跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.206.76.226) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/30 23:10
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:廖祐震
研究生(外文):You-Jen Liao
論文名稱:重思國際關係:「政治性」的觀點
論文名稱(外文):Rethinking International Relations from the Political
指導教授:張亞中張亞中引用關係
指導教授(外文):Ya-Chung Chang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:政治學研究所
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:政治學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:174
中文關鍵詞:政治性政治後結構主義國際關係意識形態問題化
外文關鍵詞:the politicalpoliticspoststructuralismparadigm of sovereigntyideologyproblematization
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:282
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
「政治性」(the political)的意義在政治、社會、與文化的理論中,一直是後結構主義、解構主義、女性主義、後殖民主義與精神分析等思想所關注的對象。然而在國際關係領域中,這些思想對於政治性意義的重探卻仍舊處於高度爭議的狀態。此文旨在介紹這些重新思考政治性的思想基礎,以及論說這些基礎對於「政治」(politics)與「政治性」分析的重要性,並檢視其在國際關係所造成的影響以及其所蘊含的啟發。

對於當代理論中政治性意義的重思,將牽涉到對於既有政治「主體」觀點的反思。主體的概念在諸多領域中一向被視為個體的、至高無上的、與預先存在於社會事實之中的。然而這樣的的主體概念已逐漸為一些思想家所解構與去中心化,主體概念所仰賴的存在與時間性的觀念也遭致質疑。這種對於主體概念的消解,則意在解放遭到禁錮的主體本身,同時也將對於侷限主體的各種疆界與範圍重新予以檢視。

國際關係的挑戰並不僅僅來自對於國家主權這種主體性的反思與重組,也來自於對於「政治性」概念的重新評估與重新詮釋。這種對於政治性意義的重思,一方面將涉及到對於「政治」與「政治性」概念的區分;另一方面則將關注語言、論述、或意識形態對於政治性分析的重要性。此處所提到的「政治」概念,將指涉一個被去政治化或技術化的空間,意即從原本充滿政治變遷可能的場域變為一個由專家技術與官僚統治的場域。

在此文中將引進傅柯、德里達、拉康、與齊澤克的思想作為重思政治性意義的途徑。這些思想將有助於我們瞭解去政治化或技術化的過程如何發生,並提供我們一個重思政治性與重新協商政治疆界之後的可能景象。

傅柯卻認為知識份子主要關切的政治性問題應該在於真理生產的政治、經濟、制度體制,從當前主導的社會、經濟、文化霸權中拆解其中真理的權力,而不應當是嘗試在任何權力體系的基礎上去解放真理,因為真理總是權力的再現。因此,政治性的問題並不在於關注錯誤、幻覺、與意識形態所導致的異化意識,而是真理本身。

對於德里達而言,延異作為一種批判形式,其目的不在於檢視理論文本的缺失與不完善,而是在探索文本的可能性基礎。延異關注的問題不是文本的意義為何,而是文本的預設為何、問題意識為何:對於那些被視為是自然、明顯、不證自明、與普世的事物重新進行閱讀,以揭露出這些事物其實是有歷史性的、揭露出它們之所以如此的理由、揭露出這些事物所產生的效應、以及揭露出它們的起始點並非(自然)給定的,而經常是被掩飾的(文化)建構。

齊澤克指出意識形態批判的任務就是在任何時刻都能提供懷疑的態度,而批判性知識份子的責任,就是隨時居據於社會秩序過渡時期所產生的一個「空洞」(hole)位置。易言之,知識份子必須與每一個處於統治地位的主導能指維持一定的距離,即使新秩序已穩定下來並再一次遮蔽這個空洞的存在。這樣做的目的則是在揭露每個主導能指在生產過程中所隱含的人為性、偶然性特徵。如同我們已經提及的,所有的社會現實都必須依靠某種組織性的主導能指或意識形態幻象,而意識形態批判的目的即在於防止其遮掩創傷性的內核、防止其自然化、或是防止其將社會結構去政治化。

