1970年代，隨著越戰終結，以及美國與中國兩國關係”正常化”，冷戰進入另一個發展階段。東歐與東亞這兩個區域，逐步退出”衝突熱區”的名單，而中東、非洲與中南半島順勢地成為”代理人戰爭”或”離岸作戰”的熱門區塊。時至1980年，美國與蘇聯再次發起了新一波對峙與衝突的戲碼，所謂的”星際大戰”瞬時間推高了發動大規模戰爭的機率，同時也讓冷戰極有可能再次轉變為”熱戰”，並且以無與倫比的姿態，毀滅全世界。 只是，歷史有時是無法預測，是深具荒謬色彩的，因為當時間再往後推移數年，到了1990年前後，世界局勢有了巨大改變：先是東歐共產主義的政權先後垮台，之後便是蘇聯的崩解。
此時起，西方民主政營似乎在漫長的對峙與衝突之後，獲得最終勝利。這一切的一切好像說明了，歷史終結了，”最後一人”也成了人類共同處境的簡單縮影。更簡單的說，1914年之後，除了歐洲，世界各地皆先後陷入漫長、血腥的戰爭衝突之中。從兩次大戰，到之後的冷戰，”短暫的二十世紀”（1914-1989年），不僅呈現?一幅與”漫長十九世紀”完全相反的歷史景象（百年和平vs.百年戰爭），同時也凸顯出”現代文明”是何等脆弱且飽受磨難。也因此，1990年前後的巨變，既是為這場漫長且曲折的戰事劃下休止符，也是為現代文明開啟了另一個樂觀的視野。新的視野中，民主體制與資本主義的市場制度正是現代文明最終的依歸。
不過，歷史再次給人們開了一次玩笑，開了一個頗具”戲仿”效果的玩笑。從”蘇東波巨變”之後，新一波戰爭與對峙再次浮現於世界各地，一些原本深藏、隱匿、壓抑於冷戰架構底下的歷史脈絡，隨著舊有是政治/經濟框架的解體，逐步走向台前，最終成為國際合作的基本阻礙/格局。於是，”文明衝突”一說，有效且形象地說明了後冷戰格局的國際局勢。換個角度說，民主體制與資本主義的市場制度不僅不是現代文明最終的依歸，同時也忽略了後冷戰格局中最為關鍵的因素：文明及其衝突。
不同文明之間，既是衝突的，也充斥著諸多的不滿與不適。當我們深究這些衝突、不滿與不適的歷史根源時，會赫然發現：二次世界大戰之後，冷戰確實發生，但將冷戰放置於更大的歷史脈絡，放置在更廣闊的歷史格局之中，所謂的冷戰及其所相應的政治意識型態，充其量只是漫長歷史中的某個區塊；過份強調冷戰與其歷史效果，常忽略了：1800年之後，諸文明之間的衝突、對抗和合作才是現代世界體系的真正基調。更具體的說，從”文明”或”文化”等概念成為世界通行的語彙，播散翻譯至各個語言之時起，文明衝突與現代世界之間便存在著某種根深蒂固但又彼此衝突的歷史關係。因此，冷戰不過是由美國或蘇聯的角度出發，進而想像出的另一種”文明衝突”（民主對抗共產，自由對抗平等）。
文明與文化概念乃源於歐洲，但對比起1700年與1900年，我們可發現，對身處在1700年歐洲的人們，無論是一般人或知識人，文明一詞乃是前所未聞的，因為今日我們所熟悉的文明或文化概念，在當時尚未被創造出來。再者，對當時的歐洲人，劃分人類發展的諸種階段，以及不同區域之中人類活動的不同”規律”，宗教與其系譜或許才是關鍵之處。換言之，宗教衝突才是國際政治與國際戰爭的重要因素。此外，與1900年不同，身處在1700年歐洲的人們，即使知曉歐洲帝國已征服殖民世界上眾多區域，卻不見得能肯定地回答出來以下問題：歐洲基督教文明是否真的優於其他宗教文明？ 某種劣勢感依舊深藏在歐洲人的內心之中（尤其是長期身處在伊斯蘭文明的影響與侵略陰影下）。然而，時至1900年，上述歷史情結有了明顯不同的樣貌：此刻起，歐洲人已然征服或介入世界各個區域的運作。歐洲人不但串聯起原本不太相連的國際貿易、政治治理的網絡，同時他們的國際視野與歷史想像也成為全世界中主導且唯一的尺度。更重要的，文明與文化概念取代宗教，成為描繪人類處境，人類發展階段，人類未來的基本用語。由此，文明衝突與現代世界兩者之間有了異於以往的關連方式。
參照於上述，本課程嘗試藉由回顧文明與文化概念的歷史源起，並且簡介19世紀中文明與文化概念如何成為現代世界格局的基本語彙，進而說明我們熟知的現代世界及其文明衝突是如何緩步形成的。
就實際課程安排，整學期的課程將分成兩個部分：第一部分簡介1990年代之後與文明衝突有關的文獻與討論，主要讀本將包含Fukuyama、Huntington等人的作品，而討論焦點則鎖定在：後冷戰格局中，文明衝突是如何形塑世界體制的運作。第二部分將反過來檢視文明/文化概念的歷史源起，以及這兩個概念在19世紀至二十世紀上半葉所歷經的諸多變革。通過Marx、Spengler、Freud等人所書寫的作品，我們嘗試將文明衝突放置於更大的視野，由此重新理解文明/文化概念與現代世界兩者之間究竟有著何種緊密且不甚同調的歷史關係。In the 1970s, with the end of the Vietnam War and the "normalization" of relations between the United States and China, the Cold War entered another stage of development. Eastern Europe and East Asia are gradually withdrawing from the list of "conflict hot spots", while the Middle East, Africa and Indochina have become popular areas for "proxy wars" or "offshore operations." By 1980, the United States and the Soviet Union once again launched a new wave of confrontation and conflict. The so-called "Interstellar War" instantly increased the probability of launching a large-scale war, and also made it very likely that the Cold War would once again turn into a "hot war." ”, and destroyed the whole world with an unparalleled gesture. However, history is sometimes unpredictable and full of absurdity, because when time passed a few years later, around 1990, the world situation had changed dramatically: first, the communist regimes in Eastern Europe collapsed one after another, and then The collapse of the Soviet Union.
