博碩士論文 961404601 詳細資訊




以作者查詢圖書館館藏 以作者查詢臺灣博碩士 以作者查詢全國書目 勘誤回報 、線上人數:24 、訪客IP:54.198.58.62
姓名 王漢哲(Aleksandar Stamatov)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 哲學研究所在職專班
論文名稱 老子政治哲學的現代詮釋
檔案 [Endnote RIS 格式]    [Bibtex 格式]    [檢視]  [下載]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
  3. 請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。

摘要(中) 十九世紀末至二十世紀初期,正當西方開始孰悉老子哲學思想,而東方開始孰悉西方的現代政治學說時,一種較常見的主張認為老子政治哲學思想是一種無政府主義的學說。此因,有人將「無為」的概念錯誤理解為統治者什麼都不做。今日此種看法似乎普通,甚至幾乎所有當代政治哲學教科書,也提到老子與無政府主義可能的關係,而成為一般人對老子的普及理解,似乎已是毫無疑問的事實。不過,在學術文獻中,我們可以看到,老子政治思想是否是無政府主義學說,意見不一。本文要試圖挑戰那些主張對老子政治思想無政府主義詮釋的學者,而試圖給予對老子可接受的非無政府主義的解讀。
為了做出以上的工作,我先承認老子政治思想具深刻形上基礎,此為對老子哲學思想普通理解,而此形上基礎在討論與詮釋老子政治思想時有貢獻。由此,本文首先要討論老子形上思想,即道、無、有、德這些概念,以及對道領會的問題。其次,討論由此形上基礎浮現的實踐哲學,包含「自然」與「無為」的概念,及給予對無為的積極解釋。第三,探討老子政治思想,即老子對治國的看法及老子對統治者的建議,說明聖人要模仿或順著由道來的自然原則,以便建立合於道的標準之國。
接者,本文要給予老子政治思想非無政府主義的詮釋。在此過稱中,我要討論至今最詳盡的無政府主義詮釋論證,並試圖找出這些論證可能出現的錯誤或破落。老子承認統治者與國家存在的事實,並非是一個具強烈說服力的論證去說明老子不是無政府主義者,因為無政府主義本身不見得否定統治者與國家。但問題是老子承認等級制度,而此正是無政府主義想要排除的東西。且本文說明,老子政治思想與無政府主義之間理論上與概念上的差異。由前者而言,老子哲學思想給予詳盡闡述的形上思想,特別是存有論,反之無政府主義缺乏這種討論。由後者而言,老子政治思想最重要的概念是無為,而西方政治哲學,含無政府主義,皆仍在有為而治的意識中。
最後,雖老子在第八十章中所描繪的「小國寡民」裡看不見政權,但如將它置於全文語境中做考量,其他有關政權文本的章句,可應用於這個「理想國」,而排斥對它作為無政府主義的詮釋。並,如果接受老子在第八十章中描寫了一種自然狀態的看法,可見此種自然狀態與西方哲學家的自然狀態的不同,在於後者是前–政治的狀態,但老子的則有合法政權。
摘要(英) Ever since the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century, when the West began to be familiar with the Laozi, and the East with modern Western political theories, we have frequently heard the claim that the political philosophy of the Laozi is a kind of anarchist theory. The reason for this claim is that some would wrongly interpret the Laozi’s concept of wuwei as meaning that the ruler should do absolutely nothing.
This view today is almost common. Nearly every textbook on contemporary political philosophy hastens to mention that the Laozi is one of the first works which propounded anarchism, and this has become a popular understanding of the Laozi among the common people and an unquestionable fact. However, we can see in academic literature that there are disagreements on whether the political philosophy of the Laozi is an anarchist theory or not. This dissertation will try to challenge those who offer the anarchist interpretation and will also attempt to give an acceptable non-anarchist interpretation of the political philosophy of the Laozi.
