What are the representational differences between situations that do and do not map well onto previous experiences? This research offers some answers to this question by having participants compare two narratives that were either reality or fantasy-based. Fantasy-based narratives, with their deviations from reality, were considered similar to situations that do not map well onto previous experience. The concept of systematicity, where high-order relations constrain low-order relations was used to describe such situations (Bowdle & Gentner, 1997). Compared to a reality-based narrative, extra processing is required to maintain a systematic representation of a fantasy-based narrative. One can reduce the amount of processing needed by grounding that fantasy-based narrative in a reality-based or another fantasy-based narrative. Comparative judgments were used to measure processing differences. In three studies, participants read two narratives and then performed a series of comparative judgments derived from retrospective duration judgment (Block, 1992), event-structure perception (Zacks & Tversky, 2001), and structure-mapping theory (Gentner, 1983) research. For example, one of the comparative judgments adopted from structure-mapping theory was the rating of directional similarity, or the similarity rating of the second-read narrative relative to the first-read narrative. Directional similarity was proposed to increase as the amount of processing associated with maintaining a systematic representation of the first and second-read narrative decreased. For Studies 1A-E, the directional similarity was higher for the RealityFirst condition (reality read first) than the FantasyFirst condition (fantasy read first). These results are interpreted as indicated that the increase in directional similarity for the RealityFirst conditions was due to structure lending from the first-read reality-based narrative and that the decrease in directional similarity for the FantasyFirst conditions was due to representational disruption from the first-read fantasy-based narrative. Results also indicated that comparing two reality-based narratives (Studies 2A-B) was similar to comparing two fantasy-based narratives (Studies 3A-B) for the directional similarity and directional duration judgments, but differed for the listing of commonalities and differences and the segmentation of the narrative event structure. According to the systematicity principle (Gentner, 1989), people prefer mappings between two representations that form coherent and highly interconnected structures. The results from Studies 1A-E demonstrate a clear directional preference for the RealityFirst conditions. The results, therefore, indicate that it was more difficult to utilize the inherent structure of the narratives for the FantasyFirst conditions then the RealityFirst conditions. Comparing the results across the final set of studies, the increase in segmentation and increase in word count for the commonalities and differences were clear indications that participants still had difficulties in utilizing the structure of the narratives when both narratives being compared were fantasy-based (Studies 3A-B). In operationalizing systematicity with fantasy and reality-based narratives, I have been able to extend our understanding of how structure-lending can occur between these two narrative types. The results, therefore, extend our understanding of the structural alignment approach to narrative comparisons. But, since this research also involves the theoretical integration of the structure alignment approach (directional similarity and listing of commonalities and differences) with theories of time estimation (directional duration), event structure representation (segmentation), the basic findings herein should be applicable to comparisons ranging from auditory narrative structures to simple lexical units (e.g., unicorns vs. horses) to visual depicted objects (e.g., aliens vs. humans), even if the current set of studies described in this article involved only the comparison of written narrative structure. / text

當代哲學家紀傑克以他對於政治與文化現象的拉岡式解讀而聞名，但他哲學中的核心母題是什麼？對紀傑克而言，哲學不是使人「安然棲身」的論述，而是跟陌生感與他異性更緊密相關。所以，在紀傑克的眼中，哲學家的工作，不在於提供具體的解決方案，而是在於「新問題的創造」，重塑爭論的框架本身。 　　這篇研究中，筆者使用「系統與他者」這組概念，來彰顯紀傑克的兩大核心母題，其一，便是在有限性的範圍之內主張的自由，其二，則是他對新穎與變化的追索。「他者」使得系統能夠不斷重新定向，並向根本的變化保持開放。 　　「脫節狀態」是紀傑克用以描述主體之基本自由的概念。主體活動不被自然或文化的任一方決定；於是，所有主體所作的系統整合，都是一種與他者建立暫態平衡的嘗試，而所有用以整合的意指活動，都是一種對於他異性的回應，一種安身立命的奠基姿態。 　　簡言之，所謂「象徵界與實在界的不協調性」，在紀傑克的術語中不是消極的意涵，而是積極的意涵：它使得意義建構得以開始，並且是人類自由的根源。透過「系統」與「他者」的互動，思想總是有能力重新定向，藉此維持其鮮活與彈性，而這正是紀傑克式主體在現今政治情境中所致力實現的。 / Contemporary philosopher Slavoj Žižek is well-known for his Lacanian reading on political and cultural phenomena, but what is the central motif of his philosophy? For Žižek, philosophy is not some discourse to make people feel “being at home”, but rather something more related to foreignness and otherness. In Žižek’s eyes, What a philosopher really does is not providing substantial solutions, but rather “inventing new problems”, reshaping the framework of argumentation itself. 　　In this thesis, ”System and other” is the term I introduce to thematize two central motifs in Žižek’s philosophy: the first motif is his tireless assertion of freedom within the realm of finitude, and the second one is his relentless seeking for innovations and changes. “Other” is what enables the system to continuously re-orientate itself, and keep the system open to fundamental changes. 　　Žižek uses “Out-of-jointedness” to describe the fundamental freedom of the subject, neither nature nor culture can determine the subject. Every system organized by the subject is an attempt to create a transient balance with the other, and every totalizing signification is s a response to the otherness, the founding gesture of situating the subject itself into a meaningful context. 　　To sum up, Žižek does not use “Inconsistency between the Symbolic and the Real” as a negative term, but rather a positive term, it is the very starting point of meaning construction, and the ground for human freedom. Through the interaction between ”system and other”, the thought is always ready for re-orientation, therefore the thought is kept alive and flexible, and this is exactly what a Žižekian subject wants to accomplish in the present political situations.