能動者與結構：在本體論分析層次上的爭論__臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

來源文獻資料
摘要
外文摘要
引文資料

題名：	能動者與結構：在本體論分析層次上的爭論
書刊名：	問題與研究
作者：	宋學文／陳文政
作者(外文)：	Soong, Hseik-wen／Chen, York W.
出版日期：	2012
卷期：	51:1
頁次：	頁1-35
主題關鍵詞：	結構現實主義；建構主義；本體論；能動者與結構；分析層次；Structural realism；Constructivism；Ontology；Agent/Structure；Level of analysis
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:3 共同引用:29 點閱:150

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年代末葉論戰迄今。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，但藉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外，也討論了Wendt在國家能動性的論點與「中間道路」在本體論上的立論基礎等幾項建構主義者在概念上引勞爭議之處。在能動者/結構爭論中，建構主義者對Waltz結構現實主義提出兩項批判：Walt實乃個質量主義者與Waltz的結構制約單元的論點忽略能動者的能動性。本文綜整Waltz在國家是「單元」、結構的「形成」、結構的「屬性」、結構的「效應」、結構的「變化」等五項相關論點，本文認為：以結構決定論的標準觀之，Waltz的觀點固然與Levi-Strauss與Wallerstein等厚實的結構主義有段距離，但從Waltz對結構與單元的嚴加切剖，及其與Durkheim之間的應合，Waltz的結構現實主義宣視為一薄弱形態的結構主義。儘管如此，Waltz雖做了許多在方法論上向單元層次傾斜的修正意見，但他在本體論上依舊欠缺對能動者的能動性與該能動性可轉型結構的相關認識，結構現實主義與建構主義在能動性上的差異依舊鮮明。最後，本文認為：基於分析層次表陳所意涵之理論簡潔度的重要性與必然性，即使對於相對複雜性的建構主義，分析層次的表陳依舊是必須面對的挑戰，本文即提出在本體論上能動者／結構的討論範疇內一個能夠凸顯Waltz與Wendt立場差異性的分析層次表陳。

以文找文

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 next unpacks related concepts-such as agent, agency, and structure-as well as their origins in sociology. In the process, some conceptual controversies over state agency and ontological core of epistemological via media in Wendt's theorization are also briefly discussed. This article then turns to constructivist's two-front criticism against Waltz's Structural Realism in the agent/structure debate: Waltz is in fact an individualist and his ignorance about agency. After summarized and examined Waltz's arguments in respect of state as "unit", "emergence" of structure, "property" of structure, structural "effects," and structural "changes," this article concludes: though Waltz's theory, in strict terms of structural determinism, does not match with those thick Structuralism proposed by Levi-Strauss or Wallerstein, it is nevertheless better to see Waltz's theory as a thin Structuralism if Waltz's serious efforts to differentiate structure from agent and his theoretical responsiveness to Durkheim are properly appreciated. Waltz later makes many methodological amendments that lead his arguments more unit-level oriented; however, such efforts cannot bridge the existing gap between his Structural Realism and Constructivism since his ontological commitments about agent's agency and its potential to transform the structure are both wanting. Last, the significance and inevitability of theoretical parsimony implied in the illustration of level of analysis are highlighted; so constructivists, who cherish the complexity in their theory, may find unwarranted not to engage such an illustration. Thus, this article presents an illustration for the purpose of demonstrating ontological differences between Waltz and Wendt in the agent/structure debate.

以文找文

期刊論文
1.	Carlsnaes, W.(1992)。The Agency Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis。International Studies Quarterly，36(3)，245-270。
2.	Dessler, David(1989)。What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate?。International Organization，43(3)，441-473。
3.	Hopf, Ted(1998)。The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory。International Security，23(1)，171-200。
4.	Wendt, Alexander E.(1987)。The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory。International Organization，41(3)，335-370。
5.	宋學文(20081200)。層次分析對國際關係研究的重要性及模型建構。問題與研究，47(4)，167-199。延伸查詢
6.	Wendt, Alexander E.(1992)。Anarchy is What States Make of It: the Social Construction of Power Politics。International Organization，46(2)，391-425。
7.	Wednt, Alexander E.(1991)。Bridging the Theory/Meta-Theory Gap in International Relations Theory。Review of International Studies，17(4)，383-392。
8.	Wednt, Alexander E.(1992)。Levels of Analysis vs Agents and Structures。Review of International Studies，18(2)，181-185。
9.	秦亞青(2006)。建構主義：思想淵源、理論流派與學術理念。國際政治研究，3，1-23。延伸查詢

