文化，如宗教或道德，長久以來常被視為不具有特定體系或形構的社會現象。正因如此，於現代社會中，文化現象乃與階級、地位、經濟，甚至社會組織，有著無可區隔、不易說明的關係。某一種經濟或社會決定論的說法，也於是成了過往研究中不能說的秘密。

然而，時至1980年代之後，特殊的時代、歷史變革使得舊有的社會體制面臨瓦解，某種根深蒂固的分析框架也從而經歷無法繼續的困境。階級、地位與經濟資本等概念，逐漸地消失於文化分析的研究之中。於此，文化似乎有了一個重獲新生的可能。正視文化現象，進入文化現象本身，成為相關研究者的重要呼求。

只是，這種新生的契機，卻揭露出兩個以往常為人們忽視的問題： 一是，文化概念即使有漫長的歷史根源，其歷經的社會變革也相當繁瑣，但今日所我們經常使用、論述的文化概念，卻可能不如想像的漫長；其所涉入的社會、歷史背景雖屬繁瑣、複雜，但是相關的脈絡卻可能不依循著原有假定的理路。可以說，應對俗民的文化形式以及界定俗民的文化形式，才是現代社會中文化問題的真正起源（畢竟，所謂的俗民，在大多數的歷史時段中，是與文化概念無甚關係的）。於是，順應著俗民文化的轉變以及大眾化的文化實作，文化的研究乃出現於現代學院。 其次，於漫長的西方歷史之中（甚至非西方的歷史），權力、金錢與文化三者一直都依著甚為緊密的方式，進行扣連。文化本身的理性化與體系化，更是早於權力與金錢等社會現象。 所以，當我們嘗試重新檢視文化現象所具有的特殊邏輯，”後於階級”與”後於階層”的分析方式似乎無法真確地引導著我們窺見文化的秘密。如何進行文化的研究，或許是一個需要認真思考的問題。

除卻上述兩個常為人們忽視的問題，當我們更加仔細考察文化現象所歷經的歷史、社會變革之時，則可發現，文化概念或文化現象之於人類本能之慾望/基本處境，似乎常呈現出一種必然且辯證之關係（無論這種必然且辯證之關係，是以規範或昇華的過程，定位之）。 也就是說，引導人們渡過生死愛惡欲所引致的總總苦痛與愉悅經驗，可能是文化現象的真正精神所在。因此，文化的作用/效果總是被歸類成具有教化、社會化、精緻化的社會活動。只是，上述這種看法是否已過度地簡化、窄化文化現象所能呈現的複雜度與鬥爭屬性？

著眼於上述，本課程依著三個主題/問題意識，簡介文化概念與現代社會之間的關係：一、於應對通俗文化的歷史轉變過程之中，文化現象如何被概念化？ 二、如果文化現象具有相對自主且特殊之運作邏輯，那麼何謂文化現象所相應的承載者、技藝與場域究竟指涉何物。 三、當日常生活成為文化現象所立基的社會場景，日常生活之中的瑣碎事物如何揭露出文化操作、文化競爭的若干跡証？

於實際課程規劃上，本課程將順著四個部分，同時依循著不同時代/時段，進行安排：19世紀的文化傳統，以及文化爭議的另一個歷史脈絡； 兩次大戰過程之中的文化轉折與大眾文化的爭議； 二戰之後，文化作為一個可受爭議的對象； 1980年代之後，文化研究歷經的興與衰，以及文化的社會研究是如何興起於學院論述之中。

Culture, such as religion or morality, has long been regarded as a social phenomenon without a specific system or structure. Because of this, in modern society, cultural phenomena have an indistinguishable and difficult-to-explain relationship with class, status, economy, and even social organization. A certain kind of economic or social determinism has become a secret that cannot be revealed in past research.

However, after the 1980s, special times and historical changes caused the old social system to collapse, and a certain deep-rooted analytical framework experienced an unsustainable dilemma. Concepts such as class, status and economic capital have gradually disappeared from the study of cultural analysis. Here, culture seems to have a possibility of rebirth. Facing cultural phenomena squarely and entering into the cultural phenomena themselves has become an important call for relevant researchers.

