請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/27261
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 石之瑜 | |
dc.contributor.author | Yu-Ching Wang | en |
dc.contributor.author | 王玉青 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-12T17:59:25Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2008-01-30 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2008-01-30 | |
dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2008-01-28 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 中文參考文獻
專書 于殿利、陸日宇(譯)(2006),《美國的中國形象》,(著)Harold R. Isaacs(北京:中華書局)。 王志弘等(合譯)(民94),《東方主義》,(著)Edward W. Said(台北:立緒文化)。 王義桅、唐小松(合譯)(2004),《大國政治的悲劇》,(著)John J.Mearsheimer(上海:上海人民出版社)。 王德威(1998),《想像中國的方法》(北京:新華出版社)。 王瓊淑(譯)(2001),《穆罕默德─先知的傳記》,(著)Karen Armstrong(台北:究竟出版社)。 石之瑜(1990),《文明衝突與中國》(台北:五南)。 ―(1997),《宋美齡與中國》(台北:商智)。 ―(1998),《書評中國》(台北:翰蘆)。 李希光、劉康(1997),《妖魔化中國的背後》(台北:捷幼出版社)。 李榮泰(譯)(1991),《美國的中國近代史研究》,(著)Paul A. Cohen(台北:聯經出版社)。 李鳳新(譯)(2005),《製造敵人的文化》,(著)Marc Crepon(台北:果實出版)。 肖歡容等(合譯)(2004),《國際關係中的野蠻與文明》,(著)Mark B. Salter(北京:新華出版社)。 阮叔梅(譯)(2005),《大汗之國》,(著)Jonathan D. Spence(台北:台灣商務)。 林添貴(譯)(2004),《大旗盤》,(著)Zbigniew Brzezinski(台北:立緒文化)。 施愛國(2004),《傲慢與偏見-東方主義與美國的“中國威脅論”研究》(廣東: 中山大學出版社)。 夏光(2005),《東亞現代性與西方現代性-從文化的角度看》(北京:新華書店)。 馬曉宏(譯)(1994),《美國的分裂─種族衝突的危機》,(著)Arthur M. Schlesinger(台北:正中書局)。 陳曉林(譯)(2004),《西方的沒落》,(著)Osward Spengler(台北:遠流)。 傅建中編著(1999),《季辛吉密錄》(北京:時報)。 湯淑君(譯)(2003),《那裡出了錯?論西方伊斯蘭世界的衝突》,(著)Bernard Lewis(台北:商周出版)。 黃裕美(譯)(2003),《文明衝突與世界秩序的重建》,(著)Samuel P. Huntington(台北:聯經出版社)。 董從林(1996),《龍與上帝》(北京:三聯書店)。 廖中和(1985),《國際政治的理想主義與現實主義》(台北:商務)。 廖世奇、彭小樵(譯)(1997),《文化類同與文化利用》,(著)Jonathan D. Spence(北京:北大出版社)。 蔡源林(譯)(2006),《文化與帝國主義》,(著)Edward W. Said(台北:立緒)。 鄭之書(譯)(2004),《中東─自基督教興起至二十世紀末》,(著)Bernard Lewis(北京:中國友誼出版)。 賽爾曼•魯西迪(2002),《魔鬼詩篇》(台北:雅言出版社)。 嚴平(譯)(1992),《詮釋學》,(著)Richard E. Palmer(台北:桂冠)。 顧長聲(1995),《傳教士與近代中國》(上海:上海人民出版社)。 酈紅、那濱(合譯)(2003),《文明的共存》,(著)Harald Muller(北京:新華出版社)。 期刊 石之瑜、周嘉辰(2001),〈超越普遍主義與相對主義人權觀有關辯論的省思〉,《中國大陸研究》第44卷 第4期。 英文參考文獻 專書 Bell, Daniel A., eds. (2000), When the East meets the West (Princeton: Princeton University Press). Bell, Lynda S., Andrew J. Nathan, Ilan Peleg, eds. (2001), Negotiating Culture and Human Rights (New York: Columbia University Press). Bullock, Katherine (2003), Rethinking Muslim Women and the Veil (London: The International Institute of Islamic Thought). Freeman, Michael (2002), Human Rights: An interdisciplinary approach (UK: Polity Press). Harries, Owen, eds. (1991), America’s Purpose: New Visions of U.S. Foreign Policy (California: ICS Press). Jacobsen, Michael and Ole Bruun, eds. (2000), Human Rights and Asian Values: Contesting National Identities and Cultural Representations in Asia (Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press). Johnson, Barbara, eds. (1993), Freedom and Interpretation (New York: HarperCollins Publishers). Lampton, David M. & Richard Daniel Ewing (2002), U.S.