請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/38980完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 張亞中 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Li-Yen Yang | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 楊立彥 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T16:55:33Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2005-07-11 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2005-07-11 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2005 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2005-06-07 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 參考書目
一、英文部份 Alderson, K. and Hurrell, A. (1999). Hedley Bull on International Society. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire.: Macmillan Press. Baldwin, D. A. (1993) Neorealism and Neoliberalism: the Contemporary Debate. New York.: Columbia University Press. Beck, J. R. & Arend, Anthony C. & Vander Lugt, Robert D. (1996). International Rules: Approaches from International Law and International Relations. New York.: Oxford University Press. Booth, K. (1991). “Security in Anarchy: Utopian Realism in Theory and Practice”. International Affairs. 67: 527-545. Bull, H. (1961). “Society and Anarchy in International Relations”. In Butterfield, H. and Wight, M. (eds), Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics. London.: George Allen und Unwin. Bull, H. (1966a). “International Theory: The Case for a Classical Approach”. World Politics. 18(3): 361-377. Bull, H. (1966). “The Grotian Conception of International Society”, In Butterfield, H. and Wight, M. (eds). Diplomatic Investigations. London.: George Allen & Unwin. Bull, H. and Holbraad, C. (1978). Introduction to Power Politics. In Wight M. Power Politics. New York.: Continuum. Bull, H. (1979). “The State’s Positive Role in World Affairs”. Daedalus, 108(4): 111-123 Bull, H. (1984). Intervention in World Politics. Oxford.: Clarendon Press. Bull, H. and Watson, A. (1984). The Expansion of International Society. Oxford.: Clarendon Press. Bull, H. (1995). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire.: Macmillan Burchill, S. (2001). Theories of International Relations. New York.: Palgrave. Buzan, B. (1993). “From International System to International Society: Structural Realism and Regime Theory Meet the English School”. International Organization. 47(3): 327-352 Buzan, B. (2001). “The English School: An Underexploited Resource in IR.” Review of International Studies. 27: 471-488. Buzan, B. (2004). From International to World Society?: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Caney, S. (2001). “Review British Perspectives on Internationalism, Justice and Sovereignty”. The European Legacy, l6(2): 265-275 Chen, S. (2003). “Review of the book Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society”. The Political Quarterly. 74(1): 133-137 Copeland, D. C. (2003). “A Realist Critique of the English School.” Review of International Studies. 29: 427-441. Dougherty, J. E. and Pfaltzgraff, R. L. (2001). Contending theories of international relations: a comprehensive survey. New York.: Longman. Deutsch, K. (1969). Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience. New York.: Greenwood Press Dunne, T. (1995). “International Society: Theoretical Promises Fulfilled?”. Cooperation and Conflict. 30(2): 125-154 Dunne, T. (1998). Inventing International Society: A History of the English School. Basingstoke, Hampshire.: Macmillan. Dunne, T. (2000). “All Along the Watchtower: A Reply to the Critics of Inventing International Society”. Cooperation and Conflict. 35(2): 227-238. Dunne, T. (2001). “New Thinking on International Society”. British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 3( 2): 223-244. Dunne, T. (2001). “Watching the Wheels Go Round: Replying to the Replies”. Cooperation and Conflict. 36(3): 338-342. Evans, T. and Wilson, P. (1992). “Regime Theory and the English School of International Relations: A Comparison”. Millennium. 21(3): 329-351. Finnemore, M. (2001). “Exporting the English School?” Review of International Studies. 27: 509-513. Gaddis, J. L. (1992). “International Theory and the End of the Cold War”. International Security. 17(3): 5-58. George J. (1994) Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)ntroduction to International Relations. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Gong, Gerrit W. (1984). The Standard of Civilization in International Society. Oxford.: Clarendon Press. Gonzalez-Pelaez, A. and Buzan, B. “A Viable Project of Solidarism? The Neglected Contributions of John Vincent’s Basic Rights Initiative”. International Relations, 17(3): 321-339 Grader S. (1988). “The English School of International Relations: Evidence and Evaluation”. Review of International Studies. 14: 29-44. Halliday, F. (1994). Rethinking International Relations. Vancouver.: UBC Press. Hill, C. (1991). “Obituary: R.J. Vincent (1943-90)”. Political Studies. 39(1): 158-159. Hobbes, T. (1996). Leviathan. edited by Richard Tuck. New York.: Cambridge University Press Hoffmann, S. (1977). “An American Social Science: International Relations”. In H. Janus And Minerva: Essays in the Theory and Practice of International Politics. Boulder Col.: Westview Press. Howe, P. (1994). “The Utopian Realism of E.H. Carr”. Review of International Studies. 20: 277-297. Hurrell, A. (1996). “International Society and the Study of Regimes: A Reflective Approach”. In Robert J. B. & Anthony C. A. & Robert D. V. L. (eds). International Rules: Approaches from International Law and International Relations. New York.: Oxford University Press. James, A. (1982). “Michael Nicholson on Martin Wight: A Mind Passing in the Night”. Review of International Studies. 8: 117-123. James, A. (1993). “System or Society?”. Review of International Studies. 19: 269-288. Jones, R. (1981). “The English School of International Relations: A Case for Closure”. Review of International Studies. 7: 1-13. Kaplan, M. (1957). System and Process in International Politics. New York.: John Wiley. Kaplan, M. (1961). “Problems of Theory Building and Theory Confirmation in International Politics”. World Politics. 14(1): 6-24 Kaplan, M. A. (1966). “The New Great Debate: Traditionalism vs. Science in International Relations”. World Politics. 19(1): 1-20. Keohane, R. O. and Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and Interdependence : World Politics in Transition. Boston.: Little, Brown. Keohane, R. O. (1984). International Institutions and State Power. Bolder.: Westview Press. Keohane, R. O. (1986). Neorealism and Its Crisis. New York.: Columbia University Press. Keohane, R. O. (1988). “International Institutions: Two Approaches“. International Studies Quarterly. 32: 379-396. Knorr, K. and Rosenau, J. N. (1969). Contending approaches to international politics. Princeton, N.J..: Princeton University Press. Knudsen, T. B. (2000). “Theories of society or society of theorists? With Tim Dunne in the English school”. Cooperation and Conflict. 35(2): 193-203. Knudsen, T. B. (2001). “Beyond the Watchtower? A Further Note on the Origins of the English School and its Theoretical Potential”. Cooperation and Conflict. 35(2), 193-203. Linklater, A. (1990). Beyond realism and Marxism : Critical Theory and International Relations. Houndmills.: Macmillan. Linklater, A. (2001). Rationalism. In Burchill, S. (eds.). Theories of international relations. New York.: Palgrave. Little, R. (2000). “The English School's Contribution to the Study of International Relations.” European Journal of International Relations. 6(3): 395-422. Maghroor, R. (1982). Introduction: Major Debates in International Relations. In Maghroori, R. and Ramberg, B. Globalism versus Realism: International Relations' Third Debate. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. Makinda, S. M. (2000). “International Society and Eclecticism in International Relations Theory”. Cooperation and Conflict. 35(2): 205-216. Makinda, S. M. (2001). “International Society and Global Governance”. Cooperation and Conflict. 36(3): 334-337. Manning, C. A. W. (1952). “Report of the General Rapporteur”. In G..L. Goodwin (ed). the University Teaching of International Relations. Oxford.: Blackwell Manning, C. A. W. (1962). The Nature of International Society. London.: London School of Economics and Political Science. Morgenthau, H. (1973). Politics Among Nations, New York.: Knopf. Neibuhr, R. (1949). Faith and History : a Comparison of Christian and Modern Views of History. New York.: Charles Scribner's Sons. Neumann, I. B. and Waver, O. (1997). The Future of International Relations : Masters in the Making?. New York : Routledge. Nye, J. (1988). “Neorealism and Neoliberalism”, World Politics. 40(2): 235-251. Powell, R. (1994). “Anarchy in International Relations Theory: The Neorealism- Neoliberalism Debate”. International Organization. 48(2): 313-344 Roberts, A. (1993). “Humanitarian War: Military Intervention and Human Rights”. International Affairs. 