In order to accomplish the above task I will first acknowledge that the political philosophy of the Laozi has a deep metaphysical basis, which is a common understanding of the philosophy of the Laozi, and when we discuss or interpret the political philosophy of the Laozi this metaphysical basis has a contribution to make. Thus, this dissertation will first discuss the metaphysical thought of the Laozi, e.g., the concepts of the dao (the way), wu (nothingness), you (being), de (the virtue) etc., and the problems of grasping the dao. Secondly, it will discuss the practical philosophy that emerges from this metaphysical basis, including the concepts of ziran (naturalness, self-so) and wuwei (non-action, having-no-action), and it will also offer a positive account of the concept of wuwei. Thirdly, it will present the political philosophy of the Laozi including the view of the Laozi on ruling the state and its advice to the rulers, and it will show that the role of the sage is to imitate or follow the natural principle that comes from the dao so that the state the sage-ruler establishes is in accordance with the standard of the dao.
Next, this dissertation will provide a non-anarchist interpretation of the political philosophy of the Laozi. At this point, I will present the most elaborate arguments for the anarchist interpretation so far, and I will try to find out their possible mistakes and gaps. It should also be known that the fact that the Laozi recognizes the existence of the ruler and the state is still not a convincing enough argument for some that it does not propound anarchism, because anarchism itself does not necessarily negate them. However, I will also show that the Laozi recognizes central and hierarchical political authority, and this is the very thing that anarchism wants to eliminate. Moreover, this dissertation stresses the theoretical and principal differences between the Laozi and anarchism. The former is that the philosophy of the Laozi has an elaborate metaphysical thought, especially ontology, while anarchism does not. The latter is that according to the political philosophy of the Laozi the ruler’s main principle of action is wuwei (having-no-action), while for Western political philosophies including anarchism, the opposite principle of youwei (having-action) is the key.
At the end, in Chapter 80 of the Laozi there is a description of a “small country with few people” and we cannot see the political authority in it; yet if we place it in the context of the whole text, other chapters concerning political authority can be used to eliminate the anarchist interpretation of this “ideal state”. Moreover, if we allow that Chapter 80 of the Laozi depicts a kind of state of nature, we can see that it is different from the one imagined by the Western philosophers in that the latter is a pre-political state, whereas the state of nature of the Laozi has a legitimate political authority.
關鍵字(中) ★ 老子
★ 政治哲學
★ 無為
★ 無政府主義
★ 烏托邦
★ 自然狀態
關鍵字(英) ★ Laozi
★ political philosophy
★ wuwei
★ anarcism
★ utopia
★ state of nature
論文目次 目錄
導論
前言.......................................................1
一.研究動機與目的............................................2
二.研究方法.................................................9
三.研究範圍與對象...........................................11
四.文獻回顧................................................13
五.研究步驟................................................27
結語......................................................29
