壹、前言

Similar documents

國立中山大學學位論文典藏.PDF

台灣紡織產業發展史物件徵集計畫研究報告

壹、世界音樂導聆與文化探索

序文離年聆老福更年來力不裡不論更論了老理力不勵裡牢女館益勵老了讀歷不葉論不老了年句了寧論利度精神令更不年老兩來了老老不論兩老老不了論

南宋獄訟判決文書中的「健訟之徒」

國家圖書館典藏電子全文

極限燙衣板

漫談養生之道

歷更不略都參金 2006 年年理參李金劉

Transcription:

論年論例行理六年

2005 年 Deliberative Democracy 論 Deliberative Debate 行 comparative approach 歷度論 historical institutionalismcase study approach 3 (research approach) 參論行 Deliberative Democracy 理論論 Deliberative Debate 理論兩論 2005 Abstract This research is mainly aimed at county magistrate election in 2005 Tainan County. Also, it is the first time for the academic circles and television media in Taiwan take the system of Deliberative Democracy. This is a case study for the Deliberative Debate. This whole research is using comparative approach, historical institutionalism, and case study approach to collect deta to analysis and compare. Also, the research s material is from participators people at the election debate. This dissertation will introduce the theory and practice of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan. Therefore, it will also discuss and take a suggestion for Deliberative Debate on the standard theory. Key Words Deliberative Democracy Deliberative Debate Election 2005 Tainan County Magistrate Election I

論領識老老來領獵更留更林劉兩諸不更益年年讀論老見了老說論利老不年論料留了利行論了更了參了行年年年參更了類參年年年度力益李行不林力理女行女福神年 II

錄錄錄錄論歷度論參理論理論類參參理論參 III

論度年見論年參論論參論理論論度參論度參六理 IV

行識參行論論來論歷來論參來論來論律來論陸來論類參錄料錄料 V

錄論見論年論料識類類見論錄流理論參料錄論論識識 VI

論錄 Samuel P. Huntington 說 Huntingto199725 暴理度領領便諸落連了兩識立立數識度數來略了數立數識 Arend Lijphart 2001:2 立不不立見識立裂論力力度不領裡更理切 Deliberative Democracy 念林勵 2002 年行了 1

2002 年行立參 2002 年了論論 2004 年北北 2004 年 9 行理年行年了年年參 11 更車 2005 年參不更例說了論 NIFStudy Circle 更車量 2005 說 2005 年葉年論 Deliberative Debate 2005 年連串了力 1 年來識度若來立識令羅說年說立不 2005168 2000 年數藍數藍 1 行 2004 年 9 29 行年 2004 年年理念落論勞論來識年理論理見行行 2

2004 年 319 2 3 藍藍羅 2005173 2004 年 12 立藍立立數 2005159 立了 2005 年 4 理說力兩壘更 5 度 2005 年行論例來 2005 年論裡立理識 2 2004 年 3 19 來 ( 呂蓮 ) 呂蓮藍連見參 3 2004 年烈不兩例更行益 2004129 4 2005 年行年 2006 年 2005 年行聯 5 2005 年 12 1 10 6 3

論論論論兩行說理立烈行理歷力了度了類識不類識立識類 199969 理論理論不路理論理論兩 Jürgen Habermas 行論見數不不領見論論 (199128 ) 識行識識識見 Habermas,1996: 317 4

列臨例立見理論論度理參例論列 5 索論年論留錄年論不理不論行論論量歷度論 2 料理論了論錄流見 1-1 流論流 5

理論度例度度流 6

論兩易 research approachresearch method 易 198498 理料料歷度料量料理料歷度論來歷度論歷度論度論利行歷度兩 2001199Ellen,199817 20071617200316 理論歷度論行行說歷連力力力度力 Bell,2002485486 度了領歷度論歷理歷度論度度 Pierson,1996210200717 Stephen D. Krasner 1984 年路 path dependency 念立度行度歷路 7

2001200 來兩論利異更了念 4 年來論論 3 論論見來論論行論參 198730 2005 年論論參念參論料行錄參論參行度行行論六 8

3 理論理論來不度論度理論行論理論理論利論度錄不度度理度理度異不論度論不 9

利例 2005 年論來論理 3 料 2005 年論例錄錄料行料來行料行料 6 7 參 2005 年論例見例了度略料來行行力 6 7 例讀料 10

理論論 2005 年論行不論例論拉更度來了論兩 2005 年論行念歷論念略參參行論列陸禮說參念類拉臘歷 ία demokratia 便 508 年度來 demokratia demos kratia 兩來 rule by the people 11