-China Relations in a Post-September 11th World (U.S.: Nixon Center). Madsen, Richard (1995), China and the American Dream (California: University of California Press). Mayer, Ann E. (1995), Islam and Human Rights: Tradition and Politics (Boulder: Westview). Nadwi, Sayyed Abul Hasan Ali (2005), Islam and the World (UK: UK Islamic Academy). Ness, Peter Van, eds. (1999), Debating Human Rights (London: Routledge). Ramadan, Tariq (2001), Islam, the West and the Challenges of Modernity (UK: The Islamic Foundation). Shambaugh, David, eds. (1993), American Studies of Contemporary China (New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc.). Shute, Stephen and Susan Hurley, eds. (1993), On Human Rights (New York: BasicBooks.) 期刊 Alatas, Syed Farid, “The Study of Social Sciences in Developing Societies: Towards an Adequate Conceptualization of Relevance,” Current Sociology, 49:2 (March 2001), pp.1-19. Benthall, Jonathan, “Confessional Cousins and the Rest-The Structure of Islamic Toleration,” Anthropology Today, 21:1 (Feb 2005), pp.16-20. Bernstein, Richard & Ross Munro, “Coming Conflict with America,” Foreign Affairs, 76:2 (March/ April 1997), pp.18-31. Brems, Eva, “Reconciling Universality and Diversity in International Human Rights: A Theoretical and Methodological Framework and Its Application in the Context of Islam,” Human Rights Review, 5:3 (April-June 2004), pp.5-21. Brookes, Peter T.R., “Strategic Realism: The Future of U.S.S-Sino Security Relations,” Strategic Review, 27:3 (Summer 1999), pp.53-56. Carle, Robert, “Revealing and Concealing: Islamist Discourse on Human Rights,” Human Rights Review, 5:3 (April-June 2005), pp.122-137. Christoffersen, Gaye, “The Role of East Asia in Sino-American Relations,” Asian Survey, 42:3 (May-June 2002), pp.369-372. Cohen, Joshua, “Minimalism About Human Rights,” The Journal of Political Philosophy, 12:2 (2004), p.190-213. Croissant, Aurel, “From Transition to Defective Democracy,” Democratization, 11:5 (December 2004), pp.156-178. Dagi, Ishan D., “Rethinking Human Rights, Democracy, and the West: Post-Islamic Intellectuals in Turkey,” Critique: Critical Middle Eastern Studies, 13:2 (Summer 2004), pp.135-151. Dallmayr, Fred, ““Asian Values” and Global Human Rights,” Philosophy East & West, 52:2 (April 2002), pp.173-189. Donnelly, Jack, “The Relative Universality of Human Rights,” Human Rights Quarterly, working paper no.33(May 2006), pp.1-35. Ferjani, Mohamed-Cherif, “Islam and Politics: The Terms of the Debate,” History And Anthropology, 16:1 (Mar 2005), pp.75-83. Fukuyama, Francis, “The End of History,” National Interest, No. 16(Summer 1989), pp.4-18. Fuller, Graham, “The Next Ideology,” Foreign Policy, No.98 (Spring 1995), pp.145-158. Funabashi, Yoichi, “The Asianization of Asia,” Foreign Affairs, 72:5 (Nov/ Dec 1993), pp.75-85. Gole, Nilufer, “Contemporary Islamic movements and new sources for religious tolerance,” Journal of Human Rights, 2:1 (Mar 2003), pp.17-30. Hajjar, Lisa, “Religion, State Power, and Domestic Violence in Muslim Societies: A Framework for Comparative Analysis” Law & Social Inquiry, 29:1 (Winter 2004), pp.1-38. Halloran, Richard, “The Rising East,” Foreign Policy, No.102 (Spring 1996), pp.3-21. Harries, Owen, “The Collapse of “The West”,” Foreign Affairs, 72:4 (Sep/ Oct 1993), pp.41-53. Hashmi, Sohail H., “The Qur’an and Tolerance: an interpretive essay on Verse 5:48,” Journal of Human Rights, 2:1 (April-June 