重新檢視國際關係學的歷史轉向：來自歷史途徑的反思

「歷史與國關」這類研究途徑已行之有年，其通常是指國關學者借鑒歷史並運用於當下，以求修齊治平、經世致用。但其立意雖好，實際應用效果卻顯得良莠不齊、無咎無譽。有些推論使用的論據有太多反例可以駁斥，有些則是結論與現實發展相去甚遠等。這其中緣由自然因人而異，然天行有常，採用該類研究方法的論著也有著許多共同的特點與規律。這些特質包括但不限於跨領域研究沒能很好的揚長避短，反而頻頻越俎代庖；過於注重尋找規律而忽視了論據本身的考證與討論等。孔席不暖，墨突不黔。在這方面有研究的學者們雖學富五車、著作等身，但鮮有專精於此並不斷改進者。故本文志在通過總結、分析兩岸關於「歷史與國關」式研究的著作，嘗試找出方法論層面的問題，並提出相應的改良建議。正所謂以史為鏡，可以知興替；歷史與國關的結合本大有可為，不該就此蒙塵。

關鍵字

歷史與國關；方法論；時代變遷；地緣政治

並列摘要

The research method of "History and international relations" has been around for years. It usually means that scholars of state relations draw lessons from history and apply them to the present, aiming to analyze and make suggestions on the current situation. However, although its ideal is good, the practical application effect is mediocre. Some reasoning uses arguments that have too many counterexamples to refute, some conclusions that are far from the development of reality, etc. Naturally, THE reasons for this vary from person to person, but there are also many common characteristics and rules in the works using this kind of research method. These characteristics include, but are not limited to, cross-field research that does not make good use of strengths and avoid weaknesses, but frequently overreach; Too much attention is paid to looking for rules and ignoring the textual research and discussion of the argument itself. Everyone is busy. Scholars who have studied in this area are well-educated and have written books, but few are specialized in this field and keep improving. Therefore, this paper aims to find out the methodological problems and put forward the corresponding suggestions for improvement by summarizing and analyzing the works on "history and international relations" on both sides of the Straits. The so-called history can be used for reference; The integration of history and international relations has much to offer and should not be overshadowed by it.