會議論文
1.	莫大華(2010)。國際關係後現代建構主義理論的知識論立場1-19。延伸查詢

圖書
1.	Finnemore, Martha(1999)。National Interests in International Society。National Interests in International Society。Ithaca, NY：Cornell University Press。
2.	Friedman, Gil、Starr, Harvey(1997)。Agency, Structure, and International Politics: From Ontology to Empirical Inquiry。London：Routledge。
3.	Benton, Ted、Craib, Ian(2001)。Philosophy of Social Science: the Philosophical Foundations of Social Thought。Hampshire。
4.	Waltz, Kenneth N.(1979)。Theory of International Politic。Reading, Mass：Addison-Wesley Pub. Co。
5.	Smith, M. J.(1998)。Social science in question。Sage。
6.	Hollis, Martin、Smith, Steve(1990)。Explaining and Understanding International Relations。New York, NY：Oxford University Press。
7.	Bhaskar, R.(1979)。The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences。Hemel Hempstead, UK：Harvester。
8.	Bhaskar, Roy(1993)。Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom。London：Routledge。
9.	Cox, Robert W.、Sinclair, Timothy J.(1996)。Approaches to World Order。Cambridge University Press。
10.	Blaikie, Norman(1993)。Approaches to Social Enquiry。Cambridge, UK：Oxford, UK：Blackwel Publishers：Polity Press。
11.	Onuf, Nicholas Greenwood(1989)。World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relationships。Columbia, South Carolina：University of South Carolina Press。
12.	Booth, Ken(2007)。Theory of World Security。Cambridge。
13.	Bhasker, Roy(1986)。Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation。London：Verso。
14.	Kendall, G.、Wickham, G.(1999)。Using Foucault's Methods。London：Sage。
15.	Wight, Colin(2006)。Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology。Cambridge：Cambridge University Press。
16.	Hay, Colin(2002)。Political analysis: A critical introduction。Palgrave Macmillan。
17.	Robson, Colin(1993)。Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioners Researchers。Blackwell。
18.	Crotty, M.(1998)。The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process。Allen & Unwin。
19.	Wendt, Alexander E.(1999)。Social Theory of International Politics。Cambridge：Harvard University Press。
20.	McSweeney, Bill(1999)。Security, Identity, and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations。Cambridge University Press。
21.	Berger Peter L.、Luckmann, Thomas(1966)。The Social Construction of Reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge。New York：Doubleday。
22.	Giddens, Anthony(1984)。The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration。Cambridge：Polity Press。
23.	Waltz, Kenneth N.(1959)。Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis。Columbia University Press。
24.	Bhaskar, Roy(1978)。A Realist Theory of Science。Harvester Press。
25.	King, Gary、Keohane, Robert O.、Verba, Sidney(1994)。Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific inference in Qualitative Research。Princeton University Press。
26.	Durkheim, Emile、Lukes, Steven、Halls, W. D.(1982)。The Rules of Sociological Method。Free Press。
27.	Bhaskar, Roy A.(1989)。Reclaiming Reality: A Critical Introduction to Contemporary Philosophy。London：Verso。
28.	Sayer, Andrew(1992)。Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach。Routledge。
29.	Luhmann, Niklas、Bednarz, John Jr.、Baecker, Dirk(1995)。Social Systems。Stanford, California：Stanford University Press。
30.	Suganami, Hidemi(2006)。Wendt, IR, and Philosophy: A Critique。Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics \\ Stefano Guzzini ; Anna Leander(eds.)。London。
31.	Trigg, Roger(1987)。Understanding Social Science: A Philosophical Introduction to the Social Sciences。Oxford。
32.	Viotti, Paul R.、Kauppi, Mark V.(1993)。International Relations Theory。New York。
33.	Wallerstein, Immanuel(1993)。The Modern World System as a Capitalist World-Economy。International Relations Theory \\ Paul R. Viotti ; Mark V. Kauppi。New York。
34.	Waltz, Kenneth N.(1964)。The Stability of a Bipolar World (1964)。Realism and International Politics \\ Kenneth N. Waltz。New York。
35.	Waltz, Kenneth N.(1990)。Realist Thought and Neorealist Theory (1990)。Realism, and International Politics \\ Kenneth N. Waltz。New York。
36.	Behnke, Andreas(2006)。Grand Theory in the Age of Impossibility: Contemplations on Alexander Wendt。Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics \\ Stefano Guzzini ; Anna Leander (eds.)。London。
37.	Buzan, Barry(1995)。The Level of Analysis Problem in International Relations Reconsidered。International Relations Theory Today \\ Ken Booth ; Steve Smith (eds.)。Cambridge。
38.	Callinicos, Alex(1988)。Making History: Agency, Structure, and Change in Social Theory。Ithaca。
39.	Cox, Robert W.(1992)。Towards a Posthegemonic Conceptualization of World Order: Reflections on Relevancy of Ibn Khaldun (1992)。Approaches to World Order \\ Robert W. Cox ; Timothy J. Sinclair(reprinted)。Cambridge。
40.	Fay, Brian(1997)。Contemporary Philosophy of Social Science: A Multicultural Approach。Oxford。
41.	Giddens, Anthony(1976)。Ney Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies。London。
42.	Giddens, Anthony(1981)。A Contemporary Critiques of Historical Materialism。London。
43.	Gould, Harry D.(1998)。What Is at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate?。International Relations in a Constructed World \\ Vendulka Kubalkova ; Nicholas Onuf ; Paul Kowert (eds.)。Armonk。
44.	Guzzini, Stefano、Leander, Anna(2006)。Wendt’s Constructivism: A Relentless Quest for Synthesis。Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics \\ Stefano Guzzini ; Anna Leander (eds.)。London。
45.	Hurd, Ian(2006)。Constructivism。The Oxford Handbook of International Relations \\ Christian Reus-Smit ; Duncan Snidal (eds.)。Oxford。
46.	Katzenstein, Peter J.、Keohane, Robert K.、Krasner, Stephen D.(1999)。International Organizations and the Study of World Politics。Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics \\ Peter J. Katzenstein ; Robert K. Keohane ; Stephen D. Krasner (eds.)。Cambridge。
47.	Klotz, Audie、Lynch, Cecelia(2007)。Strategies for Research in Constructivist International w Relations。Armonk。
48.	Kratochwil, Friedrich(2008)。Sociological Approaches。The Oxford Handbook of International Relations \\ Christian Reus-Smith ; Duncan Snidal(eds.)。Oxford。
49.	Kubalkova, Vendulka、Onuf, Nicholas、Kowert, Paul(1998)。Constructing Constructivism。International Relations in a Constructed World \\ Vendulka Kubalkova ; Nicholas Onuf ; Paul Kowert(eds.)。Armonk。
50.	Kulcla, Andre(2000)。Social Constructivism and Philosophy of Science。New York。
51.	Lose, Lars G.(2001)。Communicative Action and the World of Diplomacy。Constructing International Relations: The Next Generation \\ Karin M. Fierke ; Knud Erik Jorgensen(eds.)。Armonk。
52.	Morgan, Patrick M.(1975)。Theories and Approaches to International Politics。New Brunswick。
53.	Onuf, Nicholas G.(1988)。The Republican Legacy in International Thought。Cambridge：Cambridge University Press。
54.	Reus-Smit, Christian(1996)。Constructivism。Theories of International Relations \\ Scott Burchill。Basingstoke, Palgrave。
55.	Wendt, Alexander E.(2006)。Social Theory as Cartesian Science: An Auto-Critique from a Quantum Perspectives。Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics \\ Stefano Guzzini ; Anna Leander(eds.)。London。

