國際關係建構主義學者內部不同知識論的爭論或焦慮,尤其是現代建構主義與後現代建構主義的知識論爭議,因為後者根本反對有共同知識論與方法論的存在,影響了建構主義內部的建橋計畫,乃至整個國際關係理論建橋計畫的可能性,更明確地說,國際關係理論的綜合是否可能呢?遂有必要更為細緻與詳細的探討不同建構主義學者個別的觀點,藉以呈現國際關係理論研究的複雜性、多元性。本文以 Alexander Wendt、Jeffrey Checkel、Emanuel Adler 和 David Campbell 等建構主義學者作為範例探討建構主義內部的知識論與方法論爭議,Wendt 與 Checkel 是科學實存論的現代建構主義,Adler 是 務實實存論的現代建構主義,Campbell 是反實存論後現代建構主義,四人在知識論與方法論上的主張,正可以呈現出建構主義內部的知識論爭論,並簡介建構主義常用的研究方法,以說明建構主義的多元方法論,作為觀察國際關係理論綜合的基準與評論基礎。
The different epistemological assumptions or anxieties among constructivists, particularly, the epistemological debate between modernistic constructivists and postmodernistic constructivists, and it may not only have a profound impact on the bridge building project within constructivism but also on the bridge building projects in the International Relations Theory (IRT). Clearly and namely, can it be possible for the synthesis of IRT? It is necessary to conduct a more sophisticated and detailed research on constructivism’s epistemological assumptions to demonstrate the complexities and diversities in IRT.
This paper takes some leading constructivists - Alexander Wendt, Jeffrey T. Checkel, Emanuel Adler, and David Campbell - as examples to study the epistemological debates within constructivism. Wendt and Checkel both are modernistic constructivists, Campbell is a postmodernistic constructivist, and Adler is in the middle. I will use their different epistemological assumptions as an observation and evaluation to check the synthesis of IRT.
橫亙百餘年之久的俄屬遠東黃禍論已是某種或然性規律,不僅未因世局變遷而消弭,今日更成為俄羅斯與中國之間的兩難困境與潛在負面變數。本文擬由身分政治角度切入,解構促使黃禍論於冷戰後復萌之無形雙重觀念結構-俄中關係與俄國內部互動。除藉以揭示黃禍論的深層蘊含外,亦對其進行中長期預測,希冀藉由建構主義就黃禍論的釋疑,推導「跨層次/情境習得轉化」論點,讓國際政治與國內政治雙向互動的研究不再僅是某種未落實的隱喻,從而為建構主義中層理論增添新的實徵案例,並作為層次分析學理的補..
Yellow Peril in the Russian Far East, spanning more than one hundred years, has already become a probabilistic law. It does not fade with time, and has already been the dilemma and the potential negative variable between Russia and China. The thesis attempts to analyze Yellow Peril from a perspective of identity politics, and to deconstruct Russo-Chinese relationships and Russia’s domestic interaction, because the dual intangible idea structures awakened contemporary Yellow Peril after the Cold War. Such an approach not..
本文主要的目的是探討戰略文化研究在國際關係領域中的發展與理論定位之相關問題。國際關係戰略文化研究乃源自於軍事歷史學者對國家戰爭方式與作戰傳統之探討,並開始蓬勃發展於 1970 年代的冷戰時期。在社會科學國際關係研究領域中,戰略文化的研究方向是企圖在以物質為基礎的現實主義論述外,強調從文化意念與歷史途徑的角度,探討國家行為者在國際環境中的戰略行為模式根源。目前,西方關於戰略文化研究的文獻相當多,但在這豐富的文獻中迄今仍尚未產生一個共同而且被接受的戰略文化概念,..
This paper seeks to explore the development of strategic culture in the field of international relations by highlighting the problem of its theoretical orientation. The research of IR strategic culture stemmed from the research of traditional ways of war by many military-historical scholars and started to emerge since the 1970s. The main research purpose of strategic culture is trying to look at the ideational origin of state behavior in the international environment by taking the perspective of culture under the dominance of..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.