2011年12月

【專題研究】東南亞區域研究的技藝：新生代國際關係學者應有的方法解放論
【Special Issue】The Craftsmanship of Research Southeast Asian Area Studies: The Need for Emancipation of Methodology

楊昊
Alan Hao Yang

126-

國立政治大學國際關係研究中心亞洲暨太平洋研究所助理研究員
從事東南亞研究的學者應當深入探索「區域的研究」與「區域研究」這兩種研究傳統在研究主題、知識論立場與方法論作為等方面的差異，並藉此省思學科本位的不可撼動性與跨學科／領域整合的高度困難性等實際研究操作困境。本文希望藉由國際關係研究者從事東南亞區域研究的初步嘗試與自我參照，試圖重新檢視並呈現「知識論—方法論連結」的潛在知識斷裂，進而提出一套以「技藝」為軸心的研究理路，用以重新建構國際關係研究者與政治學者在從事區域研究時的「知識論—方法論連結」基礎。

關鍵詞：東南亞、區域研究、技藝、方法解放論、邊境政治

Assistant Research Fellow, Institute of International Relations, National Chengchi University
Scholars of Southeast Asian area studies should explore the differences between “area studies” and “regional studies” with specific regard to subject matters, epistemological stances, and methodological design, taking into account the resolute disciplinary persistence and difficulties in cross-disciplinary undertakings. Hence, this article argues that a craftsmanship-centered approach is needed to reveal the potential epistemic ruptures and, moreover, to rebuild the epistemological-methodological link for IR scholars and political scientists in conducting Southeast Asian area studies. Accordingly, self-reference to the author’s investigation in border politics as well as his fieldwork in the Thailand-Cambodia borderland is provided as a demonstration of methodological emancipation.

Key words: Southeast Asia, Area Studies, Craftsmanship, Emancipation of Methodology, Border Politics

全文下載