2004), pp.81-103. Howard-Hassmann, Rhoda E., “The Flogging of Bariya Magazu: Nigerian politics, Canadian pressures, and Women’s and children’s rights,” Journal of Human Rights, 3:1 (March 2004), pp.3-20. Huntington, Samuel P., “If Not Civilization, What? Paradigms of the post-Cold War,” Foreign Affairs, 72:5 (Nov/ Dec 1993), pp.186-194. Huntington, Samuel P., “No Exit: The Error of Endism,” National Interest, No. 17(Fall 1989), pp.3-11. Huntington, Samuel P., “The Erosion of American National Interests,” Foreign Affairs, 76:5 (Sep/ Oct 1997), pp.28-49. Kupchan, Charles A., “Reviving the West,” Foreign Affairs, 75:3 (May/ Jun 1996), pp.92-104. Lampton, David M., “Paradigm Lost: The Demise of ‘Weak China,” National Interest, No. 81 (2005), pp.73-80. Lind, William. S., “Defending Western Culture,” Foreign Policy, No.84 (Fall 1991), pp.40-50. Magnarella, Paul J., “Review Article: Communist Chinese and “Asian Values” Critiques of Universal Human Rights,” Journal of Third World Studies, 21:2 (Fall 2004), pp.179-192. Maier, Charles S., “The Politics of Productivity: Foundation of American International Economic Policy after World War Ⅱ,” International Organization, 31:4 (1977), pp.607-634. Mohammed, Khaleel, “A Muslim Perspective on Human Rights,” Society, 41:2 (Jan-Feb 2004), pp.29-35. Mtango, Sifa, “A state of Oppression? Woman’s Rights in Saudi Arabia,” Asia Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law, 5:1 (2004), pp.49-67. Muller, Zdenek, “The Trap of Islam,” New Presence: The Prague Journal of Central European Affairs, 7:1 (Spring 2005), pp.15. Polisi, Catherine E., “Universal Rights and Cultural Relativism: Hinduism and Islam Deconstructed,” World Affairs, 167:1 (Summer 2004), pp.41-46. Rigg, Jonathan, “Of Miracle and Crisis: (re-) interpretations of growth and decline in East and Southeast Asia,” Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 43:2 (August 2002), pp.137-156. Roy, Denny, “Hegemonic of Horizon? China’s Threat to East Asian Security,” International Security, 19:1 (Summer 1994), pp.149-168. Seligman, Adam B., “Particularist Universalism,” Common Knowledge, 11:1 (2005), pp.81-88. Shah, Niaz A., “Freedom of Religion: Koranic and Human Rights Perspectives,” Asia Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law, 1:2 (2005), pp.69-88. Song, Young-Bae, “Crisis of Cultural Identity in East Asia: on the meaning of Confucian ethics in the age of globalization,” Asian Philosophy, 12:2 (2002), pp.109-125. Thayer, Bradley A., “Confronting China: An Evaluation of Options for the U.S.,” Comparative Strategy, No. 24 (2005), pp.71-98. Tomalin, Emma, “Religion and a rights-based approach to development,” Development Studies, 6:2 (2006), pp.93-108. Zakaria, Fareed, “Culture is Destiny: A Conversation with Lee Kuan Yew,” Foreign Affairs, 73:2 (March/ April 1994), pp.109-126. 研討會論文 Shambaugh, David & Robert S. Litwak, “America and China Get a Chance to Improve Their Relations,” International Herald Tribune, (Oct.18, 2001), p.8. 