Books by Poe Yu-ze Wan
【一刻鯨選 × 聯經出版】, 2019
課程簡介
200年前誕生的馬克思，他的思想改變了世界的樣貌，點燃了20世紀革命的火花；150年前出版的《資本論》，分析了資本主義發展的動力與矛盾，直到今天仍然具有深刻的現實感。
然而，從19... more 課程簡介
200年前誕生的馬克思，他的思想改變了世界的樣貌，點燃了20世紀革命的火花；150年前出版的《資本論》，分析了資本主義發展的動力與矛盾，直到今天仍然具有深刻的現實感。
然而，從1917年俄國革命以來，號稱實行共產主義的國家，真的是馬克思所說的共產主義嗎？眾多不同流派的馬克思主義究竟在哪些部分繼承或偏離了馬克思？後人對馬克思的各種褒揚與詆毀是否公允？
長期研究馬克思著作與思想的萬毓澤教授，將從馬克思寫下的社論、文章、筆記與手稿，對照他親身投入的政治活動，帶你走進馬克思的生命以及他生存的時代，讓你看見身為學者、新聞工作者和革命家，這三種不同身分的馬克思，不再把他當成一個枯燥又過時的經濟學者，而是一個形象鮮活的行動者。
透過這門課程，你將認識一個更立體、更多元、也更真實的馬克思。
任何一部經典，都要扎根進當代的現實土壤，經過此時此地的重新閱讀、批評、繼承、開展後，才算獲得了生命。在這個意義上，所有經典都是未完成的，一切經典都等待著讀者參與它的重生。
萬毓澤的《《資本論》... more 任何一部經典，都要扎根進當代的現實土壤，經過此時此地的重新閱讀、批評、繼承、開展後，才算獲得了生命。在這個意義上，所有經典都是未完成的，一切經典都等待著讀者參與它的重生。
萬毓澤的《《資本論》完全使用手冊：版本、系譜、爭議與當代價值》前半部介紹了《資本論》的創作史與版本問題、恩格斯的編輯工作、結構與邏輯、二戰後歐美的繼受狀況以及常見的誤讀。後半部則試圖從文學、政治、經濟、歷史、生態等多重視角閱讀《資本論》。透過作者細膩的梳理與論證，可幫助讀者建立一幅以《資本論》為核心的知識地圖，以及一套理解《資本論》的方法論。
《資本論》完全使用手冊：版本、系譜、爭議與當代價值》不是三卷《資本論》的「入門」、「導論」或「要點整理」，而是試圖追溯《資本論》的寫作歷程、版本、結構與知識系譜，並從多重視角展開解讀。萬毓澤極嚴肅地將《資本論》當成「經典」對待，設法讀出新意。如果您已經對《資本論》有初步認識，相信您可以在閱讀的過程中體會這部經典的廣博、深刻與歷久彌新。
Drawing extensively on the research findings of natural and social sciences both in America and E... more Drawing extensively on the research findings of natural and social sciences both in America and Europe, Reframing the Social argues for a critical realist and systemist social ontology, designed to shed light on current debates in social theory concerning the relationship of social ontology to practical social research, and the nature of "the social." It explores the works of the systems theorist Mario Bunge in comparison with the approach of Niklas Luhmann and critical social systems theorists, to challenge the commonly held view that the systems-based approach is holistic in nature and necessarily downplays the role of human agency.
Theoretically sophisticated and investigating the work of a theorist whose work has until now received insufficient attention in Anglo-American thought, this book will be of interest to those working in the field of social theory, as well as scholars concerned with philosophy of social science, the project of analytical sociology, and the nature of the relationship between the natural and social sciences.