同樣地,國際關係理論學家的任務也並不在於維護我們(無論是什麼「我群」的共同體建構)遠離任何危險,而是要去挑戰那些生產所謂安全的權力關係或象徵秩序霸權,揭示其偶然性與權宜性的本質。本文主張的是一種持續性的政治介入,這種政治介入必須是不間斷的、隨時保持警戒的、與回應事件的行動主義。我們必須重複地標幟出創傷並避免遺忘。
“The political” is being rethought through and is always the primary concern of poststructuralist, feminist, postcolonial and psychoanalytic thought. The essay attempt to introduce the theoretical basis for rethinking “the political” and to indicate how it is central to the distinction between “politics” and “the political”. In international relations, the reflection or the problematization of the political through above-mentioned approaches remains wildly contested. So the essay also attempt to open the possibility of refiguring and reimaging international relations through the analysis of “politics” and “the political”.

The rethinking of the political in contemporary thought involve the interrogation of Cartesian view of “subject” of politics. In international relations, political subjects are still conceived as sovereign, independent, and preexisting entities. This notion of subject has been decentered by various thinkers and the conditions of existence and temporality on which it was founded problematized. As a matter of fact, the endeavor of destabilizing, unsettling, and decentering of the subject is trying to free the imprisoned subject and reexamine boundaries of various kind constructed around the subject.

The challenge to international relations not only come from a realignment and reexamination of dominant subjectivity that leads to a rearticulation of fundamental political question, but also from the appraisal of the political. In the essay, the rethinking of the political will start out from the reassessment of the distinction between politics and the political, and this reassessment will pay further attention to the question of discourse, ideology, power relations, and disciplining practices. The notion of “politics” implies a depoliticized or technologized space: a room for constant political change has been displaced by a technology of expertise or the rule of bureaucracy.

The insights of Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Jacques Lacan, and Slavoj Žižek provide useful sources and perspectives for the reconsideration of the political. They do this, first, by indicate how “politics” become depoliticized and technologized and, second, by providing some preliminary images about what a rethinking of the political or a renegotiation of the boundaries of politics might look like.

There is a battle “for truth”; or in Foucault''s words: The essential political problem for the intellectual is the political, economic, institutional regime of the production of truth. It''s not a matter of emancipating truth from every system of power (which would be a chimera, for truth is already power) but of detaching the power of truth from the forms of hegemony, social, economic and cultural, within which it operates at the present time. The political question is truth itself.

For Derrida, différance is not a ‘concept’ or ‘idea’ that is ‘truer’ than presence. It can only be a process of textual work, a strategy of writing. The approach proceeds by the careful teasing out of the warring forces of signification within the text itself. It is a form of critique. It is not an examination of the flaws or imperfections of the theoretical text but an analysis that seeks to explore the grounds of possibility of the text. The critique reads back from what seems natural, obvious, self-evident or universal, in order to show that these things have their history, their reasons for being the way they are, their effects on what follows from them, and that the starting point is not a (natural) given but a (cultural) construct usually blind to itself. Accordingly, the crucial question is not “What does the text mean?” but “What does the text presuppose?”

Žižek indicates that the duty of the critical intellectual is precisely to occupy all the time, even when the new order stabilizes itself and again renders invisible the hole as such, the place of the hole of transition from old social order to new social order, i.e., to maintain a distance toward every reigning Master-Signifier. The aim is to render visible its “produced,” artificial, contingent character. The construction of all social realities is made by an organizing Master-Signifier or ideological fantasy, and thus the purpose of critique of ideology is to prevent it from naturalizing and depoliticizing our social structure.