官方文獻 Bush, George W., The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington, D.C.: White House, September 2002), p.5. ─, The President's State of the Union Address (Washington, D.C.: White House, 2002) | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/27261 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 長久以來,歐美作家習慣以「西方」為名來鞏固自我認同,並透過所謂西方精神與文明價值觀在世界上的傳播,辨識或建構出非西方的「他者」。於是,西方文明對內成為加強主體認同的思想基礎,對外又形成一種優越的批判立場,使身為主體的「西方」在面對異文明的同時,看似以普遍價值的高姿態來維持本身文明存在的合理性,最終成就了「西方普遍主義」。然而,探究許多文獻可以發現,儘管歐美作家始終保有普遍身分的認同心態,其論述內容卻不必然能夠維持普遍性,因為,當同屬異文明的儒家與伊斯蘭共同出現時,西方文明主體基於傳統價值觀,分別和兩者發展出不同的互動模式,不但不能對儒家與伊斯蘭展現一視同仁的普遍姿態,還必須採取「同時,不過分開」的敘事策略來加以論述。因此,西方的普遍主義是矛盾的,一方面身為「他者」的儒家與伊斯蘭若同時出現,可以映襯出西方文明的普遍性,另一方面,歐美作家也要將兩者分開討論,保持與個別文明的彈性對話空間,並且杜絕本質不同的儒家與伊斯蘭聯手形成真正的文明威脅。本文以亞洲價值與文明衝突論為主要探討範疇,試圖分析歐美作家的普遍主義思維會如何敘述儒家與伊斯蘭。其中,亞洲價值所展現出來的普遍身分較為婉轉間接,並且明顯使用「同時,不過分開」的敘事策略來處理可親的儒家與威脅的伊斯蘭。文明衝突論則表達出更直接的普遍認知與中心主義,以致未能顧及文明的差異性而將儒家與伊斯蘭視為威脅同盟,使得西方文明的主體性得到全新的鞏固。最終,歐美敘述本身與兩個異文明的相互關係便賦予西方文明的普遍身分,則本文的研究重心則以嘗試揭開這種「同時,不過分開」的敘事策略,進一步將「西方」從普遍主義的敘事者,轉變成平等的被敘事對象。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | European and American narrators have been used to construct self-identity in the name of “the west” for a long time and also discern “the others” which are non-western civilizations by expanding the western spirits and values to the whole world. Western civilization therefore could be the foundation which reinforce the self-identity internally, and externally, produce a judging superiority that maintains the privilege to rationalize the existence of western civilization when confronting with dissimilarities and ultimately create “Western Universalism”. However, western narratives are not always universal even if the narrators almost recognize the identity of universalism. Especially when Confucianism and Islam arise simultaneously, the western civilization, according to traditional values, would develop two different interactive models which not only are apposed to the universalism, but also potentially produce certain “Simultaneous yet Separate” narrative strategies. Hence, western universalism becomes a paradox. On one hand, the universality of western civilization could be verified when Confucianism and Islam coincide as “the others”. On the other hand, Confucianism and Islam should be narrated separately to assure “the west” keeps the access to communicate with independent both, which preclude these two different civilizations from forming a new threatening alliance. Through the main studying in “Asian Values” and “Clash of Civilizations”, Confucianism and Islam would be assumed divergently under western universalism. Comparatively, western identity in “Asian Values” presents more indirect universality when discussing a friendly Confucianism and a threatening Islam simultaneously yet separately. In the “Clash of Civilizations” covered with affirmative universalism and west-centralism, the narrators would easily achieve the integrality of “a new west” by ignoring the heterogeneity between Confucianism and Islam and combining them as a threatening alliance. As a result that the universal identity of western civilization depends on how western narrators manipulate the interrelations between itself and the others (Confucianism and Islam), revealing the “Simultaneous yet Separate” narrative strategies would become the main purpose of this paper. Furthermore, the western narrators complying with universal identity would be deconstructed equally to the narrated object. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-12T17:59:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-97-R94322009-1.pdf: 855948 bytes, checksum: ae8c5e69a8c6c58319126465670b0834 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 誌謝………………………………………………………………………....i