Reviews:
“This is the clearest and most comprehensive discussion of contemporary social ontology. The author's definitions and illustrations of such key concepts as those of system, process, mechanism, and emergence, often used sloppily, are lucid. And his evaluation of the competing theories is magisterial. This book should greatly help any social theorists and philosophers seeking clarity and depth.” (Mario Bunge, McGill University, Canada)
“Poe Yu-ze Wan has produced an impressive book that brings social systems theory into the twenty-first century. In a beautifully well-judged argument that deserves to be widely read, he shows how social theorists are moving towards mechanismic explanation and ‘emergentist systemism’ – and why they are right to do so.” (Dave Elder-Vass, Loughborough University, UK)
“Every scholar interested in this literature needs to read this book simply to be able to claim that he or she is acquainted with the state of the art and with the now staggering breadth of writings on the various inter-related subjects.” (Omar Lizardo, University of Notre Dame, US)
“Whoever wishes to become introduced to the contemporary philosophical debate on causality (with special reference to social causality) cannot do better than studying this book.” (Wolfgang Krohn, University of Bielefeld, Germany)
“…dieses Klar gegliederte und flüssig geschriebene Buch…. Auch kann dieses Buch jedem zu Diensten sein, der sich einen konzisen Überblick über die Probleme und Argumente zu verschaffen sucht, welche die Entwicklung einer wissenschaftstheoretisch informierten „erklärenden Soziologie“ nicht erst seit jüngster Zeit begleiten.” (Michael Schmid, Bundeswehr University Munich, Germany)
Journal Articles by Poe Yu-ze Wan
華文哲學百科, 2021
本文將馬克思主義的發展放置在歐美社會整體的政治社會脈絡下來考察，盡可能抽絲剝繭、梳理出馬克思主義的學說要旨及發展邏輯。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義... more 本文將馬克思主義的發展放置在歐美社會整體的政治社會脈絡下來考察，盡可能抽絲剝繭、梳理出馬克思主義的學說要旨及發展邏輯。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。
「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」分為兩節。第一節討論當代馬克思主義的蓬勃發展，主要分析對象包括「分析馬克思主義」、「生態馬克思主義」、「自主馬克思主義」、「政治馬克思主義」、「黑人激進傳統」，並帶出「超越歐洲中心論」的問題意識。第二節則承繼「超越歐洲中心論」的分析視角，從「跨現代性」的角度討論「馬克思學」與馬克思主義未來的發展方向。
華文哲學百科, 2021
本文將馬克思主義的發展放置在歐美社會整體的政治社會脈絡下來考察，盡可能抽絲剝繭、梳理出馬克思主義的學說要旨及發展邏輯。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中... more 本文將馬克思主義的發展放置在歐美社會整體的政治社會脈絡下來考察，盡可能抽絲剝繭、梳理出馬克思主義的學說要旨及發展邏輯。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。全文結構如下。
「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」共分五節，焦點是對當代哲學、文藝思想影響甚鉅的「西方馬克思主義」。該文將考察「西方馬克思主義」如何銜接古典與當代，討論盧卡奇、柯爾施、葛蘭西等人及「法蘭克福學派」的學說，說明馬克思《1844 年經濟學哲學手稿》的影響，並檢討「西方馬克思主義」這個概念的適用性。
華文哲學百科, 2021
本文將馬克思主義的發展放置在歐美社會整體的政治社會脈絡下來考察，盡可能抽絲剝繭、梳理出馬克思主義的學說要旨及發展邏輯。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中... more 本文將馬克思主義的發展放置在歐美社會整體的政治社會脈絡下來考察，盡可能抽絲剝繭、梳理出馬克思主義的學說要旨及發展邏輯。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。
「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」分為三節。第一節簡單勾勒馬克思主義的複雜性與歷史淵源。第二節分析馬克思及恩格斯的主要貢獻與爭議，以及這兩位「馬克思主義」創始人與「馬克思主義」本身的關係。第三節則探討「古典馬克思主義」及其遺產。針對古典馬克思主義，本文不採常見的「時序」式分析（即將其限定在馬克思與恩格斯之後、俄國革命之前的馬克思主義），而是提出兩項規範性的判準：「工人階級的自我解放」及「資本主義轉型下的政治經濟學批判」。
二十一世紀, 2018
1840年代中期以後，馬克思對資本主義的批判，便結合了以「聯合起來的個人」（vereinigte Individuen）或「自由人聯合體」（Verein freier Menschen）為核心的... more 1840年代中期以後，馬克思對資本主義的批判，便結合了以「聯合起來的個人」（vereinigte Individuen）或「自由人聯合體」（Verein freier Menschen）為核心的社會主義觀。這種「由下而上的社會主義」，也可以理解為一種強調「自我管理」的政治－經濟民主化運動。最能繼承與開展（馬克思式的）自我管理理念的社會理論的重要代表人物之一，當數二戰後希臘裔的法籍思想家卡斯托里亞迪斯(Cornelius Castoriadis, 1922-1997），尤其是其在「社會主義或野蠻」（Socialisme ou barbarie）時期（1949-1967）一系列具有承先啟後意義的著作。本文試圖重新閱讀及評估卡斯托里亞迪斯對馬克思的批判，並論證卡斯托里亞迪斯開展的「自主」計劃並不代表與馬克思的斷裂，而是延續與開展。從馬克思到卡斯托里亞迪斯，這種「自我管理式的社會主義」觀在今天仍有巨大的現實意義。
社會分析, 2018
本研究從分析社會學（analytical sociology）的取徑出發，從三個相互關聯的面向說明跨領域研究可能對社會理論工作帶來的啟發。首先，以晚近關於「社會突現」（social emerge... more 本研究從分析社會學（analytical sociology）的取徑出發，從三個相互關聯的面向說明跨領域研究可能對社會理論工作帶來的啟發。首先，以晚近關於「社會突現」（social emergence）的研究為例，說明受認知神經科學影響的心靈哲學可以如何幫助社會理論工作者處理涂爾幹以降的重大問題：個人與社會、個體主義與整體主義、社會複雜性與化約的關係。其次，說明認知神經科學可以如何為社會理論中的重要理論概念或因果解釋提供微觀基礎（microfoundations），也因此有助於支持、擴充、修正或拒絕這些概念與解釋。最後，以晚近關於「強相互性」（strong reciprocity）的研究為例，說明實驗經濟學、人類學、社會心理學、倫理學正如何與認知神經科學等學科密切合作，探討社會理論歷久不衰的問題，即Talcott Parsons所謂的「霍布斯式（社會）秩序問題」。本研究主張，社會理論研究者應留意這些跨領域的研究動態，且社會理論其中一項值得追求的發展方向，在於充分吸收自然科學與人文社會科學的跨領域研究成果。