It is not the task of the international relations theorist to secure us (whatever community “we” may be) against the danger but precisely the reverse: to challenge the hegemony of the power relations or symbolic order in whose name security is produced, to render visible its contingent, provisional nature of origin. This leads to a position that advocates a continual political involvement and a need for recurring, vigilant, and responsive activism. We should repeatedly mark the trauma and ensure that we are not lulled into forgetfulness.
第一章 緒論1

1.1. 研究動機與目的...1
1.2. 研究範圍與途徑...7
1.2.1. 研究範圍與概念界定...7
1.2.2. 研究途徑...11
1.3. 研究架構與章節安排...13

第二章 「政治」與「政治性」之文獻評論...16

2.1. 里克爾──政治的矛盾...16
2.2. 施密特──政治性的敵對面...17
2.3. 鄂蘭──政治性的公共性面向...18
2.4. 政治性的中立化與去政治化...19
2.5. 儂曦與拉庫-拉巴特...21
2.6. 勒弗爾...27
2.7. 拉克勞...31

第三章 從「政治」到「政治性」...40

3.1. 「政治」與「政治性」...40
3.1.1. 「政治性」即是「主體性的時刻」...44
3.1.2. 政治作為政治主體的隱喻象徵...46
3.1.3. 主權政治...48
3.2. 去政治化與技術化...49
3.3. 論述、認同、與敵對...53
3.4. 傅柯、德里達、齊澤克...59

第四章 主體的去中心化...62

4.1. 馬克思...64
4.2. 佛洛伊德...67
4.3. 索緒爾...70
4.4. 傅柯...72
4.5. 女性主義...74

第五章 傅柯、德里達、與齊澤克與政治性...78

5.1. 傅柯...78
5.1.1. 論述...81
5.1.2. 規訓的實踐...85
5.1.3. 權力關係...89
5.1.4. 自我的倫理與政治性...91
5.2. 德里達...95
5.2.1. 邏各斯中心主義與延異...95
5.2.2. 補充的邏輯...99
5.2.3. 解構...101
5.2.4. 解構與政治性...106
5.2.5. 法律的力量與不可決斷性...108
5.3. 齊澤克...111
5.3.1. 自我的形成與認同...113
5.3.2. 意識形態與主導能指...122
5.3.3. 社會幻象...127
5.3.4. 社會現實...130

第六章 國際關係與重思政治性...137

6.1. 國際關係的權力與知識...137
6.1.1. 權力與知識...138
6.1.2. 系譜學...139
6.2. 後結構學派的文本策略...142
6.2.1. 解構...143
6.2.2. 阿希利對於無政府狀態之問題意識的雙重閱讀...144
6.3. 主權典範的問題化...146
6.3.1. 暴力...146
6.3.2. 疆界...148
6.3.3. 認同...150
6.3.4. 製國計略...152
6.4. 超越主權:重思政治性...155
6.4.1. 主權與排除的倫理...156
6.4.2. 後結構倫理...158

第七章 結語──重新政治化...162

參考文獻...165
中文文獻
1.石之瑜,2002,後現代的政治知識,台北:元照。
2.Žižek. Slavoj著,季廣茂譯,2002,《意識形態的崇高客體》,北京:中央編譯。

