當代民主和平研究已不再局限於民主政體間的戰爭機率，有些學者已經開始轉向研究威權政體間的戰爭機率。這樣的研究發展，有利於促進國際政治和比較政府兩個次領域的對話，而本文亦嘗試將威權政體分類相關的比較政治研究，帶入國際政治場域進行分析。2002 年 Mark Peceny、Caroline C. Beer和 Shannon Sanchez-Terry 提出 「獨裁政體和平假說」(dictatorial peace)，主張威權政體間亦存在低武裝衝突機率。而且，如果再將威權政體進一步分類，則僅有單..

When analyzing the relationship between regime type and the possibility of militarized interstate conflict, an interdisciplinary dialogue between the fields of comparative politics and international relations is vitally demanded, especially when stepping into the further area of democratic peace, “dictatorial peace." In 2002, Mark Peceny, Caroline Beer, and Shannon Sanchez-Terry concluded that a lower conflict possibility does exist among non-democratic regimes. Moreover, after classifying non-democracies into three categories, t..

在國際關係理論中，以主權國家為前提，以理性選擇為途徑，這種採用國家是單一理性行為體的假設，在解釋國際合作與否時，已經面臨到一些挑戰，換言之，非國家行為體亦扮演重要角色。另外，由新現實主義和新自由主義共同假定的制度結構，在日趨複雜的現實世界中，也不能完全理解真實國際社會合作發生的原因。因此，本文嘗試引用認知理論，藉共同認知變項的提出，並結合共同利益變項，透過整合制度結構和認知轉化的過程，導出一種國際合作框架。在驗證部份，本文採用賽局理論和列舉實際案例，說明制度..

In international relations, some theories explain international cooperation almost solely based on sovereign states and a presumed approach of rational choice. However, these hypotheses assume a state-actor, as a rational unit, will meet some unforeseen challenges, thus we need a non-state actor as another variable. Furthermore, an institutional structure of neo- realism’s and neo-liberalism’s hypothesis do not fully illustrate how international cooperation occurs in the real world. So we adopt both the cognitive ..

儘管阿弘認為自己的國際政治理論只適用於冷戰時期，但基於 20 世紀中葉以來日益強調不確定性的科學走向，並參照摩根索、瓦爾茲等人對科學概念的理解，今天似乎可以從三個知識論層級看出他的理論並沒有過時的問題:第一、在元理論層次，他以一系列的二律背反和特殊符碼，點明了許多不確定性的問題;第二、在元結構層次，他透過社會學與歷史學的方法論，將當事人與政治實體推出更嚴謹的二項式互動結構;第三、在實踐學層次，他對一系列外交行為提出二律背反的探索，從而不但超越了精確科學在確定..

It is with regards of the importance of the uncertainty for the current scientific philosophy that we want to interpret the theory of the international relations of the Cold War by Raymond Aron, using the comprehension which is concerned with the scientific conceptions of Mogenthau, Waltz, and others; and we want to verify not only that this theory keeps a sort of efficiency until today, but also that Aron has found some theories about the uncertainty on a higher level. We first want to show, in the field of metathe..

國際恐怖主義在911恐怖攻擊事件之後，迅速形成國際關係研究中的學術焦點。本文嘗試從國際恐怖主義的結構、策略、工具與資金四個大面向切入，探討國際恐怖主義的實質內涵。透過對國際恐怖主義結構，包含行為者、原因與互動過程的探討，進一步分析其策略與應用工具，最後討論其資金募集與流動的方式，藉此幫助吾人對國際恐怖主義更進一步的理解。

Since the terror attack of 9-11, international terrorism has become the focus of International Relations research. This paper attempts to study the content of international terrorism through four aspects: structure, strategy, instrument, and funding. Through the discussion on the structure of including the parties involved,  motives, and operations, this paper extends to analyze the strategy and instrumentations of terrorism, and the mode of gathering and flows of funding. What this paper hopes to achieve is to help us gain a deeper in..

在過去的二十年以來，理論辯論成為寬廣的國際關係理論領域中日益顯著的部份。如果我們需要使用一組可信而適當的理論，來回答關於在特定條件下國際關係理論分歧的向題，則現有理論無法提供一個滿意的答案。 本文嘗試提出一個整體的觀點，來理解國際關係中的研究途徑與理論概念現存的分歧情形。基此目的，本研究的目標，在於藉由統攝概念的運動，以建立 一個國際關係理論分歧現象的分析架構，來理解那些主理論分歧的現象。 本文的討論並未解決那些現存理論分歧的問題，只是嘗試說明一個理論的爭議將會如何予以解..

Over the last 20 years, theoretical debates have become an increasingly conspicuous part in the broader field of international Relations Theory. If we are in need of an adequate theory that provides a set of plausible and testable answers to questions about theoretical diversity under specified conditions, the existing theory, in term, does not suffice. This paper attempts to provide a comprehensive perspective to understand the existing diversity of research approaches and theoretical concepts of international relations. To this end, t..