63(3): 429-449. Shue, H. (1996). Basic Rights : Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Stanley, H. (1990). “International Society”. In J.D.B. Miller and R.J. Vincent (eds). Order and Violence: Hedley Bull and International Relations. Oxford.: Clarendon Press. Stern, G. (1995). The Structure of International Society. New York.: Pinter Publishers Schelling, T. (1961). “The Strategy of Conflict”. World Politics. 14(4): 642-652 Smith, S. (1985). “Introduction”. In Smith(ed). International Relations: British and American Perspectives. Oxford.: Blackwell. Suganami, H. (1983). “The Structure of Institutionalism: An Anatomy of British Mainstream International Relations.” International Relations. 7: 2363-2381. Suganami, H. (2000). “A New Narrative, a New Subject? Time Dunne on the 'English school'”. Cooperation and Conflict. 35(2): 217-226. Suganami, H. (2001a). “Alexander Wendt and the English School”. Journal of International Relations and Development. 4: 403-424 Suganami, H. (2001). “C.A.W. Manning and the Study of International Relations”. Review of International Studies. 27: 91-107. Suganami, H. (2002). “The International Society Perspective on World Politics Reconsidered.” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific. 2: 1-28. Suganami, H. (2003). “British Institutionalism, or the English School, 20 Years On”. International Relations. 17(3): 253-271. Thompson, K. W. (1980). Masters of International Thought: Major Twentieth-Century Theorists and the World Crisis. Baton Rouge.: Louisiana State University Press. Thomas, S. M. (2000). “Taking Religious and Cultural Pluralism Seriously: The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation of International Society”. Millennium. 29(3): 815-841 Thomas, S. M. (2001). “Faith, History and Martin Wight: The Role of Religion in the Historical Sociology of the English School of International Relations”. International Affairs. 77(4): 905-929 Tonnies, F. (2001). Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. New York: Cambridge University Press. Vasquez, J. (1995). The Post-Positivist Debate: Reconstructuring Scientific Enquiry and International Relations Theory After Enlightenment’s Fall. In Booth, K. and Smith, S. (eds.) International Relations Theory Today. University Park, PA.: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Vincent, R. J. (1974). Nonintervention and International Order, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Vincent, R. J. (1984), “Edmund Burke and the Theory of International Relations”, Review of International Studies, 10(3): 205-218. Vincent, R. J. (1986). Human Rights and International Relations, Cambridge.: Cambridge University Press. Vincent, R. J and Wilson, P. (1993). “Beyond Non-Intervention”, In Ian F. and M. Hoffman. (eds). Political Theory, International Relations, and the Ethics of Intervention. New York.: St. Martin's Press. Waltz, K. (1988). “The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory”. Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 18: 615-628 Watson, A. (1990). “System of States”. Review of International Studies. 16: 99-109. Watson, A. (1992). The Evolution of International Society : a Comparative Historical Analysis. New York.: Routledge. Watson, A. (1997). The Limits of Independence: Relations Between States in the Modern World. London.: Routledge. Waever, O. (1996). The Rise and Fall of the Inter-Paradigm Debate. In Smith, S. ,Booth, K., & Zalewski, M. International theory: Positivism and beyond. Cambridge; New York.: Cambridge University Press. Waever, O. (2002). Four Meanings of International Society. In Roberson, B. A. (Ed.). International society and the development of international theory. London, New York.: Continuum. Wendt, A. (1992). “Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics”. International Organization. 46(2). Pp.391-425. Wendt, A. (1994). “Collective Identity Formation and the International State”. American Political Science Review. 88(2): 384-396. Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. New York.: Cambridge University Press. Wendt, A. (2000). “On the Via Media: A Response to the Critics”. Review of International Studies. 26(1): 165-180 Wheeler, N. J. (1992). “Pluralist or Solidarist Conceptions of International Society: Bull and Vincent on Humanitarian Intervention”. Millennium. Vol.21(3). pp.463-487 Wheeler, N. J. (2000). Saving strangers: humanitarian intervention in international society, New York: Oxford University Press. Wight, M. (1936). “Christian Pacifism”. Theology. 