第一章 老子的形而上思想
前言......................................................31
第一節 論道的形而上之意義.....................................32
第二節 道的兩個表現:無與有...................................43
第三節 道與萬物的關係........................................54
第四節 由「道」的體驗到「知」道的表述...........................57
結語......................................................61
第二章 老子思想的哲學特色:由理論到實踐
前言......................................................63
第一節 道的自然法則..........................................64
第二節 由道來的行動原則:無為..................................72
第三節 無為的積極角色........................................79
第四節 以隱喻探討無為........................................84
結語......................................................92
第三章 老子的政治哲學思想
前言......................................................95
第一節 老子對當時政治狀況的看法與批評...........................96
第二節 聖人的政治角色.......................................106
第三節 合於道的標準之國......................................115
第四節 無為而治的具體應用....................................122
結語.....................................................129
第四章 老子政治哲學思想的反思與檢討
前言.....................................................131
第一節 老子哲學思想現代詮釋的價值與意義.........................133
第二節 老子政治思想與無政府主義異同的討論.......................138
(一)無政府主義是什麼?.....................................139
(二)對老子政治思想無政府主義的詮釋...........................142
(三)對老子政治思想非無政府主義的詮釋..........................151
第三節 對「小國寡民」的檢討..................................157
第四節 以自然狀態的理論去解讀老子政治思想.......................163
第五節 老子政治哲學思想的價值.................................168
結語.....................................................173
結論.....................................................176
參考書目..................................................180
參考文獻 參考書目
一、 中文書目
(一)書籍
王邦雄,2006,《老子的哲學》,臺北市:東大圖書公司,修定二版二刷。
王邦雄,2010,《老子道德經的現代解讀》,臺北市:遠流出版事業公司,初版三刷。
朱敏章(譯),霍布斯(著),1972,《利維坦》,臺北市:台灣商務印書館,初版。
牟宗三(譯), 維特根什坦(著),1987,《名理論》,臺北市:學生書局,初版。
牟宗三,1983,《中國哲學十九講》,台北:學生書局,初版。
牟宗三,1985,《才性與玄理》,台北:學生書局,修訂七版。
李常山(譯),盧梭(著),1986,《論人類不平等的起源和基礎》,臺北市:唐山出版社,初版。
唐君毅,1986,《中國哲學原論.導論篇》,台北:學生書局,全集校私訂版。
袁保新,1991,《老子哲學之詮釋與重建》,台北:文津出版社,初版。
張覺(譯注),韓非(著),1996,《韓非子》,臺北市:台灣古籍出版社,初版。
梁啟超,1980,《先秦政治思想史》,台北:東大圖書公司,初版。
陳安仁,1962,《中國政治思想史》,台北:商務印書館印行,臺一版。
陳鼓應,1972,《老子今註今釋》,台北:商務印書館,四版。
陳鼓應、白奚,2002,《老子評傳》,台北:文史哲出版社,初版。
雪克、王雲璐(譯注),荀(著),2011,《荀子》,臺中市:暢談國際文化,初版。
傅佩榮,2003,《解讀老子》,台北:立緒文化事業公司,初版。
勞思光,1984,《新編中國哲學史.第一卷》,台北:三民書局,修訂初版。
賀榮一,1988,《老子之道治主義》,台北:五南圖書出版公司,初版。
馮友蘭,1993,《中國哲學史》,台北;台灣商務,增訂臺一版。
馮滬祥,2007,《中國政治哲學》,台北:學生書局,初版。
楊幼炯,《中國政治思想史》,六版,商務印書館,台北,1989。
楊汝舟,1987,《老子道德經》,台北:黎明文化事業公司,初版。
葉海煙,1999,《老莊哲學新論》,台北:文津出版社,初版二刷。
廖正勝,2012,《老子道德經基礎解讀》,台北:廖正勝,初版。
劉文忠(譯注),2011,《呂氏春秋》,臺中市:暢談國際文化,初版。
劉笑敢,1997,《老子》,台北:東大圖書公司,初版。
劉笑敢,2009,《老子古今:五種對勘與析評引論》北京:中國社會科學出版社,修訂版。
樓宇烈(編),1992,《王弼集校釋》,台北:華正書局,初版。
歐崇敬,2001,《中國哲學史.先秦卷》,台北:洪葉文化,初版。
談遠平,2003,《中國政治思想史》,台北:揚智文化事業公司,初版一刷。
鄭成海,1971,《老子河上公注斠理》,台北:中華書局,初版。
鄭昌淦,1995,《中國政治學說史》,台北:文津出版社,初版。
蕭公權,《中國政治思想史》,初版,聯經出版事業公司,台北,1986。
蕭振邦,2009,《深層自然主義:《莊子》思想的現代詮釋》,臺北市:東方人文學術研究基金會,修訂版。
(二)單篇論文
丁原植,1993/01,〈《老子》哲學中「自然」的觀念〉,《哲學與文化》第21卷第1期,頁108-123。
朱孟庭,2000/04,〈由老子「反」的哲學論其「柔弱」哲學的義涵〉,《哲學與文化》,第27卷第4期,頁389-402。
林俊宏,1999/06,〈《老子》政治思想的開展––從「道」與幾個概念談起〉,《政治科學論叢》第10期,頁171-194。
袁保新,1991,〈老子政治哲學的洞見與侷限〉於《老子哲學之詮釋與重建》,台北:文津出版社,初版。
陳秀美,2010/12,〈從「實踐性」反思《老子》「無為」思想的意義〉,《空大人文學報》第19 期,頁77-108。
陳榮波,2002/09,〈老子的人生哲學及其應用之道〉,《T&D飛訊》第1期,頁1-5。
劉笑敢,1997/03,〈老子之自然與無為—古典意含與現代意義〉,《中國文哲研究期刊》第10期,中央研究院中國文哲研究所,頁25-58。
蕭振邦,2013/7/7-10,〈《老子道德經》思想的文化衝浪〉,浙江華東師範大學主辦海峽兩岸學術研討會。
二、 英文書目
(一)書籍
Ames, Roger T. and Hall, David L. (trans.), 2003, Daodejing -- “Making This Life Significant”: A Philosophical Translation, first edition, New York: Balantine Books.