From the perspective of analytical sociology, this article attempts to illustrate the ways in which interdisciplinary studies can inform social theorizing by way of three examples. First, it demonstrates how the neuroscientifically-based philosophy of mind can be instrumental in addressing such core issues in social theory as the individual-society and individualism-collectivism dilemma and the problem of social emergence, complexity, and reduction. Second, it argues that the findings of cognitive neuroscience, seen in light of analytical sociology that highlights the importance of microfoundations for social research, are valuable in so far as they can support, enrich, or modify the concepts, theories, and causal explanations provided by social theorists. Third, it draws heavily on the recent interdisciplinary research into “strong reciprocity,” thereby illustrating how the classical issue in social theory, i.e., what Talcott Parsons calls the Hobbesian problem of (social) order, is being dealt with collectively by cognitive neuroscience, experimental economics, social psychology, moral philosophy, and anthropology. This article submits that instead of staying insulated from these interdisciplinary efforts, social theorists would be well-advised to keep abreast of their research findings.
Journal of Public Deliberation, 2018
This article attempts to critically examine the experiences of participatory budgeting (PB) that ... more This article attempts to critically examine the experiences of participatory budgeting (PB) that have proliferated across Taiwan’s cities over the past three years. It is argued that PB in Taiwan remains an isolated initiative instead of an integral part of a comprehensive administrative reform. What makes Taiwan’s PB experiences theoretically interesting is that, in most cases outside the Taipei City, the tasks of promoting PB, designing the procedure of participation, and organizing and mobilizing lay citizens have been contracted out to NGOs or teams led by scholars.
In light of the analytical framework of state power - political society - civil society, this article argues that (1) PB in Taiwan takes place in the absence of active support from civil society and confronts a political society that is hostile to or skeptical of PB; (2) the “outsourced” model of PB generates incentives for the commissioner to evade administrative and political responsibilities, and imposes structural constraints on the performance of the contractor regarding mobilization, organizing and deliberative quality; and (3) the future of PB in Taiwan depends on whether the current modus operandi of PB will give way to a more comprehensive institutional reform and whether a growing number of active citizens and civil society organizations can fill the new political space created by PB that may otherwise be occupied by vested interests and political elites.
科技、醫療與社會, 2015
本文從孔恩的「演化轉向」切入，討論演化理論與社會科學研究的關係。本文透過討論「類比」與「存有論」（一般化）兩種不同的研究策略，勾勒出某種版本的「一般化達爾文主義」，亦即一種以變異、遺傳（複製）、... more 本文從孔恩的「演化轉向」切入，討論演化理論與社會科學研究的關係。本文透過討論「類比」與「存有論」（一般化）兩種不同的研究策略，勾勒出某種版本的「一般化達爾文主義」，亦即一種以變異、遺傳（複製）、選擇為核心的後設理論架構，有助於啟發、引導、架構、組織研究者提出的解釋。其次，本文試圖論證「能動性」和拉馬克主義（「斯賓賽式選擇」）都能夠在「一般化達爾文主義」的架構內得到安置。最後，本文提出了幾項認識論的立場，以與「生物學帝國主義」做清楚的區隔。
Taking Thomas Kuhn’s “evolutionary turn” as a starting point, this article addresses the relationship between evolutionary theories and social scientific research. By way of a comparison of two research strategies — analogy and generalization (ontology) — It outlines the tenets of “generalized Darwinism,” a meta-theoretical framework that stimulates, guides, and organizes empirical inquiry. Variation, inheritance, and selection are its core principles. This article also argues that human agency and Lamarckism (“Spencerian selection”) are fully compatible with such a framework. Finally, it advances a number of epistemological stances that help set itself apart from the infamous “biological imperialism.”
Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 2013
This article attempts to assess Mario Bunge's important but widely neglected criticisms of dialec... more This article attempts to assess Mario Bunge's important but widely neglected criticisms of dialectics. It begins by providing a contextualized interpretation of Friedrich Engels’s metaphysics of the dialectics of nature before embarking on a detailed discussion of Leon Trotsky’s and contemporary “dialectical” scientists’ views on materialist dialectics. It argues that while some of Bunge’s criticisms are eminently sensible, the principles underlying the works of dialectical scientists are compatible with Bunge’s emergentist and systemic approach and can shed light on such issues as the levels of organization, the diachronic and synchronic aspects of emergence, and the individualism-holism-systemism trilemma. This article also submits that dialectics is best interpreted as a guideline for a philosophy of change instead of a magical wand that liberates the investigator from study of facts. Understood as something that serves heuristic purposes, dialectics can be sensibly utilized by scientists to shore up or refine their methodological principles and thereby to facilitate empirical research.
社會理論學報, Jun 2012
本文是對李鈞鵬〈作為社會科學哲學的社會機制〉一文的批判性回應。本文充分肯定〈李文〉對華語社會科學界的貢獻，但也指出〈李文〉的幾項主要缺失：（1）混淆「社會機制」與「機制式解釋」；（2）未能清楚說... more 本文是對李鈞鵬〈作為社會科學哲學的社會機制〉一文的批判性回應。本文充分肯定〈李文〉對華語社會科學界的貢獻，但也指出〈李文〉的幾項主要缺失：（1）混淆「社會機制」與「機制式解釋」；（2）未能清楚說明涵蓋律模式與機制式解釋的關係；（3）未能清楚界定「機制」與「社會機制」。其中又以第三項缺失最為嚴重，因為它妨礙了讀者理解「什麼樣的解釋才能算是以社會機制為基礎的解釋」。本文認為，由於〈李文〉未與多數機制取徑文獻進行對話，因此一方面忽略了重要的（社會）科學哲學問題（如實在論與經驗主義/實證主義的區別、不同理論立場對因果性的不同理解、不同的機制取徑所反映的不同科學哲學立場），一方面低估了不同機制取徑的歧異可能衍生的後果。本文希望藉由回應〈李文〉，進一步澄清機制式解釋中的關鍵概念，並讓華語社會科學界更加熟悉國際學術界的研究動態。
Science & Education, Oct 1, 2012
Analytical sociology, an intellectual project that has garnered considerable attention across a v... more Analytical sociology, an intellectual project that has garnered considerable attention across a variety of disciplines in recent years, aims to explain complex social processes by dissecting them, accentuating their most important constituent parts, and constructing appropriate models to understand the emergence of what is observed. To achieve this goal, analytical sociologists demonstrate an unequivocal focus on the mechanism-based explanation grounded in action theory. In this article I attempt a critical appreciation of analytical sociology from the perspective of Mario Bunge’s philosophical system, which I characterize as emergentist systemism. I submit that while the principles of analytical sociology and those of Bunge’s approach share a lot in common, the latter brings to the fore the ontological status and explanatory importance of supra-individual actors (as concrete systems endowed with emergent causal powers) and macro-social mechanisms (as processes unfolding in and among social systems), and therefore it does not stipulate that every causal explanation of social facts has to include explicit references to individual-level actors and mechanisms. In this sense, Bunge’s approach provides a reasonable middle course between the Scylla of sociological reification and the Charybdis of ontological individualism, and thus serves as an antidote to the untenable “strong program of microfoundations” to which some analytical sociologists are committed.
Current Sociology, Dec 1, 2011
In the field of sociological theory, after the decline of Parsons’ version of structural function... more In the field of sociological theory, after the decline of Parsons’ version of structural functionalism, Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory came to be seen as the major representative of systems thinking. While Luhmann’s autopoietic systems ontology is sophisticated and deserves serious consideration, the author argues that the prevailing identification of Luhmann’s constructivist-oriented approach with the systems approach itself is problematic mainly for two reasons. First, as the works of the Argentinian-Canadian systems theorist Mario Bunge demonstrate, the systems approach can be fruitfully based on (some version of) scientific realism. Second, the adherents to Luhmann’s constructivist epistemology in sociology seldom engage in a detailed examination of the various critiques of anti-realism offered by scientific and critical realists. Drawing on the literature on philosophy of science, especially the writings of Bunge and a few leading critical realists, the author suggests that a serious Luhmannian sociologist is obligated to provide more cogent and detailed discussions on philosophy of (social) science before taking an opinionated position on epistemology.