英文文獻
1.Agamben, G. 1993. Infancy and History: Essays on the Destruction of Experience. London: Verso.
2.Althusser, Louis. 1984. Essays on Ideology. Trans. Ben Brewster. London: Verso.
3.Arditi, Benjamin. 1994. “Tracing the Political.” Angelaki 1(3): 15-28.
4.Arendt, Hannah. 1968. Between Past and Future. New York: Viking Press.
5.Ashley, Richard K. 1987. “The Geopolitics of Geopolitical Space: Toward a Critical Social Theory of International Politics.” Alternatives 12(4): 403-434.
6.Ashley, Richard. 1988. “Untying the Sovereign State: A Double Reading of the Anarchy Problematique,” Millennium, 17(2):227-262.
7.Ashley, Richard K. 1989. “Living on Border Lines: Man, Poststructuralism and War.” In Intemational/Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics, eds. James Der Derian and Michael J. Shapiro. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, pp. 259-321.
8.Ashley, Richard. K. 1989. “Imposing International Purpose: Notes on a Problematic of Governance.” In Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges: Approaches to World Politics lor the 1990s, eds. Ernst-Otto Czempiel and James N. Rosenau. Lexington: Lexington Books, pp. 251-290.
9.Ashley, Richard K. and R. B. J. Walker. 1990. “Reading Dissidence/Writing the Discipline: Crisis and the Question of Sovereignty in International Studies.” International Studies Quarterly 34(3): 367-416.
10.Benhabib, Seyla.1996. Tlie Reluctant Modernism of Hannah Arendt. London: Sage.
11.Benvenuto, Bice & Roger Kennedy. 1986. The Works of Jacques Lacan: An Introduction. London: Free Association Books.
12.Bleiker, Roland. 2000. Popular Dissent, Human Agency, and Global Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex”. London: Routledge.
14.Butler, J. 1997. The Psychic life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
15.Buzan, Barry, Ole Wæver, and Jaap de Wilde. 1998. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
16.Campbell, David. 1996. “Political Prosaics, Transversal Politics, and the Anarchiacal World.” In Challenging Boundaries: Global Flows, Territorial Identities, eds. Michael J. Shaprio, Hayward R. Alker. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 7-31.
17.Campbell, David. 1999. “Violence, Justice and Identity in the Bosnian Conflict.” In Sovereignty and Subjectivity, eds. Jenny Edkins, Nalini Persraro, and Veronique Pin-Fat. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 21-37.
18.Campbell, David. 1998. National Deconstruction: Violence, Identity, And Justice In Bosnia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
19.Campbell, David. 1998. Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
20.Campbell, David, & Michael Dillon, eds. 1993. The Political Subject Of Violence. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
21.Cholewa-Madsen, Michael. 1994. “Enacting the Political.” Angelaki 1(3): 29-42.
22.Connolly, William E. 1991. “Democracy and Territoriality.” Millennium 20(3): 463-484.
23.Connolly, William E. 1994. “Tocqueville, Territory and Violence,” Theory, Culture and Society, 11(1): 19-41.
24.Connolly, William E. 1995. The Ethos of Pluralization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
25.Critchley, Simon. 1993. “Re-tracing the political: politics and community in the work of Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe and Jean-Luc Nancy.” In The Political Subject of Violence, eds. David Campbell and Michael Dillon. Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 73-93.
26.Critchley, Simon. 1992. The Ethics of Deconstruction: Derrida and Levinas. Oxford: Blackwell.
27.Culler, Jonathan. 1983. On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism After Structuralism. London: Routledge.
28.Dalby, Simon. 1993. Creating the Second Cold War: The Discourse of Politics. London: Pinter Publishers.
29.Dallmayr, Fred. 1993. “Politics and Power: Ricoeur’s Political Paradox Revisited.” In Meanings in Texts and Actions. Questioning Paul Ricoeur, eds. David E. KIemm and William Schweiker. London: University Press of Virginia, pp. 176-194.
30.Deleuze Gilles. 1988. Foucault. Trans. Sean Hand. London: Athlone Press.
31.Der Derian, James. 1989. “The Boundaries of Knowledge and Power in International Relations.” In Intemational/Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics, eds. James Der Derian and Michael J. Shapiro. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.
32.Der Derian, James. 1987. On Diplomacy: A Genealogy of Western Estrangement. Oxford; Blackwell.
