among different forms of ideological and political education and driving the development of each form of ideological and political education.

四是“比较—互构型”。该方法旨在通过比较鉴别思想政治教育理论与实践，在跨国家、跨地区、跨民族、跨文化的多项互动、平等交流中促进思想政治教育的互构共变，实现思想政治教育的共生发展。这包含其他形态思想政治教育优秀成果的本土转化以及各形态思想政治教育间的交流碰撞与相互影响。具体而言，在对其他形态思想政治教育的有效措施与有益经验进行借鉴时，把握不同形态思想政治教育间的异质性，对其中内蕴的异质文化因子进行甄别；在考虑文本内容可理解性、读者的可接受度、译文内容的可阅读性等基础上，将某形态思想政治教育的成功经验进行跨文化翻译，促进不同形态思想政治教育间的平等对话与交流，推动各形态思想政治教育的发展。

It is worth noting that the typological attribution of comparative research methods in ideological and political education is not absolute, nor is it fragmented; the same research method can be attributed to different types based on the different orientations of the research purpose. Furthermore, in the practical application of comparative research methods in ideological and political education, since research may involve multiple research purposes, different types of specific methods can be used either individually or in combination.

值得注意的是，思想政治教育比较研究方法的类型归属并非绝对的，也并非割裂的，同一研究方法可以依据研究目的的不同指向归属于不同类型。此外，在思想政治教育比较研究方法的实际运用中，由于研究会涉及多方面研究目的，不同类型的具体方法既可以单独运用，也可以混合运用。

III. Principles to Follow in Comparative Research Methods for Ideological and Political Education

三、思想政治教育比较研究方法的原则遵循

The selection and use of comparative research methods in ideological and political education are not arbitrary; they have specific scopes of application, conditions of use, and operational norms. Only by grasping the important principles of comparative research methods can the validity and accuracy of comparative research conclusions be ensured, thereby enhancing the scientific nature of comparative research in ideological and political education.

思想政治教育比较研究方法的选择使用不是任意的，而是有其特定的适用范围、应用条件与操作规范。把握比较研究方法的重要原则，才能够保证比较研究结论的有效性与准确性，从而提升思想政治教育比较研究的科学性。

1. Guided by the Marxist View of Comparison

1. 以马克思主义比较观为指导

Marxist classical writers and Chinese Communists actively employed comparative thinking in their theoretical research and revolutionary practice to understand, analyze, and solve problems, comprehensively utilizing methods such as horizontal comparison and vertical comparison, homogeneous comparison and heterogeneous comparison, and macro comparison and micro comparison to discern right from wrong, reveal the essence of problems, grasp developmental laws, and predict developmental trends. They deeply discussed a series of fundamental issues such as “why compare,” “how to compare,” and “what to compare,” forming a systematic and scientific Marxist view of comparison. The Marxist view of comparison has rich connotations, covering national comparison, historical comparison, cultural comparison, etc., and has put forward many important theses and innovative viewpoints on the value, purpose, and principles of comparison. For example, Marx and Engels’ important expositions on international comparison methods point out that comparison seeks similarities and differences, comparison observes development, and comparison elucidates meaning. In practice, it is necessary to handle the relationship between general principles and the actual conditions of each country, the relationship between domestic struggle and international unity, and the relationship between class struggle and national liberation, among other practical requirements. Comparative research methods in ideological and political education must be theoretically guided by the Marxist view of comparison and follow the comparative principles embedded within it. First, it is necessary to determine that the objects of comparison are of the same kind. When comparing different forms of ideological and political education, phenomena should be compared with phenomena, methods with methods, and processes with processes. One cannot compare the past form of China’s ideological and political education with the present form of another country’s ideological and political education, nor can one mechanically compare ideological and political education from different historical periods, leading to one-sided or even erroneous conclusions. In *Capital*, Marx criticized the German vulgar economists for comparing things of different kinds together, “because the quantities compared here are incommensurable,” and further pointed out that such unreasonable comparisons would inevitably lead to erroneous conclusions. [8]8 Marx, *Capital*, Volume 1, Chapter 1, Section 3, on the form of value or exchange value, criticizing vulgar economists for comparing incommensurable quantities. Second, it is necessary to grasp the totality of facts about the objects of comparison. In comparative research on ideological and political education, each form of ideological and political education has its specific historical environment in which it arises, so it is unscientific to deduce universal conclusions from individual facts or examples of ideological and political education. Comparative research must “grasp facts from the totality of facts, from their connections,” and only by grasping all the facts related to the objects of comparison and the research questions in ideological and political education can facts become “absolutely conclusive evidence” and yield valuable conclusions in comparative research. Third, it is necessary to profoundly reveal the inner essence of the research objects. The comparison of various forms of ideological and political education cannot be limited to depicting and delineating the similarities and differences in the phenomena of ideological and political education; rather, it must, through comparison, reveal the substantive problems and fundamental contradictions behind the similarities and differences. When Lenin discussed that Kautsky’s theoretical critique of imperialism was unscientific, he pointed out: “Simply comparing colonies with non-colonies, comparing one imperialism with another, comparing one semi-colony or colony (e.g., Egypt) with all other countries, is precisely to evade and obscure the essence of the problem.” [9]9 Lenin, “Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism,” criticizing Kautsky’s evasion of the essence of imperialism by superficial comparisons.