From this moment on, the Western democratic political camp seemed to have won the final victory after a long period of confrontation and conflict. All of this seems to indicate that history has ended, and the "last man" has become a simple epitome of the common situation of mankind. To put it more simply, after 1914, except for Europe, all parts of the world fell into long and bloody war conflicts. From the two wars to the subsequent Cold War, the "short twentieth century" (1914-1989) not only presented a historical scene completely opposite to the "long nineteenth century" (one hundred years of peace vs. one hundred years of war), At the same time, it also highlights how fragile and suffering "modern civilization" is. Therefore, the great changes around 1990 not only put an end to this long and tortuous war, but also opened up another optimistic vision for modern civilization. In the new perspective, the democratic system and the capitalist market system are the ultimate destination of modern civilization.
However, history once again made a joke to people, a joke with quite a "parody" effect. After the "Soviet-Dongbo Great Change", a new wave of wars and confrontations resurfaced around the world. Some historical contexts that were originally hidden, hidden, and suppressed under the Cold War structure gradually moved towards Taiwan as the old political/economic framework disintegrated. Before, it eventually became the basic obstacle/pattern of international cooperation. Therefore, the theory of "clash of civilizations" effectively and vividly explains the international situation in the post-Cold War pattern. To put it another way, the democratic system and the capitalist market system are not only not the ultimate destination of modern civilization, but also ignore the most critical factor in the post-Cold War landscape: civilizations and their conflicts.
Different civilizations are not only in conflict, but also full of dissatisfaction and discomfort. When we delve into the historical roots of these conflicts, dissatisfaction and discomfort, we will suddenly find that: after World War II, the Cold War did occur, but placing the Cold War in a larger historical context and a broader historical pattern, the so-called The Cold War and its corresponding political ideology are, at best, just a certain segment in a long history; over-emphasis on the Cold War and its historical effects often overlooks the fact that after 1800, conflicts, confrontations, and cooperation among civilizations is the true tenor of the modern world system. More specifically, from the time when concepts such as "civilization" or "culture" became common vocabulary around the world and were spread and translated into various languages, there has been some deep-rooted but conflicting history between the clash of civilizations and the modern world. relation. Therefore, the Cold War was just another "clash of civilizations" imagined from the perspective of the United States or the Soviet Union (democracy versus communism, freedom versus equality).
The concepts of civilization and culture originated in Europe, but comparing 1700 and 1900, we can find that for people in Europe in 1700, whether ordinary people or intellectuals, the word civilization was unheard of. Because the concept of civilization or culture that we are familiar with today had not yet been created at that time. Furthermore, for Europeans at that time, religion and its genealogy may be the key to dividing the various stages of human development and the different "laws" of human activities in different regions. In other words, religious conflicts are an important factor in international politics and international wars. In addition, unlike 1900, people in Europe in 1700, even though they knew that European empires had conquered and colonized many areas of the world, could not necessarily answer the following question with certainty: Is European Christian civilization really superior to other religious civilizations? ? A certain sense of inferiority still remains deep in the hearts of Europeans (especially those who have been under the influence and invasion of Islamic civilization for a long time). However, by 1900, the above historical complex had a significantly different look: from this moment on, Europeans had conquered or intervened in the operations of various regions of the world. Europeans have not only connected the originally disconnected networks of international trade and political governance, but their international vision and historical imagination have also become the dominant and only yardstick in the world. More importantly, the concepts of civilization and culture have replaced religion and become the basic terms for describing the human condition, the stages of human development, and the future of mankind. As a result, the conflict of civilizations and the modern world are related in a different way than before.
With reference to the above, this course attempts to review the historical origins of the concepts of civilization and culture, and introduce how the concepts of civilization and culture became the basic vocabulary of the modern world in the 19th century, and then explain how the modern world and the conflict of civilizations we know are Formed slowly.
