中文摘要：

中国古代无逻辑论的主张并非始自今日,但近年来这一主张却有重新抬头的趋势。当今秉持中国古代无逻辑论者,既有承继以往学术界类似观点的一面,又有基于对近代以来的比较逻辑研究进行反思之后得出结论的特点。梁启超是对中国名辩、西方逻辑和印度因明首次进行系统比较的学者,他第一次从理论上说明了“中国古代有逻辑”。在新的学术背景下,重新翻检梁启超的相关研究,对于正确理解“中国古代有逻辑”这一命题的原始含义,化解当今中国古代无逻辑论者对20世纪众多学者关于三大逻辑比较研究之成果所提出的挑战,均具有借鉴价值。同时,这种新的回顾,对于如何推进中国古代逻辑研究,如何使中国名辩、西方逻辑和印度因明的比较呈现新的气象,亦无疑会指出一种路向。

英文摘要：

Now some people doubt if there is logic in ancient China, which appeared in the past. Liang Qichao was the first schol- ar who compared Mingbian, Logic and Hetuvidya systematically in the history, and his conclusion was that there is Logic in ancient China. Today it will be a valuable work to research what Liang Qichao did under the new background. It will help us understand more accurately what Liang Qichao＇ s viewpoint is, and it will be advisable for us to know how to answer the questions from the people who deny the fact that there is Logic in ancient China. Finally, it will be valuable for us to improve the research about the Logic in ancient China, as well as how to compare Mingbian, Logic and Hetuvidya much better.