社會科學的本土化一直是二十年來學界所努力的目標。然而，近年來，隨著國內的威權轉型和統獨議題的浮現，社會科學本土化潮流中遂有「中國化」、「臺灣化」，甚至「反中國化」與「去中國化」之爭。 本文從兩種社會科學典範的角度，一方面檢討社會科學「中國化」、「臺灣化」「反中國化」和「去中國化」等泛政治性觀點的可能不足，另方面則主張從臺灣整體實存政經社文網絡立基，建構能突顯「學術主體性」或「臺灣主體性」的本土化社會科學理論。其間的關鍵，在於這種方法能從一般社會科學的普同性中分離出臺灣社會科學的特殊性，而且能以臺灣社會科學的普同性，整合國內社會科學上因不同時間或其他理由而主張的各種特殊性。

　　　　　The indigenization of social sciences has been an important objective of the academic efforts in Taiwan for the past twenty years. After the transformation of the authoritarianism, beginning in the mid-1980s, however, there came severe disputes over the manners and contents of the indigenization. Among others, sinonization, Taiwanization, or even antisinonization and de-sinonization were separately argued to be the real meaning of the indigenization. From the viewpoints of the two paradigms (the theory-centered and the fact-centered ones) in social sciences, this article first tries to inspect the shortcomings of the arguments to define the indigenization as isnonization, Taiwanization, anti-sinonization, or de-sinonization. Furthermore, based upon the fact-centered paradigm, this paper argues the only way to embody "the academic subjectivity" or "the Taiwan subjectivity" that has been always emphasized in the indigenization efforts is to start from a historical understanding of what had happened in Taiwan.