33.Der Derian, James. 1992. Antidiplomacy: Spies, Terror, Speed and War. Oxford: Blackwell.
34.Derrida Jacques. 1988. “Signature Event Context.’ In Limited Inc. Trans. Samuel Weber and Jeffrey Mehlman. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
35.Derrida, Jacques. 1991. “‘Eating Well’ or the Calculation of the Subject: An Interview with Jacques Derrida.” In Who Comes After the Subject? eds. Eduardo Cadava, Peter Connor, and Jean-Luc Nancy. New York: Routledge, pp. 96-119.
36.Derrida Jacques. 1992. “Force of Law: The ‘Mystical Foundation of Authority.’” In Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice, ed. David Gray Carlson, Drucilla Cornell, and Michel Rosenfeld. Trans. Mary Quaintance. New York: Routledge, pp. 3-67.
37.Derrida Jacques. 1976. Of Grammatology. Trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
38.Derrida Jacques. 1978. Writing and Difference. Trans. Alan Bass. London: Routledge.
39.Derrida Jacques. 1982. Margins of Philosophy. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40.Derrida Jacques. 1987. Positions. Trans. Alan Bass. London: Athlone Press.
41.Derrida Jacques, ed. 1988. Limited Inc. Trans. Samuel Weber and Jeffrey Mehlman. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
42.Derrida, Jacques. 1994. Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, and the New International. Tran. Peggy Kamuf. New York: Routledge.
43.Descartes, Rene. 1968. Discourse on Method and Other Writings. Trans. F. E. Sutcliffe. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
44.Dillon, Michael and Jerry Everard. 1992. “Stat(e)ing Australia: Squid Jigging and the Masque of State.” Alternatives 17(3): 281-312.
45.Dillon, Michael. 1999. “The Sovereign and the Stranger.” In Sovereignty and Subjectivity, eds. Jenny Edkins, Nalini Persram, and Véronique Pin-Fat Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 117-140.
46.Dillon, Michael. 1996. Politics of Security: Towards a Political Philosophy of Continental Thought. London: Routledge.
47.Donald, James, and Stuart Hall. 1986. Politics and Ideology. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
48.Dreyfus Hubert L. and Paul Rabinow, ed. 1983. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.Dyrberg, Torben Bech. 1997. The Circular Structure of Power. Politics, Identity, Community. London: Verso.
50.Edkins, Jenny, and Veronique Pin-Fat. 1999. “The Subject of the Political.” In Sovereignty and Subjectivity, eds. Jenny Edkins, Nalini Persraro, and Veronique Pin-Fat. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 1-18.
51.Edkins, Jenny. 2000. “Sovereign Power, Zones of Indistinction, and the Camp.” Alternatives 25(1): 3-25.
52.Edkins, Jenny. 1999. Poststructuralism and International Relations: Bringing the Political Back In. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
53.Edkins, Jenny. 2002. Whose Hunger? : Concepts of Famine, Practices of Aid. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
54.Enloe, Cynthia. 1990. “Conclusion: The Personal Is International.” In Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
55.Foucault, Michel. 1977. “Intellectuals and Power: A Conversation Between Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze.” In Language, Counter-memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews, ed. Donald F. Bouchard. Trans. Donald F. Bouchard and Sherry Simon. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 205-217.
56.Foucault, Michel. 1980. “Truth and Power.” In Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977, ed. Colin Gordon. New York : Harvester Wheatsheaf.
57.Foucault, Michel. 1984. “The Order of Discourse.” In Language and Politics, ed. Michael J. Shapiro. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 108-138.
58.Foucault, Michel. 1984. “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History.” In The Foucault Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow. New York: Pantheon Books, pp. 76-100.
59.Foucault, Michel. 1984. “On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress.” In The Foucault Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow. New York: Pantheon Books, pp. 340-372.
60.Foucault, Michel. 1991. “Politics and the Study of Discourse.” In The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality with Two Lectures by and an Interview with Michel Foucault, eds. Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon, and Peter Miller. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, pp. 53-72.
61.Foucault, Michel. 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977, ed. Colin Gordon. New York : Harvester Wheatsheaf.