Uploads
Books by Poe Yu-ze Wan
200年前誕生的馬克思，他的思想改變了世界的樣貌，點燃了20世紀革命的火花；150年前出版的《資本論》，分析了資本主義發展的動力與矛盾，直到今天仍然具有深刻的現實感。
然而，從1917年俄國革命以來，號稱實行共產主義的國家，真的是馬克思所說的共產主義嗎？眾多不同流派的馬克思主義究竟在哪些部分繼承或偏離了馬克思？後人對馬克思的各種褒揚與詆毀是否公允？
長期研究馬克思著作與思想的萬毓澤教授，將從馬克思寫下的社論、文章、筆記與手稿，對照他親身投入的政治活動，帶你走進馬克思的生命以及他生存的時代，讓你看見身為學者、新聞工作者和革命家，這三種不同身分的馬克思，不再把他當成一個枯燥又過時的經濟學者，而是一個形象鮮活的行動者。
透過這門課程，你將認識一個更立體、更多元、也更真實的馬克思。
萬毓澤的《《資本論》完全使用手冊：版本、系譜、爭議與當代價值》前半部介紹了《資本論》的創作史與版本問題、恩格斯的編輯工作、結構與邏輯、二戰後歐美的繼受狀況以及常見的誤讀。後半部則試圖從文學、政治、經濟、歷史、生態等多重視角閱讀《資本論》。透過作者細膩的梳理與論證，可幫助讀者建立一幅以《資本論》為核心的知識地圖，以及一套理解《資本論》的方法論。
《資本論》完全使用手冊：版本、系譜、爭議與當代價值》不是三卷《資本論》的「入門」、「導論」或「要點整理」，而是試圖追溯《資本論》的寫作歷程、版本、結構與知識系譜，並從多重視角展開解讀。萬毓澤極嚴肅地將《資本論》當成「經典」對待，設法讀出新意。如果您已經對《資本論》有初步認識，相信您可以在閱讀的過程中體會這部經典的廣博、深刻與歷久彌新。
和一般解讀馬克思的著作不同，本書是第一本將馬克思的核心思想，例如人應該如何生活、資本主義如何運作、勞動與工時問題、如何理解社會主義等，依原典分類摘錄並加以詮釋的著作。每個主題都有一篇導讀，帶領讀者從宏觀的視野理解馬克思和當代社會的關聯，並掌握馬克思極具爆發力的思想火花。
如果你對馬克思的學說已相當熟悉，這本書為你整理出重要的原典段落；如果你剛開始接觸馬克思，這本書既有原典的忠實度，又有學者的解說導讀，是最快速精確的入門讀物。
購買網址
博客來：http://www.books.com.tw/products/0010776956
讀冊：https://www.taaze.tw/sing.html?pid=11100837148
三民：http://www.sanmin.com.tw/Product/index/006638426
Theoretically sophisticated and investigating the work of a theorist whose work has until now received insufficient attention in Anglo-American thought, this book will be of interest to those working in the field of social theory, as well as scholars concerned with philosophy of social science, the project of analytical sociology, and the nature of the relationship between the natural and social sciences.
