當前國際關係理論研究現正面臨著「物質轉向」、「物質主義轉向」、「新物質主義轉向」及「複雜轉向」的風潮，重新掀起國際關係理論的「心-物」、「心-身」、「社會世界-自然世界」、「行為主體性-結構」的爭論，乃至「人類中心-非人類中心」的新爭論。國際關係學者藉由「新物質主義」的哲學觀點提供了實用的哲學基礎而使國際關係或國際系統的本體論爭議迴避或拒絕二元對立觀點，呈現出新的「中間道路」(via media)吸納雙方觀點發展出「不只人類」的觀點，以及物質性也不是僅僅無生..

The field of international relations is facing the fashions of “material turn”, “materialism turn,” “new materialism turn,” and “complexity turn,” which re- raises the new debates of ideal-material, mind-body, social world-natural world, agency-structure, and anthropocentrism-nonanthropocentrism in international relations. With the New Materialism offering a practical philosophical founda- tion, the ontological debates of international relations or international systems could av..

從 1950、60 年代受到政治學「行為主義革命」的影響，國際關係理論 開始嘗試建立科學的研究，「科學派」遂以「體系論」(system theory)進行 國際關係的理論化，國際關係的理論化也就成為國際體系的理論化。歷經 1960 年代只有少數國際關係學者關注國際體系理論的「相當低度發展的階 段」，1970 年代起逐漸有較多不同的學者都嘗試藉由其他學科(例如社會 學、生物學、控制學)學者的體系理論提出不同的「國際體系」理論化途 徑，1980 年代由新現實主義..

Following the behavioralism revolution of political science in the 1950– 60s, attempts for international relations(IR)theory to become scientific began with the theorization of IR through systems theory that engendered the theorization of international systems. Through an underdeveloped stage involved with only a few scholars in the 1960s, a contending stage with various approaches proposed in the 1970s, a dominated stage of neorealism in the 1980s, and to an opposite stage of constructivism and international historical..

做為國際關係學門當中安全研究重要項目之一的「歐洲安全」，在經由冷戰時期與後冷戰時期的理論辯證與政策實踐進程，已成為相關領域的重要範例。本文將有系統的以區域安全、國際關係、全球體系三個不同層次面向理論當中各自所屬的理性主義與非理性主義做為理論架構，檢驗歐洲安全分別在冷戰與後冷戰時期的發展，以了解各理論的解釋效度與適用性。由本研究對於歐洲安全的交叉檢驗可以發現，冷戰時期以權力為安全關係核心，形成了長期區域集團對抗的國際雙極體系，因此，上述三個層次的理論當中的理性..

The dynamic development of European security in both theoretical debate and policy practice has made its research a momentous model in the field of security studies. This article aims at exploring various theoretical structures of European security by systematically examining both rationalism and non-rationalism in regional security, international relations theories, and global systems. Core issues of focus are allocated at three levels. The article applies a theoretical basis to the volatile evolution of European security du..

國際系統的理論化是國際關係理論發展的關鍵階段之一，甚至有學者認為國際關係理論研究如同是(國際)系統理論化的傳統。國際關係學者從 1950、60 年代開始進行國際系統的理論化，嘗試建立科學研究的國際系統理論，不同的學者都嘗試藉由其他學科學者的系統理論(systems theory)提出不同的國際系統理論化途徑。國際關係歷史社會學學者歷經三階段的國際系統理論化途徑，第一階段引述歷史社會學學者的國際系統觀點，作為其國際系統理論化及批判新現實主義國際系統理論化的主張..

Theorization of the “international systems” is a critical stage in the development of International Relations Theory(IRT). Some IR scholars even thought that IRT is a tradition of(international)systems-theorization. Since the 1950s and 1960s, IR scholars began to theorize the “international systems” and build a scientific study on international systems theories. Many scholars tried to propose approaches in theorizing the “international systems” through system theories from other disciplines..

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..