Ames, Roger T., 1994, The Art of Rulership: A Study of Ancient Chinese Political Thought, first edition, New York: State University of New York Press.
Chan, Wing-tsit (trans. and comp.), 1963, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, first edition, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
Chan, Wing-tsit (trans.), 1963, The Way of Lao Tzu, first edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Chang, Chung-yuan (trans.), 1977, Tao: A New Way of Thinking, first edition, Taipei: Dunhuang Shuju.
Creel, Herrlee G., 1997, Chinese Thought: From Confucius to Mao Tse-tung, second edition, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cua, Antonio S. (ed.), 2003, Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, first edition, New York and London: Routledge.
Fang, Thomé H., 1957, The Chinese View of Life: The Philosophy of Comprehensive harmony, first edition, Hong Kong: The Union Press.
Fang, Thomé H., 1986, Chinese Philosophy: Its Spirit and Its Development, first edition, third printing, Taipei: Linking Publishing.
Fung, Yu-lan, 1952, A History of Chinese Philosophy, second edition, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Fung, Yu-lan, 1997, A Short History of Chinese Philosophy, first edition, New York: The Free Press.
Goodin, Robert E., Pettit, Philip and Pogge, Thomas (eds.), 2007, A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, second edition, Oxford: Blackwell.
Graham, A.C., 1989, Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Arguments in Ancient China, first edition, La Salle, IL.: Open Court.
Hansen, Chad, 1992, A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought: A Philosophical Interpretation, first edition, New York: Oxford University Press.
Honderich, Ted (ed.), 1995, The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, first edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hsiao, Kung-chuan, 1979, A History of Chinese Political Though, Volume I: From the Beginning to the Sixth Century AD, translated by F.W. Mote, first edition, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Hughes, E. R. (trans.), 1969, Chinese Philosophy in Classical Times, first edition, Taipei: Jinshan Tushu.
Kaltenmark, Max, 1969, Lao Tzu and Taoism, Roger Greaves (trans.), first edition, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Kohn, Livia and LaFargue, Michael (eds.), 1998, Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching, first edition, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Lai, Karyn L., 2008, An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy, first edition, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lakof, George and Turner, Mark, 1989, More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor, first edition, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lau, D.C. (trans.), 1971, Lao Tzu Tao Te Ching, sixth edition, Middlesex: Penguin Books.
Legge, James (trans.), 1962, The Texts of Taoism, Part I:The Tao Te Ching of Lao Tzu, The Writings of Chuang Tzu (Books I-XVII), first edition, New York: Dover.
Leon P. Baradat, 1984, Political Ideologies: Their Origins and Impact, second edition, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Liang, Chi-chao, 1930, History of Chinese Political Thought During the Early Tsin Period, translated by L. T. Chen, first edition, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., LTD.
