本研究根據政治思想史方法論的提示，針對發行於五○年代的《自由中國》半月刊中的「憲政論述」，進行一項在歷史、方法論、理論及思想人物等層次上的分析。所謂「憲政論述」是指：針對與立憲主義相關的「觀念」議題、與政府統治有關的「制度／政策」議題、與政治活動相關的「行動」議題等三大議題所進行的論述總稱。本研究試圖檢視憲政論述之社會政治意涵及呈現語言／觀念意涵，即將憲政論述及其提出視為一項政治理念、意識型態、政治語言及政治行動的綜合體。另一方面，本研究嘗試就論述內容分析《自由中國》時期的反對精英的「政治秩序」的觀念即論述典範，主要探討他們對「政治」的看法及相關憲法理念的理解與運用。

According to the methodical implication so ‘new history of political thought’, we intend to conduct a historical analysis toward the constitutional discourses of the Free-China Semi-monthly that published from 1949 on the historical, methodological, theoretical and individual levels. Two propositions on the historical and theoretical levels were the starting point: 1. the historical : the constitutional discourse in the Free-China Semi-monthly was the starting point for the political discourses of the post War Taiwan. 2. the theoretical: the innate action orientations of political discourses created a co-existent and co-variant relationships between discourses and actions. I postulate the constitutional discourses contained the following issues; the issues of idea’ relevant to constitutionalism, the issues of institutions/policies’ relevant to the government (the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of governmental policies), and the issues of action’ relevant to political activities. Constitutional discourses contain multi-dimensional characters and meanings that constructed by historical, political, ideal and linguistic elements. This research is a deep survey toward the historical, political, linguistic, and ideological levels of constitutional discourses. On the other hand, we try to discuss the understandings, opinions and uses of political elites on the ideas of “political order”, “constitution” and “democracy”. The following questions constitute the core concerns of our research: 1. The historical: What was the unique importance of the constitutional discourses of the Free-China Semi-monthly in 1950s Taiwan? 2. The theoretical: What are political and constitutional discourse? How did they continue, change and disappear? 3. The methodological: Why should we analyze political discourses in the study of structural changes? What were the significances of the analysis of discourses for political analysis? 4. The individual: What were the political beliefs of the authors and editors of the Free-China Semi-monthly? What they said and wrote were authentic and practical for themselves and the readers? What were their discursive rules? How were they formed and obeyed?