不同於一般學術文獻在研究中共的Soft Power時，多習於從Nye的敘事體系出發，本論文則是直接從文本分析進入中共的系絡，探究問題之所在。 本論文所欲探討的問題意識包括：Nye 的Soft Power究竟是放諸四海皆準的真理，抑或是鑲嵌於某一特定歷史系絡中的特殊存在？若為後者，則屬於此一系絡之問題意識與政策建議為何？其是否同樣適用於其他行動者身上呢？其次，作為Soft Power的主要引介者，中共知識份子究竟係以何種方式承接此一概念？是全盤接收之，抑或是採批判方式引入Nye的觀點？倘若為後者，則其批判的部分為何？改造的部分又為何？進一步言，中共知識份子所建構的「軟實力」，究竟與Soft Power有何不同？第三，就官方的角度來看，中共領導人是如何看待「軟實力」？特別是「軟實力」對其而言應定位在何處？其所指涉的意涵又為何？而此是否與學術界存在著認知上的差異？第四，在中共的系絡中，其對「軟實力」一詞係以何種傳統承接之，甚者，其又是以何種未來戰略想定對此加以定位？第五，對中共而言，「軟實力」的具體內涵為何？有哪些具體政策或措施有助於提升「軟實力」？又，這些政策或措施的成效應如何衡量？ 本論文不在證明或否證某個理論或論述，亦非志在建構一個放諸四海皆準的社會科學理論；甚者，作為一個開放的文本，本論文更非旨在宣示另一套絕對的「客觀」或「真理」。透過對「軟實力」之「建構的建構」，本論文期望呈現的是「語言／文字／符號」表象下的權力關係網絡，以及這些「能指」(signifying)對中共自我建構的意義。 / A way of seeing is a way of not seeing. Those who study Chinese soft power usually accept the legitimate of the narrative system of Joseph Nye's soft power theory. But the Chinese do not tranlate it that way. China has its own distinctive history, context, political economy system, and national grand strategy. So, it is dangerous and harmful to view the young rising global power as the same as the current dominant global power---USA. Obviously, China is marching on a very path to construct its soft power compared to the U.S.. Through the analysis of meta-narrative, the author find many interesting espects that cannot be seen via Nye's theory. These espects are in-ward dimension, highly connected with propagada and united front, mainly focus on Chinese characteristic culture . The CCP take the Chinese culure as its outside appearance and socialism value system as its guiding core. This dissertation is not intended to construct a grand theory or something. All it want to do is to disclose the hidden dimension of the Chinese characteristic soft power.