Reviews:
“This is the clearest and most comprehensive discussion of contemporary social ontology. The author's definitions and illustrations of such key concepts as those of system, process, mechanism, and emergence, often used sloppily, are lucid. And his evaluation of the competing theories is magisterial. This book should greatly help any social theorists and philosophers seeking clarity and depth.” (Mario Bunge, McGill University, Canada)
“Poe Yu-ze Wan has produced an impressive book that brings social systems theory into the twenty-first century. In a beautifully well-judged argument that deserves to be widely read, he shows how social theorists are moving towards mechanismic explanation and ‘emergentist systemism’ – and why they are right to do so.” (Dave Elder-Vass, Loughborough University, UK)
“Every scholar interested in this literature needs to read this book simply to be able to claim that he or she is acquainted with the state of the art and with the now staggering breadth of writings on the various inter-related subjects.” (Omar Lizardo, University of Notre Dame, US)
“Whoever wishes to become introduced to the contemporary philosophical debate on causality (with special reference to social causality) cannot do better than studying this book.” (Wolfgang Krohn, University of Bielefeld, Germany)
“…dieses Klar gegliederte und flüssig geschriebene Buch…. Auch kann dieses Buch jedem zu Diensten sein, der sich einen konzisen Überblick über die Probleme und Argumente zu verschaffen sucht, welche die Entwicklung einer wissenschaftstheoretisch informierten „erklärenden Soziologie“ nicht erst seit jüngster Zeit begleiten.” (Michael Schmid, Bundeswehr University Munich, Germany)
Journal Articles by Poe Yu-ze Wan
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。
「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」分為兩節。第一節討論當代馬克思主義的蓬勃發展，主要分析對象包括「分析馬克思主義」、「生態馬克思主義」、「自主馬克思主義」、「政治馬克思主義」、「黑人激進傳統」，並帶出「超越歐洲中心論」的問題意識。第二節則承繼「超越歐洲中心論」的分析視角，從「跨現代性」的角度討論「馬克思學」與馬克思主義未來的發展方向。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。全文結構如下。
「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」共分五節，焦點是對當代哲學、文藝思想影響甚鉅的「西方馬克思主義」。該文將考察「西方馬克思主義」如何銜接古典與當代，討論盧卡奇、柯爾施、葛蘭西等人及「法蘭克福學派」的學說，說明馬克思《1844 年經濟學哲學手稿》的影響，並檢討「西方馬克思主義」這個概念的適用性。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。
「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」分為三節。第一節簡單勾勒馬克思主義的複雜性與歷史淵源。第二節分析馬克思及恩格斯的主要貢獻與爭議，以及這兩位「馬克思主義」創始人與「馬克思主義」本身的關係。第三節則探討「古典馬克思主義」及其遺產。針對古典馬克思主義，本文不採常見的「時序」式分析（即將其限定在馬克思與恩格斯之後、俄國革命之前的馬克思主義），而是提出兩項規範性的判準：「工人階級的自我解放」及「資本主義轉型下的政治經濟學批判」。
From the perspective of analytical sociology, this article attempts to illustrate the ways in which interdisciplinary studies can inform social theorizing by way of three examples. First, it demonstrates how the neuroscientifically-based philosophy of mind can be instrumental in addressing such core issues in social theory as the individual-society and individualism-collectivism dilemma and the problem of social emergence, complexity, and reduction. Second, it argues that the findings of cognitive neuroscience, seen in light of analytical sociology that highlights the importance of microfoundations for social research, are valuable in so far as they can support, enrich, or modify the concepts, theories, and causal explanations provided by social theorists. Third, it draws heavily on the recent interdisciplinary research into “strong reciprocity,” thereby illustrating how the classical issue in social theory, i.e., what Talcott Parsons calls the Hobbesian problem of (social) order, is being dealt with collectively by cognitive neuroscience, experimental economics, social psychology, moral philosophy, and anthropology. This article submits that instead of staying insulated from these interdisciplinary efforts, social theorists would be well-advised to keep abreast of their research findings.
In light of the analytical framework of state power - political society - civil society, this article argues that (1) PB in Taiwan takes place in the absence of active support from civil society and confronts a political society that is hostile to or skeptical of PB; (2) the “outsourced” model of PB generates incentives for the commissioner to evade administrative and political responsibilities, and imposes structural constraints on the performance of the contractor regarding mobilization, organizing and deliberative quality; and (3) the future of PB in Taiwan depends on whether the current modus operandi of PB will give way to a more comprehensive institutional reform and whether a growing number of active citizens and civil society organizations can fill the new political space created by PB that may otherwise be occupied by vested interests and political elites.
Taking Thomas Kuhn’s “evolutionary turn” as a starting point, this article addresses the relationship between evolutionary theories and social scientific research. By way of a comparison of two research strategies — analogy and generalization (ontology) — It outlines the tenets of “generalized Darwinism,” a meta-theoretical framework that stimulates, guides, and organizes empirical inquiry. Variation, inheritance, and selection are its core principles. This article also argues that human agency and Lamarckism (“Spencerian selection”) are fully compatible with such a framework. Finally, it advances a number of epistemological stances that help set itself apart from the infamous “biological imperialism.”