As for the actual course arrangement, the whole semester course will be divided into two parts: The first part introduces the literature and discussions related to the conflict of civilizations after the 1990s. The main readings will include the works of Fukuyama, Huntington and others, and the focus of the discussion will be on: In the Cold War, how did the conflict of civilizations shape the operation of the world system? The second part will in turn examine the historical origins of the concepts of civilization/culture, as well as the many changes these two concepts experienced from the 19th century to the first half of the twentieth century. Through the works written by Marx, Spengler, Freud and others, we try to place the conflict of civilizations in a larger perspective, thereby re-understanding the close and inconsistent relationship between the concept of civilization/culture and the modern world. historical relationship.
其他參考書目：
Adib-Moghaddam, Arshin. (2011). A Metahistory of the Clash of Civilisations: Us and Them Beyond Orientalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Adler, Eric. (2016). Classics, the Culture Wars, and Beyond. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Ahmed, Leila. (2011). A Quiet Revolution: The Veil's Resurgence, from the Middle East to America. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ahmed, Nafeez Mosaddeq. (2010). A User's Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save it London: Pluto Press.
Bayly, C. A. (2004). The Birth of the Modern World, 1780-1914: Global Connections and Comparisons. Oxford: Blackwell.
Benveniste, Emile. (1973). ‘Civilization: A Contribution to the History of the Word.’ in Problems in General Linguistics, pp.329-39. Coral Gables: University of Miami Press.
Bowden, Brett. (2009). The Empire of Civilization: The Evolution of an Imperial Idea. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Buzan, Barry., and George Lawson. (2015). The Global Transformation: History, Modernity and the Making of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chakrabarty, Dipesh. (2000). Provincializing Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Davies, Norman. (1998). Europe: A History. New York: Harper Perennial.
Duchesne, Ricardo. (2011). The Uniqueness of Western Civilization. Leiden: Brill.
Febvre, Lucien. (1973). 'Civilization: Evolution of a Word and a Group of Ideas', in A New Kind of History: from the writings of Febvre, ed. P. Burke, trans. K. Folca, pp. 219-257. London: Routledge.
Fernandez-Armesto, Felipe. (2006). The World: A Brief History. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gong, Gerrit W. (1984). The Standard of Civilization: in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hartman, Andrew. (2015). A War for the Soul of America: A History of the Culture Wars. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hegeman, Susan. (1999). Patterns for America: Modernism and the Concept of Culture. Princeton: Princeton
Other bibliographies:
Adib-Moghaddam, Arshin. (2011). A Metahistory of the Clash of Civilizations: Us and Them Beyond Orientalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Adler, Eric. (2016). Classics, the Culture Wars, and Beyond. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Ahmed, Leila. (2011). A Quiet Revolution: The Veil's Resurgence, from the Middle East to America. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ahmed, Nafeez Mosaddeq. (2010). A User's Guide to the Crisis of Civilization: And How to Save it London: Pluto Press.
Bayly, C. A. (2004). The Birth of the Modern World, 1780-1914: Global Connections and Comparisons. Oxford: Blackwell.
Benveniste, Emile. (1973). ‘Civilization: A Contribution to the History of the Word.’ in Problems in General Linguistics, pp.329-39. Coral Gables: University of Miami Press.
Bowden, Brett. (2009). The Empire of Civilization: The Evolution of an Imperial Idea. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Buzan, Barry., and George Lawson. (2015). The Global Transformation: History, Modernity and the Making of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chakrabarty, Dipesh. (2000). Provincializing Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Davies, Norman. (1998). Europe: A History. New York: Harper Perennial.
Duchesne, Ricardo. (2011). The Uniqueness of Western Civilization. Leiden: Brill.
Febvre, Lucien. (1973). 'Civilization: Evolution of a Word and a Group of Ideas', in A New Kind of History: from the writings of Febvre, ed. P. Burke, trans. K. Folca, pp. 219 -257. London: Routledge.
Fernandez-Armesto, Felipe. (2006). The World: A Brief History. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gong, Gerrit W. (1984). The Standard of Civilization: in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hartman, Andrew. (2015). A War for the Soul of America: A History of the Culture Wars. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hegeman, Susan. (1999). Patterns for America: Modernism and the Concept of Culture. Princeton: Princeton
| 評分項目 Grading Method | 配分比例 Grading percentage | 說明 Description |
|---|---|---|
| 課程參與課程參與 course participation |
20 | 出席與上課之討論情況，將視為評分之指標。 |
| 小組報告小組報告 group report |
20 | 針對課程指定讀本，以討論小組為單位，進行文本導讀，原則上，報告時間為20分鐘左右。每組原則上由四位至五位課程參與者組成，於第一次上課時，進行分組。 |
| 個人書面報告個人書面報告 personal written report |
60 | 修課之學生至少繳交四次的critical memo，每份critical memo以2500字為限，分數占比為學期總成績的15%，此項評分以個人為單位。 |