33: 12-21. Wight, M. (1966). “Western Values in International Relations”. In Butterfield, H. and Wight, M.(eds.). Diplomatic Investigations. London.: George Allen and Unwin. Wight, M. (1977). Systems of States. Edited by Bull, H. Leicester.: Leicester University Press. Wight, M. (1987). “An Anatomy of International Thought”. Review of International Studies. 13: 221-227. Wight, M. (1991). International Theory: the Three Traditions. Edited by Wight, G. and Porter, B. Leicester.: Leicester University Press. Wight, M. (2002). Power Politics. New York.: Continuum. Wilson, P. (1989). “The English School of International Relations: A Reply to Sheila Grader.” Review of International Studies. 15: 49-58. 二、中文部份 石之瑜, (2001). 後現代的政治知識 台北：元照 任得厚, (1999). 政治學 台北：三民 時殷弘、葉鳳麗, (1995) “現實主義、理性主義、革命主義” 歐洲 3: 4-16 蔡政文, (2001). 當前國際關係理論發展及其評估 台北：三民 秦亞青, (2001). “國際政治的社會建構-溫特及其建構主義國際政治理論” 美歐季刊 15(2): 231-264 房樂憲, (2001). “國際關係理論中的國際社會學派理論及方法論特徵” 世界經濟與政治 3: 18-23. 彭召昌, (1999). “英國學派對國際機制研究的啟示” 世界經濟與政治 4: 11-14. 龐中英, (1996). “國際社會理論與國際關系的英國學派” 歐洲 2: 32-40. 三、網路資料 Buzan, B. (2003). The English School: a Bibliography. Retrieved from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/polis/englishschool/biblionov2003.doc English School of International Relations Theory. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/polis/englishschool/ | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/38980 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本論文分析國際關係中英國學派，首先，探討其在國際關係理論上的地位，與其它理論之間的關連；其次，為了對英國學派所提出的國際社會有全面的了解，將分別從理論、歷史、規範與文化四個層面切入，深入檢視英國學派的理論主張與研究成果。最後，以英國學派在規範與文化上的兩種不同立場做為軸線，簡述英國學派的發展歷史。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This disquisition focuses on the English School in international relations. First, it defines the placement of English School in IR theory, and the relations between English School and other theories. Second, for fully understanding the concept called international society, which is created by English School, it discusses English School’s assertion and academic effort from theory, history, norm, and culture perspective. Finally, it outlines the English School’s development history by two axes: English School’s position on norm and culture. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T16:55:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-94-R91322016-1.pdf: 586891 bytes, checksum: 252e3a1f802b36a49fca004438de2083 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2005 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1 第二節 文獻回顧與分析 5 第三節 研究方法 23 第四節 章節安排 24 第二章 英國學派在國際關係理論中的定位 27 第一節 第一次大辯論 27 第二節 第二次大辯論 32 第三節 第三次大辯論 38 第四節 後冷戰時期 44 第五節 小結 49 第三章 國際社會的概念 51 第一節 Martin Wight三分國際社會觀 51 第二節 C.A.W. Manning社會化國際社會理論 58 第三節 Hedley Bull理性主義的國際社會 62 第四節 小結 71 第四章 國際社會的歷史層面 73 第一節 比較式歷史研究 73 第二節 歐洲式歷史研究 83 第三節 體系式歷史研究 88 第四節 小結 96 第五章 國際社會的規範面研究 97 第一節 價值多元主義的觀點 97 第二節 價值團結主義的觀點 105 第三節 批判國際社會理論的觀點 111 第四節 小結 116 第六章 英國學派的文化面與其發展 118 第一節 英國學派對文化的看法 118 第二節 文化面與規範面的結合 126 第三節 從文化與價值面看英國學派的歷史發展 132 第四節 小結 136 第七章 回顧與展望 138 第一節 回顧 138 第二節 未來展望 143 參考書目 147 一、英文部份 147 二、中文部份 155 三、網路資料 155 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 多元主義 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 國際社會 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 團結主義 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 英國學派 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 國際關係理論 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | international society | en |
| dc.subject | solidarism | en |
| dc.subject | international relations theory | en |
| dc.subject | pluralism | en |
| dc.subject | English School | en |
| dc.title | 國際關係英國學派之研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | A Research on the English School in International Relations | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 93-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 左正東,石之瑜 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 國際社會,團結主義,英國學派,國際關係理論,多元主義, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | pluralism,international relations theory,solidarism,international society,English School, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 155 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2005-06-08 | |
| 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-94-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 573.14 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。