圖書論文
1.	Jogensen, Knud Erik(2001)。Four Levels and a Discipline。Constructing International Relations: The Next Generation。Armonk：M. E. Sharpe。
2.	Ashley, Richard K.(1986)。The Poverty of Neorealism。Neorealism and Its Critics。New York。
3.	Adler, Emanuel(2002)。Constructivism and International Relations。Handbook of International Relations。Sage。
4.	Waltz, Kenneth N.(1986)。Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics。Neorealism and Its Critics。New York：Columbia University Press。
5.	Ruggie, J. G.(2000)。What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge。Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics。Cambridge：The MIT Press。
6.	Onuf, Nicholas G.(1998)。Constructivism: A User's Manual。International Relations in a Constructed World。Armonk, London：M. E. Sharpe。

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	土耳其在敘利亞北部出兵行動的戰略思考
2.	理論、層次分析與議題之關聯性研究：從領土爭端到貿易糾紛
3.	論人民幣國際化：安全至上還是悲劇一場？
4.	泰、柬柏威夏寺爭端之探析：領土國族主義的政治
5.	美中兩強與國際關係之霸權研究
6.	國際關係研究中全球治理的概念及理論之跨領域探討：以本體論與知識論為核心
7.	當前兩岸關係研究的理論與實務
8.	國際氣候政治的發展與研究議題
9.	結構現實主義與Wendt的理論對話：「體系-結構」觀點與「文化-邏輯」觀點的結合
10.	從跨區域層次分析歐盟與中美洲共同市場政經互動
11.	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
12.	從地緣戰略看美國在朝鮮半島的戰略調整
13.	國際關係實用建構主義理論的知識論分析
14.	歐元歷史：分析層次的觀點
15.	美國在歐洲的導彈防禦系統部署：現實主義、自由主義或社會建構論？

1.	習近平時期對東協區域軍事外交之研究-以現實建構主義觀點
2.	歐洲整合發展與演進：權力、利益、認同與制度建構之整合分析
3.	制度變遷、社會資本與政治參與間關係
4.	我國客家族群政策之研究-當代自由主義正義論觀點
5.	北極圈海域爭端之研究-Waltz結構現實主義理論之檢視與評析
6.	近代東亞體系：模式、變遷與動力
7.	國際關係建構主義理論主權觀之透視：經貿全球化、人道干預與反恐怖主義
8.	從建構主義探討台灣國家認同的變遷

1.	制度變遷、社會資本、政治參與：三者之間的關係
2.	氣候變遷、政治與國際關係
3.	相對獲益與絕對獲益觀點下的東亞經濟合作
4.	從多層次理論觀點分析歐元的歷史

無相關著作

1.	書評：人類學知識的本體論轉向：以21世紀的親屬研究為例
2.	什麼是德性知識論？知識的本質與價值問題
3.	社會科學研究的主體與目的：知識論的反思

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