本文主要的目的在於爬梳社會科學方法論中因果機制分析的發展和演進，並進一步評估政治學研究中如何運用因果機制來進行解釋以及討論相關的解釋效力的問題。本文將具體評析政治學國際關係領域中民主和平論之論點，以此來衡量政治學運用因果機制解釋的優勢和侷限。因果機制研究層面上，本文聚焦在機制的定義和類型、機制的觀察性、因果機制與因果關係、法則和中介變數的差異、機制的層次、機制的運作和測量、機制的路徑圖。因果機制運用層面上，本文側重於民主和平論的源起和演進、 民主和平論的重要論述、對於民主和平論的挑戰以及現實主義因果機制的補充解釋。最後，本文針對民主和平論的相關論辯提出因果機制的補充解釋。
The main purpose of this paper is to parse out the development and evolution of causal mechanism and to further evaluate how political research adopts the method of causal mechanism to explain and discuss the explanatory effect in the field of qualitative methods. Our focus is to shed light on the causal mechanism of democratic peace theory in the field of international relations and to gauge its advantages and restraints. On the dimension of causal mechanism, this paper focuses on the definition of mechanism, observation of causal mechanism, the difference between causal mechanism, causality, laws and intervening variables, level of analysis, operationalization and measurement of causal mechanism, and roadmap of causal mechanism. This paper applies the analysis of causal mechanism to the origin and evolution of democratic peace theory, the challenges of realism over democratic peace theory, and the responses from democratic peace theory. Finally, we offer an alternative explanation to the debate between democratic peace theory and realism.
本文屬於規範性的研究，在於提出個人對於國際永久和平的看法。本文分為六個部分。首先，對於歷史上曾經出現過的國際和平思想進程進行析論;其次，探討目前有無可能跳越「國家」這個長久存在的和平論述主體? 第三，嘗試解開和平論述的傳統面紗，將和平論述的主體從抽象的「國家」 轉移到更為實質的「政府」;第四，介紹「開放和平論」的理論基礎;第五，探究「開放政治市場」在歷史發展過程中曾經有過的若干實踐經驗及其意義;最後，則是對「開放政治市場」的內涵及實踐可行性表述。「開放政治市..
This article is normative in nature; it attempts to delineate the author’s view on international peace in six parts. It begins with a review of the development of international peace theory, and then advances to a discussion on the possibility of skipping the “state”—the long established subject in peace discourse—in our probing of the issue in point. The third part attempts to shift the abstract subject of the “state” in traditional peace discourse to a more substantial one of the &l..
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..
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&rsqu..
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.