马克思主义经典作家和中国共产党人在理论研究和革命实践中积极运用比较思维认识问题、分析问题、解决问题，综合运用横向比较与纵向比较、同质比较与异质比较、宏观比较与微观比较等方法鉴别优劣是非、揭示问题实质、把握发展规律、预测发展态势，深入论述了“为什么比较”“如何比较”“比较什么”等一系列基本问题，形成了系统科学的马克思主义比较观。马克思主义比较观内涵丰富，涵盖国别比较、历史比较、文化比较等，在比较的价值、目的、原则等方面提出了许多重要论断与创新观点。例如，马克思、恩格斯关于国际比较方法的重要论述指出，以比较求异同、以比较观发展、以比较阐意义，在实践中要处理好一般原理与各国实际的关系、处理好本国斗争与国际联合的关系、处理好阶级斗争与民族解放的关系等现实要求。思想政治教育比较研究方法要以马克思主义比较观为理论指导，遵循其中内蕴的比较原则。一是要确定比较对象是同类事物。在对思想政治教育的不同样态进行比较中，是将现象与现象比、方法与方法比、过程与过程比，不能将我国思想政治教育的过去样态同他国思想政治教育的现在样态比，同样也不能将不同历史时期的思想政治教育进行机械的比较，得出片面甚至错误的结论。马克思在《资本论》中批判了德国庸俗经济学家将不同类事物放在一起进行比较的做法，“因为这里互相比较的量是不可通约的”，并进一步指出这种不合理的比较必然会得出错误的结论。二是要整体把握比较对象的全部事实。在思想政治教育比较研究中，每种思想政治教育样态都有其产生的具体的历史环境，所以用思想政治教育的个别事实或事例推演出普遍性结论是不科学的。比较研究要“从事实的整体上、从它们的联系中去掌握事实”，把握思想政治教育比较对象与研究问题有关的全部事实，才能够使事实成为“绝对确凿的证据”，在比较研究中得出有价值的结论。三是深刻揭示研究对象的内在实质。对思想政治教育各样态的比较不能局限在对思想政治教育现象异同的描绘刻画上，而是要通过比较揭示异同背后的问题实质和根本矛盾。列宁在论述考茨基对帝国主义的理论批判是不科学的时指出：“简单地拿殖民地同非殖民地比较，拿一个帝国主义同另一个帝国主义比较，拿一个半殖民地或殖民地（如埃及）同其余一切国家比较，那就正是回避和掩饰问题的实质。”