200年前誕生的馬克思，他的思想改變了世界的樣貌，點燃了20世紀革命的火花；150年前出版的《資本論》，分析了資本主義發展的動力與矛盾，直到今天仍然具有深刻的現實感。
然而，從1917年俄國革命以來，號稱實行共產主義的國家，真的是馬克思所說的共產主義嗎？眾多不同流派的馬克思主義究竟在哪些部分繼承或偏離了馬克思？後人對馬克思的各種褒揚與詆毀是否公允？
長期研究馬克思著作與思想的萬毓澤教授，將從馬克思寫下的社論、文章、筆記與手稿，對照他親身投入的政治活動，帶你走進馬克思的生命以及他生存的時代，讓你看見身為學者、新聞工作者和革命家，這三種不同身分的馬克思，不再把他當成一個枯燥又過時的經濟學者，而是一個形象鮮活的行動者。
透過這門課程，你將認識一個更立體、更多元、也更真實的馬克思。
萬毓澤的《《資本論》完全使用手冊：版本、系譜、爭議與當代價值》前半部介紹了《資本論》的創作史與版本問題、恩格斯的編輯工作、結構與邏輯、二戰後歐美的繼受狀況以及常見的誤讀。後半部則試圖從文學、政治、經濟、歷史、生態等多重視角閱讀《資本論》。透過作者細膩的梳理與論證，可幫助讀者建立一幅以《資本論》為核心的知識地圖，以及一套理解《資本論》的方法論。
《資本論》完全使用手冊：版本、系譜、爭議與當代價值》不是三卷《資本論》的「入門」、「導論」或「要點整理」，而是試圖追溯《資本論》的寫作歷程、版本、結構與知識系譜，並從多重視角展開解讀。萬毓澤極嚴肅地將《資本論》當成「經典」對待，設法讀出新意。如果您已經對《資本論》有初步認識，相信您可以在閱讀的過程中體會這部經典的廣博、深刻與歷久彌新。
和一般解讀馬克思的著作不同，本書是第一本將馬克思的核心思想，例如人應該如何生活、資本主義如何運作、勞動與工時問題、如何理解社會主義等，依原典分類摘錄並加以詮釋的著作。每個主題都有一篇導讀，帶領讀者從宏觀的視野理解馬克思和當代社會的關聯，並掌握馬克思極具爆發力的思想火花。
如果你對馬克思的學說已相當熟悉，這本書為你整理出重要的原典段落；如果你剛開始接觸馬克思，這本書既有原典的忠實度，又有學者的解說導讀，是最快速精確的入門讀物。
購買網址
博客來：http://www.books.com.tw/products/0010776956
讀冊：https://www.taaze.tw/sing.html?pid=11100837148
三民：http://www.sanmin.com.tw/Product/index/006638426
Theoretically sophisticated and investigating the work of a theorist whose work has until now received insufficient attention in Anglo-American thought, this book will be of interest to those working in the field of social theory, as well as scholars concerned with philosophy of social science, the project of analytical sociology, and the nature of the relationship between the natural and social sciences.
Reviews:
“This is the clearest and most comprehensive discussion of contemporary social ontology. The author's definitions and illustrations of such key concepts as those of system, process, mechanism, and emergence, often used sloppily, are lucid. And his evaluation of the competing theories is magisterial. This book should greatly help any social theorists and philosophers seeking clarity and depth.” (Mario Bunge, McGill University, Canada)
“Poe Yu-ze Wan has produced an impressive book that brings social systems theory into the twenty-first century. In a beautifully well-judged argument that deserves to be widely read, he shows how social theorists are moving towards mechanismic explanation and ‘emergentist systemism’ – and why they are right to do so.” (Dave Elder-Vass, Loughborough University, UK)
“Every scholar interested in this literature needs to read this book simply to be able to claim that he or she is acquainted with the state of the art and with the now staggering breadth of writings on the various inter-related subjects.” (Omar Lizardo, University of Notre Dame, US)
“Whoever wishes to become introduced to the contemporary philosophical debate on causality (with special reference to social causality) cannot do better than studying this book.” (Wolfgang Krohn, University of Bielefeld, Germany)
“…dieses Klar gegliederte und flüssig geschriebene Buch…. Auch kann dieses Buch jedem zu Diensten sein, der sich einen konzisen Überblick über die Probleme und Argumente zu verschaffen sucht, welche die Entwicklung einer wissenschaftstheoretisch informierten „erklärenden Soziologie“ nicht erst seit jüngster Zeit begleiten.” (Michael Schmid, Bundeswehr University Munich, Germany)
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。
「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」分為兩節。第一節討論當代馬克思主義的蓬勃發展，主要分析對象包括「分析馬克思主義」、「生態馬克思主義」、「自主馬克思主義」、「政治馬克思主義」、「黑人激進傳統」，並帶出「超越歐洲中心論」的問題意識。第二節則承繼「超越歐洲中心論」的分析視角，從「跨現代性」的角度討論「馬克思學」與馬克思主義未來的發展方向。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。全文結構如下。
「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」共分五節，焦點是對當代哲學、文藝思想影響甚鉅的「西方馬克思主義」。該文將考察「西方馬克思主義」如何銜接古典與當代，討論盧卡奇、柯爾施、葛蘭西等人及「法蘭克福學派」的學說，說明馬克思《1844 年經濟學哲學手稿》的影響，並檢討「西方馬克思主義」這個概念的適用性。
本文共分為三個條目：「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」、「馬克思主義（中）：從古典到當代」、「馬克思主義（下）：當代發展與反思」。