Lin, Mousheng, 1942, Men and Ideas: An Informal History of Chinese Political Thought, first edition, New York: The John Day Company.
Lin, Paul J. (trans.), 1992, A Translation of Lao Tzu’s Tao Te Ching and Wang Pi’s Commentary, second edition, Michigan: Center for Chinese Studies.
Locke, John, 1975, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, edited by P. H. Nidditch, first edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Masters, Roger, D., 1976, The Political Philosophy of Rousseau, second edition, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Moeller, Hans-Georg, 2006, The Philosophy of the Daodejing, first edition, New York: Columbia University Press.
Mou, Bo (ed.), 2009, History of Chinese Philosophy, Routledge History of World Philosophies, Vol. 3, first edition, London and New York: Routledge.
Nozick, Robert, 1974, Anarchy, State, and Utopia, first edition, New York: Basic Books.
Parkes, Graham (ed.), 1990, Heidegger and Asian Thought, second edition, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Pennock, Roland J., 1978, and Chapman, John W. (eds.), Anarchism: Nomos XIX, first edition, New York: New York University Press.
Roberts, Moss (trans.), 2001, Laozi Dao De Jing: The Book of the Way, first edition, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1994, Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, translated by Franklin Philip, first edition, Oxford New York: Oxford University Press.
Schwartz, Benjamin I., 1985, The World of Thought in Ancient China, first edition, Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Shen, Vincent and Van Doan, Tran (eds.), 1992, Morality, Metaphysics and Chinese Culture, first edition, Washington D.C.: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.
Slingerland, Edward, 2003, Effortless Action: Wu-Wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China, first edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vincent, Andrew, 1992, reprinted 1993, Modern Political Ideologies, first edition, Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell.
Waley, Arthur (trans.), 1997, Lao Tzu Tao Te Ching, first edition, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Edition Limited.
Welch, Holmes, 1972, Taoism: The Parting of the Way, sixth edition, Taipei: Beacon Press.
(二)單篇論文
Ames, Roger T., 1983, “Is Political Taoism Anarchism?,” in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 10, Issue 1, pp. 27-47.
Bai, Tongdong, 2009/10, “How to Rule Without Taking Unnatural Actions(無為而治): A Comparative Study of the Political Philosophy of the Laozi,” in Philosophy East and West, Volume 59, No. 4, pp. 481-501.
Beitz, Charles R., 2007, “Human Rights”, in A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, edited by Robert E. Goodin, Philip Pettit and Thomas Pogge, second edition, Oxford: Blackwell.
Bender, Frederic L., 1983, “Taoism and Western Anarchism”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 10, Issue 1, pp. 5-26.
Chan, Alan K. L., 1998, “A Tale of Two Commentaries: Ho-shang-kung and Wang Pi on the Lao-tzu”, in Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching, edited by Livia Kohn and Michael LaFargue, first edition, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Cheng, Chung-Ying, 1983, “Introduction”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 10, Issue 1, pp. 1-4.
Chung-Ying Cheng, 2004/06, “Dimensions of the Dao and Onto-Ethics in the Light of the DDJ”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 31, Issue 2, pp, 143-182.
Clark, John P., 1983, “On Taoism and Politics”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 10, Issue 1, pp. 65-88.
Clark, John P., 1978, “What is Anarchism?”, in, Anarchism: Nomos XIX, edited by Roland J. Pennock, and John W. Chapman, first edition, New York: New York University Press.
De George, Richard T., 1995, “Anarchism”, in The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, edited by Ted Honderich, first edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Feldt, Alex, 2010, “Governing Through the Dao: A Non-Anarchistic Interpretation of the Laozi”, Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy, Vol. 9, Issue. 3, pp. 323-337.
Fu, Charles Wei-hsun, 1973, “Lao Tzu’s Conception of Tao”, in Inquiry, 16, pp. 367-394.
