期刊內容 Issue content

回列表
國際關係建構主義理論內部的知識論差異與方法論多元
The Epistemological Differences and Methodological Plurals in Constructivism
莫大華(Ta-Hua Mo)
下載檔案
48卷3期(2009/09/01)

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.

 

知識論方法論建構主義科學實存論實證主義後實證主義 Epistemology Methodology Constructivism Scientific Realism Positivism Postpositivism

相關期刊

能動者與結構:在本體論分析層次上的爭論
Agent and Structure: The Ontological and Level-of-Analysis Debates
宋學文(Hseik-Wen Soong) 陳文政(York W. Chen)
51卷1期(2012/03/01)

本體論為任何研究之始，能動者 / 結構爭論為以 Waltz 為首之結構現實主義與 Wendt 為代表之建構主義在本體論層次的重要歧異點之一，為此，兩派學者自 1980 年代末黨論戰迄今。儘管本體論的問題具有政治性，不見得有終極與明確的答案，但籍由本體論的討論可以讓吾人更能瞭解兩派理論在深層假設的異同。本文在敘明能動者/結構爭論在理論發展上的重要性後，進行爭論中相關重要概念——如能動者、能動性、結構等——的闡述，除追蹤這些概念在社會學上的根源..

All research begins with ontology. The agent/structure debate represents one of the most profound discrepancies and the least conclusive contests in this regard between Structural Realism and Constructivism since the late 1980s. Though politics is the terrain of competing ontology；definite and clear-cut answers are hardly attainable, a serious discussion on ontological issues can lead us to penetrate the assumptions deeply embedded in both theories. This article first examines theoretical significances in the agent/structure debate and ..

探索國際關係理論的後設理論爭論:國際關係學科的科學進展反思
Exploring the Metatheoretical Debates in International Relations Theory: Reflections on the Scientific Processing in International Relations Discipline
莫大華(Ta-Hua Mo)
52卷3期(2013/09/01)

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..

top