62.Foucault, Michel. 1982. “The Subject and Power.” In Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, eds. Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 208-226.
63.Foucault, Michel. 1989. Madness and Civilisation: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. Trans. Richard Howard. London: Routledge.
64.Foucault, Michel. 1989. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage Books.
65.Foucault, Michel. 1989. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Trans. A. M. Sheridan Smith. London: Routledge.
66.Foucault, Michel. 1990. The History of Sexuality, vol. I: An Introduction. Trans. Robert Hurley Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
67.Foucault, Michel. 1992. The History of Sexuality, vol. 2: The Use of Pleasure. Trans. Robert Hurley. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
68.Foucault, Michel. 1990. The History of Sexuality, vol. 3: The Care of the Self. Trans. Robert Hurley. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
69.Foucault, Michel. 1991. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Pantheon Books.
70.Freud, Sigmund. 1971. The Complete Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. Trans. James Strachey. London: George Alien and Unwin.
71.Freud, Sigmund. 1984. “The Ego and the Id.” In On Metapsychology: The Theory of Psychoanalysis, ed. Angela Richards. Trans. James Strachey. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, pp. 339-407.
72.Freud, Sigmund. 1991. The Interpretation of Dreams. Trans. James Strachey. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
73.Freund, Julien. 1995. “Schmitt’s Political Thought.” In Telos. A Quarterly Journal of Critical Thought 102(Winter): 11-42.
74.Frye, Charles E. 1966. “Carl Schmitt''s Concept of the Political.” In The Journal of Politics XXVII1(4): 818-830.
75.Gadet, Françoise. 1989. Saussure and Contemporary Culture. Trans. Gregory Elliot. London: Hutchinson Radius.
76.Gasché, Rodolphe.1986. The Tain of the Mirror: Derrida and the Philosophy of Reflection. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
77.George, Jim. 1994. Discourse of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to International Relations. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publisher.
78.Gramsci, Antonio. 1971. Selections from Prison Notebooks. Ed. and trans. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
79.Hall, Stuart. 1992. “The Question of Cultural Identity.” In Modernity and Its Futures, ed. Stuart Hall, David Held, and Tony McGrew. London: Polity Press in association with the Open University, pp. 273-325.
80.Hindess, Barry. 1996. Discourses of Power: From Hobbes to Foucault. Oxford: Blackwell.
81.Howard, Dick. 1989. Defining the Political. London: Macmillan.
82.Howarth, David. 2000. Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press.
83.Irigaray, Luce. 1985. This Sex Which Is Not One. Trans. Catherine Porter with Carolyn Burke. Ithaca, NY: Comell University Press.
84.Irigaray, Luce. 1993. Je, Tu, Nous: Toward a Culture of Difference. Trans Alison Martin. New York: Routledge.
85.Johnson, Barbara. 1981. “Translator’s Introduction.” In Jacques Derrida, Dissemination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. vii-ix.
86.Klein, Bradley S. 1994. Strategic Studies and World Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
87.Lacan, Jacques. 1977. Ecrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Routledge.
88.Laclau, Ernesto. 1990. “The Impossibility of Society.” In New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time, ed. Ernesto Laclau. London: Verso, pp. . 89-92.
89.Laclau, Ernesto. 1996. “Deconstruction, Pragmatism, Hegemony.” In Deconstruction and Pragmatism, ed. Chantal Mouffe. London: Routledge, pp. 47-68.
90.Laclau, Ernesto. 1999. “Hegemony and the Future of Democracy: Ernesto Laclau''s Political Philosophy.” In Race. Rhetoric, and the Postcolonial, eds. Lynn Woshma and Gary S. Olson. Albany: SUNY Press, pp. 129-164.
91.Laclau, Ernesto and Chantal Mouffe. 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.
92.Laclau, Ernesto, ed. 1990.. New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. London: Verso.
93.Laclau, Ernesto. 1996. Emancipation(s). London: Verso.
94.Laclau, Emesto and Lilian Zac. 1994. “Minding the Gap: The Subject of Politics.” In The Making of Political Identities, ed. Emesto Laclau. London: Verso, pp. 11-39.
95.Laclau, Emesto, ed. 1994. The Making of Political Identities. London: Verso.
