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.
國際關係理論的第三次大辯論中,廣為人知的是(新)自由主義與 (新)現實主義的辯論,較少為人關注的是實證主義與後實證主義之間的後設理論爭論,以及因此引發的後設理論研究爭議。後實證主義質疑既有國際關係理論的本體與知識基礎,更使國際關係學者質疑到底後設理論研究是否有助於國際關係理論與實務的研究。後實證主義關注的是後設理論層次而非實質理論層次,後設理論是(國際關係)理論的理論(a theory of theory)或是有關(國際關係)理論的理論(a theory a..
In the third Great Debate in International Relations, the debate between (Neo)Realism and(Neo)Liberalism has been well known; whereas the metatheoretical debate between Positivism and Postpositivism have been ignored. Postpositivism questioned the ontological and epistemological foundations of the established International Relations theory. It has caused the scholars to wonder whether metatheoretical researches exert positive incluences on theories and practices of International Relations. Postpositivism is concerned with the..
要探究國際關係建構主義理論的學術貢獻與影響,實有必要回歸到其肇 始之初的系絡,即是 Nicholas Onuf 與 Friedrich Kratochwil 的學術生涯發展之 中,由於 Onuf 和 Kratochwil 所受的國際法與國際關係學術訓練,致使他們 致力於以社會理論連結國際關係理論與國際法。國際關係建構主義理論也就 是肇始於他們兩人的此連結當中,進而逐漸擴展成為國際關係重要的理論或 研究途徑。 本文的主旨在比較分析 Onu..
To explore contributions and influences of constructivism, we should trace back to the career developments of Nicholas Onuf and Friedrich Kratochwil. Due to their trainings of International Law ( IL ) and International Relations(IR), they have focused on linking IR and IL with constructivism as a social theory. Constructivism originated from this linkage and had become an important theory or approach in IR. This article comparatively explores the way of linking IR and IL with social theory(constructivism)in Onuf&rs..
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.