2. Based on China’s Position and China’s Needs

2. 基于中国立场、中国需要

Different forms of ideological and political education each have their unique soil for survival, rooted in specific political systems, social structures, and historical cultures, reflecting different conceptual systems, psychological constructs, and value pursuits, and exhibiting certain differences in connotation, characteristics, forms, as well as educational content, processes, and carriers. This difference determines that comparing various forms of ideological and political education is not a matter of indiscriminately "borrowing" or copying, but rather, based on indigenous positions and perspectives, identifying which are correct and which are advanced, and assessing whether they are suitable and appropriate for application in our country. Against the backdrop of changes unseen in a century in the world, China's ideological and political education must stand at the height of the overall strategy for the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. When faced with the diverse and complex forms of ideological and political education, it must adhere to the principle of "making the past serve the present, making foreign things serve China, discarding the dross and selecting the essential, eliminating the false and retaining the true, and after scientific sublation, making them serve our purposes," always taking "taking ourselves as the mainstay and using them for our own benefit" as the starting point and end point of comparative research. First, use comparison to strengthen the Four Confidences. [10]10 The Four Confidences (四个自信) refers to confidence in the path, theory, system, and culture of socialism with Chinese characteristics, a key political slogan promoted by the CPC. Comparative research on ideological and political education compares today's China with China before the founding of the People's Republic, with China after the Opium War, and places the development process since the founding of the People's Republic into the historical process of globalization and into the actual circumstances of the world today. Through the interweaving of vertical and horizontal, macro and micro comparisons, it correctly understands the great achievements China has made over the past few decades, and recognizes the path advantages, theoretical advantages, institutional advantages, and cultural advantages of socialism with Chinese characteristics, thereby strengthening strong confidence in one's own development direction and bright future. Second, use comparison to solve practical difficulties. Comparative research places the study of ideological and political education under a global perspective, broadening research horizons, opening up research ideas, and seeking solutions to problems. In terms of method application, it is guided by solving the key, difficult, and hot issues of China's ideological and political education, based on in-depth investigation and research and grasping the actual situation, and guided by the principle of discarding the dross and selecting the essential, choosing the good and using it. It critically absorbs and rationally transforms the excellent achievements and effective experiences of other forms of ideological and political education, providing new concepts, new ideas, and new measures for solving the practical difficulties faced by China's ideological and political education. Third, use comparison to contribute Chinese wisdom and provide Chinese solutions. Comparative research must stand at the height of China's value concept production and dissemination, excavate and utilize the comparative consciousness, comparative thinking, and comparative philosophy inherent in excellent traditional Chinese culture, summarize, theoretically refine, and internationally disseminate the successful experiences of China's ideological and political education, actively promote exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations, promote the common values of all mankind, and contribute Chinese wisdom and provide Chinese solutions for promoting the progress of human civilization and addressing global common challenges.

不同样态的思想政治教育都有其独特的生存土壤，扎根于特定的政治制度、社会结构、历史文化，映射出不同的观念体系、心理构造、价值追求，在内涵、特征、形式以及教育内容、过程、载体等方面都表现出一定的差异性。这种差异性决定了对思想政治教育各样态的比较不是一味“拿来”、照搬照抄，而是在基于本土立场与视角的基础上，鉴别其中哪些正确、哪些先进，应用于我国是否匹配、是否恰切。在世界百年未有之大变局的时空背景下，我国思想政治教育要立足中华民族伟大复兴战略全局的高度，在面对纷繁复杂的思想政治教育各样态时，坚持“古为今用、洋为中用，去粗取精、去伪存真，经过科学的扬弃后使之为我所用”的原则，始终将“以我为主，为我所用”作为比较研究的出发点与落脚点。一是以比较坚定“四个自信”。思想政治教育比较研究是将今日之中国同新中国成立前的中国比、同鸦片战争后的中国比，将新中国成立以来的发展历程放到全球化的历史进程中比、放到世界当下的实际境遇中比，在纵向与横向、宏观与微观的交织比较中正确认识中国几十年来取得的伟大成就，认识中国特色社会主义的道路优势、理论优势、制度优势、文化优势，从而更加坚定对自身发展方向和光明前途的强大信心。二是以比较破解现实难题。比较研究是将思想政治教育研究置于全球视野下，拓宽研究视野、开拓研究思路、探求解题良方。在方法运用上，以解决我国思想政治教育重点、难点、热点问题为导向，以深入调查研究、把握实际情况为基础，以去芜存菁、择善而用为指南，批判吸收、合理转化其他形态思想政治教育的优秀成果与有效经验，为解决我国思想政治教育面临的现实难题提供新理念、新思路和新举措。三是以比较贡献中国智慧、提供中国方案。比较研究要立足于我国价值理念生产和传播的高度，挖掘和利用中华优秀传统文化内蕴的比较意识、比较思维与比较哲理，对我国思想政治教育的成功经验进行归纳总结、理论提炼与国际传播，积极推动文明交流互鉴，弘扬全人类共同价值，为推动人类文明进步、应对全球共同挑战贡献中国智慧、提供中国方案。

