1 |
七○年代中共與美國外交關係之研究崔春欽, Cui, Chun-Qin Unknown Date (has links)
第一章 導言。第一節外交政策的本質,第二節中共外交政策的意義和本質,第三節
中共外交政策的目的。
第二章 中共世界戰略構想之演變。第一節「中間地帶論」的外交政策。第二節「三
個世界論」的外交政策。
第三章 中共與美國外交關係演變的幾個階段。第一節中共政權成立至韓戰爆發前,
第二節韓戰後中共與美國關係的膠 狀態,第三節台海危機後至尼克森防問中國大陸
。
第四章 七○年代中共與美國關係之演變,第一節尼克森政府時代,第二節福特政府
時代,第三節卡特政府時代,第四節美國對中國的政策的特質。
第五章 結論。第一節美國、中共、日本的三國關係,第二節美國與中共雙邊關係。
|
2 |
公開的秘密—從網路日記看網路上的公開與私密 / Open Secret-The Publicness and the Privateness of the Online Diary廖思逸 Unknown Date (has links)
在大多數人的日記經驗中,藏匿、上鎖、被偷窺後的憤怒總是如影隨形,因為所有說不出與不能說的秘密,都被寄情於日記之中。然而隨著網路普及,越來越多的基本生活需求可藉由網路滿足後,傳統的紙本日記也開始轉以網路作為記載與儲存的媒介,成了任何人都可公開遊賞的園地。 / 本文基於研究者本身在網路日記社群三年來的親身書寫參與經驗,以「愛情國小」作為主要研究場域,除了以日記作為文本分析的對象外,並深入訪談重度使用者以及退用者,以瞭解使用者如何處理既公開又私密的網路日記書寫。本文自日記在東西方的歷史發展出發,先行定位私密在日記中扮演的角色,再輔以從社會心理學層面對秘密本質的探討,來重新探討公開與私密的問題。最後以Goffman分析日常生活之人際互動的戲劇理論為本,佐以社會學中的陌生人理論,解析人們如何在公開的網路日記裡進行表演,其間的變與不變。 / 顛覆了傳統紙本日記之私密形式的公開網路日記,之所以能為日記書寫者接受或喜愛,無非是它既能滿足日記書寫的基本需求,同時又能在日記書寫之餘創造與他人社交互動的樂趣。雖然紙本日記「自我忠實紀錄」之要素,必須仰賴將他人隔離的秘密形式才得以達成,但日記書寫者仍是企圖向日記中想像的對象揭露公開,解決秘密無處可訴的焦慮。而網路日記不僅隔離了現實生活中的親友熟人,更進一步為日記書寫者帶來了能提供積極聆聽,並能給予回應互動的具體觀眾。這些網路上似近實遠、似遠實近的陌生人,讓網路日記書寫者願意公開與之分享私密自我,並且無須擔憂網路日記紀錄的後台面向會對現實生活之前台演出造成破壞。換言之,網路日記既有公開面對觀眾、在意觀眾反應的前台特性,亦有自現實生活前台角色解放、呈現私密自我的後台性質,實則為一結合了公開與私密、前台與後台之「私密自我的展演」的中間地帶。因此,網路日記書寫者只能透過訊息管道的操弄與分寸拿捏,隨著與不同觀眾間親疏遠近的關係變化,揭露不同層面或程度的私密,且更進一步控制與不同觀眾間的心理距離。 / Diaries, on which personal matters are inscribed, are defined as a literary form that is written for oneself and therefore are kept privately, some even locked up, to avoid prying. However, the privateness, the distinguishing characteristic of diaries, has abated since the prevalent internet has become one of the media of storing content of diaries. The study is to investigate how diary writers coping with the conflict between the privateness and publicness in online diaries. / This study is based on the personal online diary writing experience of the author for three years in "Love School" ( http://love.youthwant.com.tw), the field of this study. The interviews with nine persons, including heavy users and dropouts that had ever been indulgent in Love School, are the main qualitative analysis material with some online diaries for textual analysis. / Beginning from exploring the changes in the nature of diaries both in eastern and western history, the study proceeds with probing to the characteristic of secrecy to comprehend that diaries inherently are both public and private. Moreover, Goffman's theory of human interaction in daily life and Simmel's of strangers offer steppingstones to detail the features—interacting and sharing intimacy with others unknown—of writing diaries on public internet. / Briefly speaking, the prevailing phenomenon of online diaries reveals that making diaries public can satisfy the needs of recording private life and of social contact simultaneously. Despite that traditional diary is kept away from anyone to ensure frankness, all the diary writers indeed still reveal themselves in it to some object(s), real or imaginary. Online diaries not only can exclude, if writers want, people who know them in person, but also bring in the unlimited audience with real feedback. Since the audience is composed of strangers, somehow far enough not to reach online diary writer's everyday life but virtually close to see his/her innermost, the online diary writer doesn't have to be anxious about the destruction of frontstage performances in everyday life, caused by backstage behaviors in diary being revealed. In other words, online diary is a frontstage as well as a backstage, that is, a middle region, where the division of the public and private is blurred. In online diaries, diary writers are able to disclose private selves hidden from frontstage role playing while audience¹s gaze and applause, absent in backstage, is all around. To reconcile the conflict between publicness and privateness, online diary writers master in manipulating information accesses and discretion. Therefore, they can disclose different aspects and degrees of privacy to various audiences according to various relationships, and can be the dominators subsequently to control psychological distances between them.
|
Page generated in 0.0125 seconds