96.Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe. 1989. “Transcendence Ends in Politics.” In Typography. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 267-300.
97.Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe. 1990. Heidegger, Art and Politics: The Fiction of the Political. Trans. Chris Turner. Oxford: Blackwell.
98.Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe and Jean-Luc Nancy. 1997. Retreating the Political. Ed. Simon Sparks. New York: Routledge.
99.Lefort, Claude. 1990. “Machiavelli: History, Politics, Discourse.” In The State of Theory, ed. David Carroll. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 113-124.
100.Lefort, Claude. 1986. The Political Forms of Modem Society. Trans. John B. Thompson. Cambridge: Polity.
101.Lefort, Claude. 1988. Democracy and Political Theory. Trans. David Macey. Cambridge: Polity.
102.Lefort, Claude. 2000. Writing. The Political Test. Durham: Duke University Press.
103.Lessnoff , Michael H. 1999. Political Philosophers of the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
104.Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1963. Structural Anthropology. Translated from the French by Claire Jacobson and Brooke Grundfest Schoepf. New York: Basic Books.
105.Levinas, Emmanuel. 1969. Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority. Trans. Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.
106.Lisle, Debbie. 2000. “Consuming Danger: Reimagining the War/Tourism Divide.” Alternatives 25(1): 91-116.
107.Locke, John. 1967. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. London: Fontana.
108.Marchart, Oliver. 2003. Politics and the Political. An Inquiry Into Post-Foundational Political Thought. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Government, University of Essex, UK.
109.Marx, Karl, and Frederick Engels. 1977. “The Communist Manifesto.” In Karl Marx: Selected Writings, ed. David McLellan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 221-247.
110.Marx, Karl. 1977. “Preface to ‘A Critique of Political Economy.’” In Karl Marx: Selected Writings, ed. David McLellan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 388-391.
111.Moss, Jeremy, ed. 1998. The Later Foucault: Politics and Philosophy. London: Sage.
112.Mouffe, Chantal. 1999. “Introduction: Schmitt’s Challenge.” In The Challenge of Carl Schmitt, ed. Chantal Mouffe. London: Verso, pp. 1-6.
113.Mouffe, Chantal. 2000. The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso.
114.Muller, John P. and William J. Richardson. 1982. Lacan and Language: A Reader''s Guide to Écrits. New York: International Universities Press.
115.Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1998. “The Surprise of the Event.” In Hegel after Derrida, ed. Stuart Barnett. New York: Routledge, pp. 91-104.
116.Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1991. The Inoperative Community, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
117.Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1993. The Experience of Freedom. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
118.Nyers, Peter. 1999. “Emergency or Emerging Identities? Refugees and Transformations in World Order,” Millennium 28(1): 1-26.
119.Ó Tuathail, Gearóid. 1996. Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Writing Global Space. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
120.Oye, Kenneth A. 1985. “Explaining Cooperation under Anarchy: Hypotheses and Strategies.” World Politics 38(1): 1-24.
121.Patton, Paul. 2000. Deleuze and the Political. London: Routledge.
122.Pettman, J. J. 1996. “Border Crossings/Shifting Identities: Minorities, Gender and the State in International Perspective.” In Challenging Boundaries: Global Flows, Territorial Identities, eds. Michael J. Shaprio, Hayward R. Alker. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 261-283.
123.Rasch, William. 1997. “Locating the Political: Schmitt, Mouffe, Luhmann, and the Possibility of Pluralism.” In International Journal of Sociology - Revue Internationale de Sociologie 7(1): 103-115.
124.Ricœur, Paul. 1965. “The Political Paradox.” In History and Truth, trans. Charles A. Kelbley. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, pp. 247-270.
125.Rose, Nikolas S. 1999. Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
126.Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1966. Course in General Linguistics. Trans. Wade Baskin. New York: McGraw-Hill.
127.Schmitt, Carl. 1993. “The Age of Neutralizations and Depoliticizations.” In Telos. A Quarterly Journal of Critical Thought 96(Summer): 130-142.