3. Serving the Construction of an Autonomous Knowledge System for Ideological and Political Education

3. 服务于思想政治教育自主知识体系构建

As an emerging discipline within the philosophy and social sciences, constructing an autonomous knowledge system is an urgent task for the development of the discipline of ideological and political education. Research methods define the logical path of knowledge production, drive paradigm innovation in knowledge production, and are an important factor in the autonomization of the disciplinary knowledge system. Regarding the comparative research method of ideological and political education, it is necessary to strengthen the consciousness of innovation, improve the degree of standardization, and clarify the logical framework, in order to serve the construction of an autonomous knowledge system for ideological and political education. First, improve the degree of standardization. The degree of standardization of the comparative research method affects the accuracy, universality, and transferability of comparative research results. The degree of standardization of the comparative research method of ideological and political education is mainly reflected in whether the method selection and comparative purpose are appropriate and fitting, whether the definition of cross-cultural core concepts is clear and explicit, and whether the empirical research results are credible and valid. Improving the degree of standardization of the comparative research method of ideological and political education means using the standardization of methods to promote the standardization of knowledge production, which helps in the scientific generation and rational application of meta-knowledge of ideological and political education, and promotes the scientific construction of an autonomous knowledge system for ideological and political education. Second, clarify the logical architecture. The comparative research method contains rich knowledge points, such as comparison objects, comparison standards, comparison similarities and differences, etc. There are also relatively complex relationships between different knowledge points, and the networked architecture connected by each knowledge point also contains logical structures at different levels. Clarifying the logical architecture means clarifying the basic concepts of each knowledge point, exerting the associative role of each knowledge point and the coordinating role between each structure, thereby promoting the knowledge systematization of the research method itself, and serving the systematization of the methodology of ideological and political education, promoting the systematic construction of an autonomous knowledge system for ideological and political education. Third, strengthen the consciousness of innovation. For a long time, comparative research methods have borrowed more from the research methods and tools of other disciplines, which in a sense has promoted the rapid development of comparative research on ideological and political education. However, this also means that the comparative research method inherently contains the "other's" way of understanding the world and value orientation. To promote original theoretical achievements and knowledge output in ideological and political education, the comparative research method needs to create content that reflects its own essential attributes at the levels of methodology, general methods, and specific methods, using the perspective of the "self" to understand and identify ideological and political education in different times and spaces, so that the disciplinary stipulations and research stance are consistent throughout.

思想政治教育学科作为哲学社会科学中的一门新兴学科，构建自主知识体系是学科发展的当务之急。研究方法规定了知识生产的逻辑理路，驱动了知识生产的范式创新，是学科知识体系自主化的重要因素。就思想政治教育比较研究方法而言，需要强化创新自觉、提高规范程度和厘清逻辑框架，以服务于思想政治教育自主知识体系构建。一是提高规范程度。比较研究方法的规范程度影响着比较研究结果的准确性、普遍性与可转化性。思想政治教育比较研究方法的规范程度主要体现在方法选择与比较目的是否适当恰切，跨文化的核心概念界定是否清晰明确，实证研究结果是否可信有效等方面。提高思想政治教育比较研究方法规范程度是以方法的规范促进知识生产的规范，有助于思想政治教育元知识的科学生成与合理运用，推动思想政治教育自主知识体系的科学化构建。二是厘清逻辑架构。比较研究方法中内蕴丰富的知识点，如比较对象、比较标准、比较异同点等，不同知识点间也蕴含相对复杂的关联，各知识点连接起的网络化架构也存在着不同层级的逻辑结构。厘清逻辑架构就是要明确各知识点的基本概念、发挥各知识点的关联作用与各结构间的协调作用，从而促进研究方法自身的知识体系化，并服务于思想政治教育方法论的体系化，推动思想政治教育自主知识体系的系统化构建。三是强化创新自觉。长期以来，比较研究方法较多借鉴其他学科的研究方法、工具，这在某种意义上推动了思想政治教育比较研究的快速发展，但是这也意味着比较研究方法内蕴着“他者”认识世界的方式与价值取向。为促进思想政治教育原创性理论成果和知识产出，比较研究方法需要在方法论、一般方法与具体方法上创造出体现自身本质属性的内容，以“我”之视角认识鉴别不同时空下的思想政治教育，使学科规定性和研究立场一以贯之。

(The author is the Executive Director of the Ideological and Political Education Research Center at Northeast Normal University; a doctoral student at the Ideological and Political Education Research Center at Northeast Normal University)

（作者系东北师范大学思想政治教育研究中心执行主任；东北师范大学思想政治教育研究中心博士研究生）

Online Editor: Ma Jingren

网络编辑：马京仁