查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 國際政治經濟學中的不列顛學派--British? Global? And Critical?
- 批判國際政治經濟學的發展、途徑與啟示
- 從國際政治經濟學看兩岸關係
- 國際政治經濟學的發展與政治經濟學之關係
- 初探蘇珊.史翠菊(Susan Strange, 1923-1998)的國際政治經濟學思想
- 以國際關係學說批判理論談大型國際運動賽會辦理之反思
- 馬爾科斯(Herbert Marcuse)的哲學立場暨其社會批判理論的探究
- 從文明衝突到大棋盤--冷戰後美國全球戰略思考的變遷[評Samuel P. Huntington著«The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order»與Zbigniew Brzezinski著«The Grand Chessboard»]
- 文化傳承與社會批判--回顧Apel, Habermas, Gadamer, Ricoeur間的詮釋學論爭
- Toward an International Relations Theory with Chinese Characteristics﹖
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 國際政治經濟學中的不列顛學派--British? Global? And Critical?=The British School of International Political Economy--British? Global? And Critical? |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 曾怡仁; | 書刊名 | 問題與研究 |
| 卷 期 | 51:4 2012.12[民101.12] |
| 頁 次 | 頁1-33 |
| 分類號 | 570.1355 |
| 關鍵詞 | 不列顛學派; 批判理論; 美國學派; 國際政治經濟學; 國際關係; American school; British school; Critical theory; International political economy; International relations; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 國際政治經濟學(簡稱國政經)自70年代開始發展以來,不僅呈現出理論(自由主義、重商主義與馬克思主義)與研究途徑(理性主義與反思主義)的競逐,同時也有美國(American School)與不列顛學派(British School)間關於學科定位、研究議題與方法論上的差別。本文主要目的在於從三個面向來介紹及探討國政經的不列顛學派:一、為何該學派被稱為British School?與國際關係英國學派(English School)有何差別?二、不列顛學派學者偏好以「全球政治經濟學」(Global Political Economy)取代「國際政治經濟學」(International Political Economy)作為學科名稱,「Global」和「International」到底有何不同?僅涉及世界經濟生產方式的改變?還是包括研究議題與研究方法上的變遷?三、不列顛學派亦被稱為「批判的國際政治經濟學」(Critical IPE),「Critical」的意涵為何?其和國際關係批判理論(Critical Theory of International Relations)有何異同?經由這三組問題的討論,冀望可以對國政經不列顛學派有較充分的理解。 |
| 英文摘要 | Since the 1970s, the International Political Economy (IPE)has explored various research methodologies and methods. However, the disciplinary boundary of IPE is still controversial. The main purpose of this article is to discuss the British School of IPE from three dimensions. First, why is this school called "British?" Are there differences between the British School and the English School of international relations? Secondly, British School scholars prefer to call this new discipline the" Global Political Economy (GPE)"instead of "International Political Economy." Thus, what is the underlying meaning of "Global?" Does it require the use of different research methodology? Thirdly, the British School is often viewed as the "Critical International Political Economy (Critical IPE)". What does "Critical" represent here? What are the differences and similarities of the Critical IPE and the Critical Theory of International Relations? The author hopes that the discussion of these three dimensions could help us further understand the British School of IPE. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。