However, this new opportunity has revealed two issues that have been ignored by people in the past: First, even if the cultural concept has a long historical origin, the social changes it has gone through are quite complicated. However, the cultural concept we often use and discuss today may not be as long as imagined; although the social and historical background it involves is complicated and complicated, the relevant context may not follow the original assumptions. It can be said that dealing with the cultural forms of the common people and defining the cultural forms of the common people are the real origins of cultural problems in modern society (after all, the so-called common people, in most historical periods, have little to do with the concept of culture). Therefore, in line with the changes in folk culture and popular cultural practices, the study of culture appeared in modern academies. Secondly, throughout the long history of the West (and even non-Western history), power, money and culture have always been closely linked. The rationalization and systematization of culture itself predates social phenomena such as power and money. Therefore, when we try to re-examine the special logic of cultural phenomena, the analysis methods of "post-class" and "post-class" seem to be unable to truly guide us to glimpse the secrets of culture. How to conduct cultural research may be a question that requires serious consideration.

In addition to the above two issues that are often ignored by people, when we more carefully examine the historical and social changes that cultural phenomena have gone through, we can find that cultural concepts or cultural phenomena often seem to have an inevitable and dialectical relationship with human instinctive desires/basic situations (regardless of whether this inevitable and dialectical relationship is positioned through the process of standardization or sublimation). In other words, guiding people through the total pain and pleasure experience caused by life and death, love, evil, and desire may be the true spirit of cultural phenomena. Therefore, the role/effect of culture is always classified as social activities with education, socialization and refinement. However, does the above view oversimplify and narrow the complexity and struggle attributes that cultural phenomena can present?

Focusing on the above, this course introduces the relationship between cultural concepts and modern society based on three themes/problems: 1. How are cultural phenomena conceptualized in response to the historical transformation of popular culture? 2. If cultural phenomena have relatively independent and special operating logic, then what exactly does the corresponding carrier, technique and field of cultural phenomena refer to? 3. When daily life becomes the social scene on which cultural phenomena are based, how do the trivial things in daily life reveal some evidence of cultural manipulation and cultural competition?

In terms of actual course planning, this course will be organized into four parts, following different eras/time periods: the cultural tradition of the 19th century and another historical context of cultural controversy; the cultural transition and the controversy of popular culture during the two wars; after World War II, culture as a controversial object; after the 1980s, the rise and fall of cultural studies, and how the social study of culture emerged in academic discourse.

通識課程不同於專業課程，實乃著重引導學生主動關懷、探索與實踐人類的終極價值與智慧；同時通識課程所提供的知識，不是專業課程的淺薄化，而是具有厚實感的基礎知識。本校根據創校傳統、校訓與辦學理念訂定通識教育定四大基本素養：求真素養、篤信素養、力行素養與宏通素養，以具體落實本校通識教育之理想。希望本校學生能發揮自主學習精神，在通識課程老師的引導下，逐漸培養其通識教育基本素養，並期待能終身學習。各種基本素養並訂有具體的學習成效指標，以做教學與學習成效之自我檢證的具體指標，分述如下：求真素養（自然領域）：1.學習自然科學的方法或哲學以探索物理與生命世界的微妙，2.發揮就事論事的精神，3.能參與科學議題相關的公共事務。篤信素養（人文領域）：1.學習人文精神以探索內在自我與領會人類文明的深層價值，2.發展自律精神，3.能運用理性進行道德推理。力行素養（社會領域）：1.運用社會科學的方法或哲學以激發學生的傾聽與溝通能力，2.承認與尊重多元差，3.實踐民主審議的精神。宏通素養（跨領域）：1.追求人類的整體價值，2.融通求真、篤信、力行等素養於個人生命之中。各領域的課程對於學習成效指標可以跨選，不必拘泥。

General courses are different from professional courses. They actually focus on guiding students to actively care for, explore and practice the ultimate value and wisdom of mankind. At the same time, the knowledge provided by general courses is not the superficiality of professional courses, but basic knowledge with a solid sense. Based on the school’s founding tradition, school motto and school philosophy, the school has formulated four basic qualities for general education: truth-seeking quality, belief quality, practical quality and general quality, in order to concretely implement the school’s ideals of general education. We hope that our students can develop their independent learning spirit and gradually develop their basic literacy in general education under the guidance of general education teachers, and look forward to lifelong learning. Various basic competencies have specific learning effectiveness indicators for self-examination of teaching and learning effectiveness, which are described as follows: Truth-seeking literacy (natural field): 1. Learn the methods or philosophy of natural science to explore the subtleties of the physical and life world, 2. Use the spirit of discussing things as they are, 3. Be able to participate in public affairs related to scientific issues. Belief literacy (humanities field): 1. Learn the humanistic spirit to explore the inner self and understand the deep value of human civilization, 2. Develop a spirit of self-discipline, 3. Be able to use reason for moral reasoning. Practical literacy (social field): 1. Use social science methods or philosophy to stimulate students' listening and communication skills, 2. Recognize and respect diversity, 3. Practice the spirit of democratic deliberation. Hongtong literacy (cross-field): 1. Pursue the overall value of human beings, 2. Integrate qualities such as truth-seeking, faith, and practice into personal life. Courses in various fields can choose from different learning outcome indicators, so there is no need to be rigid.

