本文以社會科學本土化為議題，並以臺灣社會科學界的論辯為軸線，指出強調文 化邊界的浮動性、重新發現社會實體的性質和文化比較研究回歸日常生活等，對本土化 議題的討論所具有的意義。全文分為以下幾部份：（一）前言，說明本文的主要議題和處 理內容；（二）分析本土化的共同預設：首先說明本土化論者對普遍主義的反省，其次分 析特殊主義的產生及其相伴而生的對在地歷史、文化與社會的重視，最後我們進一步指出 不經反省的使用特殊主義預設對社會科學本土化的危機；（三）分析本土化預設的不足： 先檢討特殊化意識的全球性趨勢，由此指出自覺性本土化的不足；接著處理本土化共識的 特殊主義有兩個陷阱，一個是潛藏的普遍主義，第二是裡邊人主義；進而提出日常文化比 較對本土化的重要性；（四）回歸日常生活的文化比較：我們指出過去文化比較研究著重 在形構通則性所帶來的限制，並借助Tenbruck對文化比較由社會實踐被窄化為社會科學方 法的反省，建構了本文的論點－－文化比較作為一種日常生活的重要性；（五）重新定義 社會實體的性質：從浮動的文化邊界與日常的文化比較分析出發，重新定義社會實體的性 質，我們指出「社會」是一種過程，是在多元文化的互動中形構的，討論社會實體必須注 意到邊界的浮動性和社會實體建構中過程與時間的重要性，由此指出實證論式本土化論點 的不足。

　　　　　The purpose of this article is to discuss some basic issues associated with the current arguments in Taiwan about social science indigenization. To do this, we set forth out own theory of social reality which embodies three concepts. These three focus on cultural boundaries, the construction of social reality, and comparative cultures based on the "life-world," or day-to day realities of the people in those cultures. By adding these concepts, we aim to clarify the disputes over social science indigenization which have ensured over the last two decades. We divide our arguments into four parts. First, after describing the context of the social science indigenization argument, we set out the commonly shared presuppositions held by those who support this view. Supporters of this view critique the universalism of positivist social science and call for a particularism that emphasizes local history, local culture and society. We agree with the criticism of universalism but do not agree with what appears to be a superficial particularism of social sciences indigenization. Second, in analyzing the limitations of the social science indigenization view, we argue that some particularism is a product of universalism which absent of local context. Therefore, the theories of particularism have two traps: hidden universalism and the limitations of the insider's perspective. Third, we argue that comparative culture in the "life-world" can compensate for the limitations of a traditional cultural comparative analysis that focuses on how to construct general rules. The basic arguments of cultural comparison in the life-world are based on Tenbruck's theory. We argue that cultural comparison in the "life- world," not in the methodology, is the first and most important step in social science science indigenization. Fourth, we posit that to