Hall, David L. , 1983, “The Metaphysics of Anarchism”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 10, Issue 1, pp. 49-63.
Hardy, Julia M., 1998, “Influential Western Interpretations of the Tao-te-ching”, in Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching, edited by Livia Kohn and Michael LaFargue, first edition, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Lakoff, George, 1993, “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor”, in Metaphor and Thought, edited by Andrew Ortony, second edition, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, George, 2009/01, “The Neural Theory of Metaphor”, report presented at the University of California at Berkeley.
Liu, Xiaogan, 2009, “Daoism (1): Lao Zi and the Dao-De-Jing” in History of Chinese Philosophy, Routledge History of World Philosophies, Vol. 3, edited by Bo Mou, first edition, London and New York: Routledge.
Parkes, Graham, 1990, “Thoughts on the Way: Being and Time via Lao-Chuang”, in Heidegger and Asian Thought, edited by Graham Parkes, second edition, Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press.
Patt-Shamir, Galia, 2009/09, “To Live a Riddle: The Transformative Aspect of the Laozi《老子》”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 36, Issue 3, pp. 408-423.
Pöggeler, Otto, 1990, “West-East Diaoluge: Heidegger and Lao-tzu”, in Heidegger and Asian Thought, edited by Graham Parkes, second edition, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Rapp, John A., 1998, “Daoism and Anarchism Reconsidered”, in Anarchist Studies, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 123-151.
Robinet, Isabelle, 1998, “Later Commentaries: Textual Polysemy and Syncretistic Interpretation”, in Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching, edited by Livia Kohn and Michael LaFargue, first edition, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Shen, Vincent, 2003, “Daoism (Taoism): Classical (Dao Jia, Tao Chia)”, in Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Antonio S. Cua, first edition, New York and London: Routledge.
Shen, Vincent, 1992, “Lao Tzu’s Metaphysics and His Critique of Confucian Ethics” in Morality, Metaphysics and Chinese Culture, edited by Vincent Shen and Tran Van Doan, first edition, Washington D.C.: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.
Shen, Vincent, 2003, “Laozi (Lao Tzu)”, in Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Antonio S. Cua, first edition, New York and London: Routledge.
Stambaugh, Joan, 1990, “Heidegger, Taoism, and the Question of Metaphysics”, in Heidegger and Asian Thought, edited by Graham Parkes, second edition, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Sylvan, Richard, 2007, “Anarchism” in A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, edited by Robert E. Goodin, Philip Pettit and Thomas Pogge, second edition, Oxford: Blackwell.
Wang, Qingjia, 1997, “On Laozi’s Concept of Ziran”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 24, Issue 3, pp. 291-321.
三、網路資料
Chan, Alan, “Laozi”, Jun 27, 2012, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/laozi/. (browsed in 2013/03/12)
Critchley, Peter, 2003, Rousseau on the Origin and Foundation of the Inequality of Mankind. [e-book], URL = http://www.academia.edu/784952/Rousseau_on_the_Origin_and_Foundation_of_the_Inequality_of_Mankind. (browsed in 2013/7/26)
Delaney, James J., Oct 21, 2005, “Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)”, in James Fieser and Bradley Dowden (ed.), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, URL = http://www.iep.utm.edu/rousseau/. (browsed in 2013/7/26)
Holcombe, John C., “Metaphor: Theories”, 2013, URL = http://www.textetc.com/theory/metaphor.html. (browsed in 2013/03/12)
Littlejohn, Ronnie, “Comparative Philosophy”, July 23, 2005, in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by James Fieser and Bradley Dowden, URL = http://www.iep.utm.edu/comparat/. (browsed in 2013/03/12)
Wong, David, Oct 1, 2009, “Comparative Philosophy: Chinese and Western”, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Stanford University Website, URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/ comparphil-chiwes/. (browsed in 2013/03/12)
指導教授 蕭振邦(Shiau Jenn-Bang) 審核日期 2013-7-29
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明