中文摘要......................................................................................................iii 英文摘要……………………………………………………………….......iv 目錄………………………………………………………………………..vi 第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………….1 第一節 研究動機與目的……………………………………………..1 第二節 研究方法─文獻分析與詮釋………………………………..4 第三節 文獻與文本…………………………………………………..5 第一項 西方眼中的單一他者……………………………………6 第二項 西方視野中同時出現的儒家與伊斯蘭…………………8 第三項 西方普遍主義身分的探討……………………………..10 第四節 分析架構……………………………………………………12 第五節 西方普遍主義的指涉………………………………………15 第二章 分析架構─西方論述中的四種語境…………………………..16 第一節 西方的現實主義語境………………………………………18 第一項 儒教威脅論…………………………………………….18 第二項 儒教夥伴論…………………………………………….22 第二節 西方的理想主義語境………………………………………26 第一項 儒教可親論……………………………………………..26 第二項 儒教威脅論……………………………………………..31 第三章 亞洲價值的挑戰─西方普遍人權的建構與辯論……………...35 第一節 亞洲價值緣起─西方普遍主義的反襯……………………37 第二節 當西方遇見東方─亞洲人權辯論與西方人權的普遍性…40 第一項 西方普遍人權的直接肯定……………………………..41 第二項 西方普遍人權的間接肯定……………………………..46 第三節 異文明的並列與切割─儒家與伊斯蘭的分別論述………49 第一項 並列的儒家與伊斯蘭─作為「整體」的亞洲………..50 第二項 切割的儒家與伊斯蘭─亞洲價值的分水嶺…………..52 第四節 小結─亞洲的多元性與「泛亞洲」價值…………………..59 第四章 文明衝突論─西方主體意識的重建…………………………...62 第一節 尋找敵人─文明衝突論的誕生……………………………64 第二節 塑造敵人─來自「東方」的威脅………………………….68 第一項 反西方情結─非西方集團形成的潛在因素…………..69 第二項 反西方核心─作為威脅的儒家與伊斯蘭……………..72 第三節 恐怖結合─西方主體意識的昇華…………………………78 第一項 非關文明─陌生與矛盾的同盟………………………..79 第二項 暴力的西方中心主義…………………………………..81 第四節 小結─西方的沒落與重生…………………………………84 第五章 普遍主義的身分意識…………………………………………...86 第一節 從東方主義到文化帝國─探究西方普遍主義心態………88 第二節 從間接到直接─ 比較亞洲價值與文明衝突論中的普遍身分意涵………….93 第一項 亞洲價值的間接表態…………………………………..94 第二項 文明衝突的直接論述…………………………………..96 第三節 救贖與墮落─同時但分開的敘事策略……………………98 第四節 小結─建構「普遍」的西方………………………………..101 第六章 結語:解釋與回顧……………………………………………..103 第一節 文明的緣起與交會─毫不普遍的普遍主義……………..104 第一項 被發現的儒家…………………………………………104 第二項 同源共生的伊斯蘭……………………………………107 第二節 西方普遍主義的敘事策略─“同時,不過分開”……….111 第一項 回歸永遠的普遍心態…………………………………111 第二項 “同時,不過分開”的儒家與伊斯蘭─ 剖析西方敘事策略…………………………………...113 參考書目………………………………………………………………...116 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | “同時,不過分開”-
當代“西方普遍主義”敘述下的儒家與伊斯蘭 | zh_TW |
dc.title | “Simultaneous and yet Separate”-
Modern Discursive Strategies toward Confucianism and Islam in Western Universalism | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 96-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蔡瑋,溫洽溢 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 普遍主義,儒家,伊斯蘭,認同,敘事策略,亞洲價值,文明衝突論, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | universalism,Confucianism,Islam,identity,narrative strategies,Asian Values,Clash of Civilizations, | en |
dc.relation.page | 123 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2008-01-29 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 政治學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 政治學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-97-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 835.89 kB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。