文學院
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/handle/20.500.12235/2
院成立於民國44年，歷經50餘年的銳意發展，目前設有國文、英文、歷史、地理、臺文等5個學系、翻譯和臺灣史2個獨立所，以及全球華人寫作中心和國際臺灣學研究中心。除臺史所僅設碩士班，其餘6個系所均設有碩、博士班；目前專兼任教師近250人，學生約2500餘人。
本院早期以培養優秀中學國文、英文、歷史和地理教師為鵠的，臺灣中學語文和史地教育的實踐與成功，本院提供不可磨滅的貢獻。近年來，本院隨師範體系轉型而調整發展方向，除維持中學師資培育的優勢外，也積極朝理論研究和實務操作等面向前進。目前，本院各系所師培生的教師檢定通過率平均在95%以上；非師培生在文化、傳播、文學、應用史學及環境災害、地理資訊系統等領域發展，也已卓然有成。
本院各系所教師的研究能量極為豐富，參與國內外學術活動相當活躍。根據論文數量、引用次數等指標所作的學術力評比，本院居人文領域全國第2名。各系所之間，無論是教師的教學與研究，或學生的生活與學習，都能相輔相成、榮辱與共，彼此渾然一體，足堪「為師、為範」而無愧。
News
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Item Untitled(英語學系, 2015-05-??) William FrankeMy contention is that apophatic or negative theology is a classic tradition of interpretation of what Agamben is (not) talking about but of what is silently manifest in the phenomena he analyzes. Negative theology happens to be lucidly revealing of the logic of exception that the political-juridical history reconstructed by Agamben also reveals. I advocate negative theology as a model for understanding Agamben’s logic of exception because it has a certain precedence historically and serves as matrix for later, more secularized forms of thinking. It is itself a decisive first step on the path of secularization. It remains conversant with both theology and its negations—and precisely negation is foundational for so many distinctively modern approaches to reality. Yet apophatic postures of thinking are most natural to Asian philosophical and religious traditions. Deeply probing apophatic insight has been developed from earliest times in Asian currents of culture such as Taoism, Advaita Vedanta, and Mahayana Buddhism. The not very well acknowledged apophatic thrust of Agamben’s thinking is thus one axis aligning it with the Asian traditions that are generally excluded from his otherwise exceptionally wide-ranging interests and allusions. I maintain that exposing apophatic thinking as the underlying (a)logic and driving inspiration of Agamben’s thinking shows him to be in unexpected proximity with millennial tendencies of thought running deep in Asian philosophy and culture. Fittingly, the deep and far-reaching significance of Agamben’s own work is thereby revealed by what it ostensibly excludes—or at least leaves largely out of account.Item Zones: Beyond the Logic of Exception?(英語學系, 2014-09-??) Brett NeilsonOver the past five decades the proliferation of economic zones has been crucial to the emergence of Asian economic power. With historical precedents in ancient free ports, pirate enclaves, and colonial concessions, zones have become crucial spaces of labor and production. They are sites in which globalized forms of capital and logistics interact with populations and administrative bodies to augment the conditions for profit-making and accumulation. How are we to understand the political and legal constitution of zones? In an important sense they are spaces of exception since states create them by sectioning off locations in which foreign investors enjoy exemptions to law and other forms of normative regulation. These exceptions, however, are often established by normative means and are almost always partial. Exceptional forms of rule in zones tend to exist alongside domestic civil laws, opportunistic applications of international law, and diverse norms and standards promulgated by corporate actors. Zones can at once be spaces of exception and spaces saturated by competing norms and calculations. They are strategic sites in which to test the applicability of Agamben’s work on sovereignty, exception and governmentality to the contemporary Asian context. Mindful of the plurality of zones across Asia, the paper highlights mutations in these forms of power to explore how zones disarticulate jurisdiction from territory, produce new kinds of laboring subjects, and prompt processes of spatial and social reorganization.Item The Immunity Paradigm’s Contradictory / Complementary Facets(英語學系, 2014-09-??) Rada IvekovićImmunization, a protocol for hammering identities and national, sexual, racial or class differences, is also a “creative” border-multiplying game. It can, but need not, revert against oneself (as autoimmunity), while it was meant to protect from the other. It is ambiguous. Extreme immunization is suicidal (because murderous), yet immunity is also vital, in a balance or percentage impossible to theorize. It is a matter of cognitive choice as well as, for Agamben, some kind of epistemological and “testimonial” ethics. While forms of immunization against others multiply from within society or from within the “camp” (as the pattern of society in Agamben’s parlance), the citizenship/ representation pattern is depoliticized i.e., subjected to immunity. The present paper argues that such depoliticization has become particularly visible since the “end” of the Cold War. Is immunity equilibrium for the community possible? The paper tests some such models with regard to Asia since 1989, articulated in politics and spelt out by some western philosophers, including Agamben, regardless of whether they actually mention Asia or not: the “with regard to Asia” aspect is here the clue for reading them, that against which they are probed. How much of the other (in this case, Asia) do they miss out? How much is left to the “politics of the people”? How much does “governance’s” democratic empty formalism enforce from above?Item Untitled(英語學系, 2015-05-??) William FrankeMy contention is that apophatic or negative theology is a classic tradition of interpretation of what Agamben is (not) talking about but of what is silently manifest in the phenomena he analyzes. Negative theology happens to be lucidly revealing of the logic of exception that the political-juridical history reconstructed by Agamben also reveals. I advocate negative theology as a model for understanding Agamben’s logic of exception because it has a certain precedence historically and serves as matrix for later, more secularized forms of thinking. It is itself a decisive first step on the path of secularization. It remains conversant with both theology and its negations—and precisely negation is foundational for so many distinctively modern approaches to reality. Yet apophatic postures of thinking are most natural to Asian philosophical and religious traditions. Deeply probing apophatic insight has been developed from earliest times in Asian currents of culture such as Taoism, Advaita Vedanta, and Mahayana Buddhism. The not very well acknowledged apophatic thrust of Agamben’s thinking is thus one axis aligning it with the Asian traditions that are generally excluded from his otherwise exceptionally wide-ranging interests and allusions. I maintain that exposing apophatic thinking as the underlying (a)logic and driving inspiration of Agamben’s thinking shows him to be in unexpected proximity with millennial tendencies of thought running deep in Asian philosophy and culture. Fittingly, the deep and far-reaching significance of Agamben’s own work is thereby revealed by what it ostensibly excludes—or at least leaves largely out of account.