128.Schmitt, Carl. 1996. The Concept of the Political. Trans. George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
129.Schürmann, Reiner. 1990. Heidegger. On Being and Acting: From Principles to Anarchy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
130.Shapiro, Michael J. 1998. “The Events of Discourse and the Ethics of Global Hospitality.” Millennium 27(3): 695-714.
131.Shapiro, Michael J. 1988. The Politics of Representation: Writing Practices in Biography, Photography, and Policy Analysis. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
132.Shapiro, Michael J. 1999. Cinematic Political Thought: Narrating Race, Nation and Gender. New York: New York University Press.
133.Sheridan, Alan. 1980. Michel Foucaull: The Will to Truth. London: Tavistock.
134.Soguk, Nevzat and Geoffrey Whitehall. 1999. “Wandering Grounds: Transversality, Identity, Temtoriality, and Movement.” Millennium 28(3): 6875-698.
135.Sparks, Simon. 1997. “Editor’s introduction: Politica ficta.” In Retreating the Political, ed. Simon Sparks. New York: Routledge, pp. xiv-xxviii.
136.Staten, Henry. 1984. Wittgenstein and Derrida. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
137.Torfing, Jacob. 1999. New Theories of Discourse. Laclau, Mouffe and Žižek, Oxford: Blackwell.
138.Vollrath, Ernst. 1987. “The ‘Rational’ and the ‘Political’ An Essay in the Semantics of Politics.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 13(1): 17-29.
139.Wæver, Ole. 1995. “Securitization and Desecuritization.” In On Security, ed. Ronnie D. Lipschutz. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 46-86.
140.Walker, R. B. J. 1995. “International Relations and the Concept of the Political.” In International Relations Theory Today, eds. Ken Booth and Steve Smith. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 306-27.
141.Walker, Robert B. J. 1993. Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
142.Weber, Cynthia. 1995. Simulating Sovereignty: Intervention, the State, and Symbolic Exchange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
143.Weber, Cynthia. 1998. “Performative States.” Millennium 27(1): 77-95.
144.Weber, Max. 1948. “Politics as a Vocation.” In From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, ed. and trans. H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. London: Routledge, pp. 77-128.
145.Williams, Caroline. 1999. “Structure, Language and Subjectivity: Lacan.” In The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia of Continental Philosophy, ed. Simon Glendinning. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
146.Williams, Raymond. 1976. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. London : Fontana.
147.Wolin, Sheldon. 1996. “Fugitive Democracy.” In Democracy and Difference. Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, ed. Seyla Benhabib. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 31-45.
148.Wolin, Sheldon. 1960. Politics and Vision. Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
149.Yar, Majid. 2000. “Arendt’s Heideggerianism: Contours of a ‘Postmetaphysical’ Political Theory?” In Cultural Values 411(January): 18-39.
150.Zimmerman, Michael. 1990. Heidegger’s Confrontation with Modernity: Technology, Politics, and Art. Bloomington : Indiana University Press.
151.Žižek. Slavoj. 1990. “Beyond Discourse Analysis.” In New Reflections on the Revolution of our Time, ed. Emesto Laclau. London: Verso, pp. 249-260.
152.Žižek, Slavoj. 1994. “The Spectre of Ideology.” In Mapping Ideology, ed. Slavoj Žižek. London: Verso, pp 1-33.
153.Žižek, Slavoj. 1999. “Carl Schmitt in the Age of Politics.” In The Challenge of Carl Schmitt, ed. Chantal Mouffe. London: Verso, pp. 18-37.
154.Žižek. Slavoj. 1989. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso.
155.Žižek. Slavoj. 1991. For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment as a Political Factor. London: Verso.
156.Žižek, Slavoj. 1992. Enjoy Your Symptom: Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out. New York: Routledge.
157.Žižek, Slavoj. 1993. Tarrying with the Negative: Kant, Hegel and the Critique of Ideology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
158.Žižek. Slavoj, ed. 1994. Mapping Ideology. London: Verso.
159.Žižek, Slavoj. 1996. The Indivisible Remainder: An Essay on Schelling and Related Matters, London: Verso.
160.Žižek, Slavoj. 1997. The Plague of Fantasies. London: Verso.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top