Adorno, Theodor. and Max Horkheimer. (1944/2006). 啟蒙辯證法. 上海：上海人民出版社。
Arnold, Matthew. (1867/2002). 文化與無政府狀態. 韓敏中譯. 北京：三聯書店。
Bauman, Z. (2001). 立法者與闡釋者. 上海：上海人民出版社。
Benjamin, Walter. (1936/2001). 機械複製時代的藝術作品（第一稿）. 北京: 中國城市出版社。
Bourdieu, Pierre. (2001). 藝術的法則——文學場的生成和結構.中央編譯出版社。
Durkheim, Emile. and Marcel Mauss (1903/2005). 原始分類. 上海：上海人民出版社。
Elias, Norbert. (2008). 臨終者的孤寂. 台北：群學出版社。
Eliot, T. S.(1994). 艾略特文學論文集. 南昌: 百花洲文藝出版社。
Freud, Sigmund. (1929/2003). 一種幻想的未來及文明及其不滿. 河北: 河北教育出版社。
Gramsci (1929-1935). 獄中雜記. 北京: 人民出版社。
Hebdige, Dick. (1979/2009). 亞文化:風格的意義. 北京: 北京大學出版社。
Hell, Victor. (1988). 文化概念. 康新文, 曉文 譯. 上海：上海人民出版社。
Lamont, Michele and Laurent Thevenot.（ed.）(2005). 比較文化社會學的再思考. 北京: 中華書局。
Lukacs (1923/1992). 歷史與階級意識. 河北: 商務出版社。
Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. (1845). 德意志意識型態，馬克思恩格斯全集 第3卷. 北京: 人民出版社。
Rancière, Jacques. (1989). The Nights of Labor: The Workers’ Dream in Nineteenth-Century France, Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press。
Thompson, E. P. (2002). 共有的習慣. 上海：上海人民出版社。
Tylor, Edward Burnett.（1871/2005）. 原始文化. 桂林：廣西師範大學。
Williams, Raymond. (1958/1991). 文化與社會, 1780-1950. 北京：北京大學出版社。

Adorno, Theodor. and Max Horkheimer. (1944/2006). Dialectics of Enlightenment. Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House.
Arnold, Matthew. (1867/2002). Culture and Anarchy. Translated by Han Min. Beijing: Sanlian Bookstore.
Bauman, Z. (2001). Legislator and Interpreter. Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House.
Benjamin, Walter. (1936/2001). Works of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (First Draft). Beijing: China City Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (2001). The laws of art - the generation and structure of the literary field. Central Compilation and Compilation Press.
Durkheim, Emile. and Marcel Mauss (1903/2005). Original classification. Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House.
Elias, Norbert. (2008). The loneliness of the dying. Taipei: Qunxue Publishing House.
Eliot, T. S. (1994). Eliot's Literary Essays. Nanchang: Baihuazhou Literature and Art Publishing House.
Freud, Sigmund. (1929/2003). An Imaginary Future and Civilization and its Discontents. Hebei: Hebei Education Press.
Gramsci (1929-1935). Prison Notes. Beijing: People's Publishing House.
Hebdige, Dick. (1979/2009). Subculture: The Meaning of Style. Beijing: Peking University Press.
Hell, Victor. (1988). The Concept of Culture. Translated by Kang Xinwen, Xiaowen. Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House.
Lamont, Michele and Laurent Thevenot. (ed.) (2005). Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
Lukacs (1923/1992). History and Class Consciousness. Hebei: Business Press.
Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. (1845). German Ideology, The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 3. Beijing: People's Publishing House.
Rancière, Jacques. (1989). The Nights of Labor: The Workers’ Dream in Nineteenth-Century France, Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Thompson, E. P. (2002). Shared Habits. Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House.
Tylor, Edward Burnett. (1871/2005). Primitive Culture. Guilin: Guangxi Normal University.
Williams, Raymond. (1958/1991). Culture and Society, 1780-1950. Beijing: Peking University Press.