「馬克思主義（上）：古典及其基礎」分為三節。第一節簡單勾勒馬克思主義的複雜性與歷史淵源。第二節分析馬克思及恩格斯的主要貢獻與爭議，以及這兩位「馬克思主義」創始人與「馬克思主義」本身的關係。第三節則探討「古典馬克思主義」及其遺產。針對古典馬克思主義，本文不採常見的「時序」式分析（即將其限定在馬克思與恩格斯之後、俄國革命之前的馬克思主義），而是提出兩項規範性的判準：「工人階級的自我解放」及「資本主義轉型下的政治經濟學批判」。
From the perspective of analytical sociology, this article attempts to illustrate the ways in which interdisciplinary studies can inform social theorizing by way of three examples. First, it demonstrates how the neuroscientifically-based philosophy of mind can be instrumental in addressing such core issues in social theory as the individual-society and individualism-collectivism dilemma and the problem of social emergence, complexity, and reduction. Second, it argues that the findings of cognitive neuroscience, seen in light of analytical sociology that highlights the importance of microfoundations for social research, are valuable in so far as they can support, enrich, or modify the concepts, theories, and causal explanations provided by social theorists. Third, it draws heavily on the recent interdisciplinary research into “strong reciprocity,” thereby illustrating how the classical issue in social theory, i.e., what Talcott Parsons calls the Hobbesian problem of (social) order, is being dealt with collectively by cognitive neuroscience, experimental economics, social psychology, moral philosophy, and anthropology. This article submits that instead of staying insulated from these interdisciplinary efforts, social theorists would be well-advised to keep abreast of their research findings.
In light of the analytical framework of state power - political society - civil society, this article argues that (1) PB in Taiwan takes place in the absence of active support from civil society and confronts a political society that is hostile to or skeptical of PB; (2) the “outsourced” model of PB generates incentives for the commissioner to evade administrative and political responsibilities, and imposes structural constraints on the performance of the contractor regarding mobilization, organizing and deliberative quality; and (3) the future of PB in Taiwan depends on whether the current modus operandi of PB will give way to a more comprehensive institutional reform and whether a growing number of active citizens and civil society organizations can fill the new political space created by PB that may otherwise be occupied by vested interests and political elites.
Taking Thomas Kuhn’s “evolutionary turn” as a starting point, this article addresses the relationship between evolutionary theories and social scientific research. By way of a comparison of two research strategies — analogy and generalization (ontology) — It outlines the tenets of “generalized Darwinism,” a meta-theoretical framework that stimulates, guides, and organizes empirical inquiry. Variation, inheritance, and selection are its core principles. This article also argues that human agency and Lamarckism (“Spencerian selection”) are fully compatible with such a framework. Finally, it advances a number of epistemological stances that help set itself apart from the infamous “biological imperialism.”
相對地，阿根廷首都布宜諾斯艾利斯的參與式預算（2002-2008）推動過程主要是由上而下的短線政治操作，且推行過程中政府單位之間嚴重缺乏協調，因人設事的色彩濃厚，於是短短幾年內由盛轉衰、難以為繼。因此，該地的參與式預算通常被認為是「失敗」的案例，與愉港形成強烈的對比。兩個案例可分別視為參與式預算「成功∕失敗」光譜的兩端。
本文試圖比較「愉港1989-2004年的參與式預算經驗」（這段時期為工人黨執政，而工人黨自2004年失去愉港執政權後，當地的參與式預算便逐漸走下坡）以及「布宜諾斯艾利斯2002-2008年的參與式預算經驗」，指出兩地公民社會與政治社會的發展動力與內部格局（configuration）的差異如何形塑了參與式預算的發展樣貌。由於世界各地多數的參與式預算經驗多落在「成功∕失敗」光譜的中間地帶，因此，透過這種對比性（contrasting）的個案研究，有助於我們辨識出各種可能影響參與式預算發展樣貌的運作機制與制度條件，進而有助於探討其他灰色地帶的案例（例如巴西的其他都市、拉美其他國家、歐洲、非洲、中國的實踐經驗）。
關鍵詞：參與式預算、愉港、布宜諾斯艾利斯、公民社會、政治社會、培力參與式治理
關鍵詞：強相互性、合作、分析社會學、演化生物學、認知神經科學
關鍵詞：認知神經科學；突現；心靈哲學；分析社會學；微觀基礎；強相互性