臘 20022Plattner,1996172 來來例 Hector Copland MacPherson1977 年 The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy 8 念歷 Protective Democracy Developmental DemocracyEquilibrium Democracy 參 Participatory Democracy 4 類 Macpherson, 19777 4 3 類參 9 3 理領不力不冷 200388 類利 Joseph Alois SchumpeterSchumpeter,1942269 不不利說了 8 利 Utilitarianism 理論 John S. Mill 理論 Joseph Schumpeter 理論參 4 4 類 The Life and Times of Liberal DemocracyMacpherson, C.B.,1977 7 參 1993 年 Macpherson 4 類了便參理 9 參理論 1960 年理論 Arnold. Kaufman1960 年參 20052 12

度利 (20053Macpherson,197777Schumpeter,1942269) 說若 10 論了了行 Political Marketing 領年來 Market Segment 11 類行 12 流不類 4 類例來 David Held 1987 年 13 Models of Democracy 歷理論類理論律參類理論不說了念了沈 200210 理論 8 Held 李 1995 10 類論不令論見 Schumpeter, 1942 參良 1999 年 20014-5 量烈 19501960 年行行 1990 年論 11 Market Segment 不若不不數年 12 Henneberg, S. C. M.2002132 行來識立理紐 2005190 不例... 不見類拉見說見說略更見 13 8 類 4 類 10 年 13

了歷類理論略參兩類 14 論參參參念識識不見更類 15 弄立數暴力 2002 參參理力念 16 若參 14 理論類不論例歷參度理論兩參度理論理論 200ii 羅列理論類理論類 15 例 plebiscitereferenduminitiative 見了參不力 16 裡不論立狀 14

了歷類理論略參兩類 19 來兩類理論 John Stuart Mill1861 年 Considerations on Representative Government 度度度理參參參益參度 17 都裡都參不结論理類 198255 論了利 Giovanni Sartori 1987 論 The Theory of Democracy Revisited. 利領内行度度不什識给利 1993282 利易度切說 17 參度論車數不來量 1861 年年來說不不說論見 15

參參力領淪參若不 Sartori 利 1993285-286 利易數暴利 1993 136 里暴 James Madison 了兩别了數凌數暴 18 來 Tocqueville 19 論良 1997213-221 了數暴理論 200612 數暴論了利利 1993136 良 1997213-221 易數暴理類了類不降结力來 1982112 說來度不數暴 18 聯 The Federalist Papers198048 1787 年 9 聯 Alexander HamiltonJohn Jay3 紐列聯說紐聯來 1788 年 2006 聯論 19 列 Charles Alexis de Tocqueville 論 Democracy in America 兩 1835 1840 年 2005 16

論了淪類给不讀不了數给兩兩力降 200648 來念來 1982101 論李 1995 7 論見參例兩 20 論度來不勵參參利見見 21 例 Dennis F. Thompson 論理論參度度論論 Thompson,197654 度數暴量了論了度 20 李 19957 說量 21 參見參 17

利 (Schumpeter,1942269) 了 1970 年了利來 contestation 參 participation 便兩 Huntington, 19917 liberal democracy 22 liberal democracy 念 23 不臘立禮立 199832 度量更歷歷數暴來識不識 24 來歷了參 22 不度行 1998 來念沈 20023 23 利 200153democracyshorthand 來說兩 freeing the peopleliberalism 力 empowering the peopledemocracy 了 liberal democracyliberal constitutionalism constitutional democracy2006 24 Marshall, T.H.citizenship 利 Marshall, 1950 理論沈 200215 18

參理論 Arnold Kaufman 1960 年參參益不了行力量 Cunningham,2002 123 參裡力參來參論更參里落 Cunningham 2002:127 參 1960 年來度理論不參了便立力量來立冷識見 20052 錄蘭寧 Frank Cunningham 理參論 Cunningham,2002123127132 Arnold Kaufman 1960 年參參 Pateman 1970 年參理論 Participation and Democratic Theory 參參 political efficacy 量 contestation 參 participation 兩念 Robert A. Dahl 兩參利 Robert Pranger 參行參 19

Pateman 參數類度不更參 (a participatory society) 不不參領參行 (Pateman, 1970: 43)Pateman 參參參行參不理離力行參參數度領冷便 (Pateman1970104) Pateman 類參不念參論參論見 Benjamin R. Barber 來 1984 年 Strong DemocracyParticipatory Politics for a New Age Barber 1984 年參來參行來 Barber 連落了 Barber 20058 Barber 來參 200064 Barber 理不不利益 20

參行立利利益參來理行參行都參不裡壟 Barber,1984151 Barber 論 Barber 參度壟了參離度了率 (citizenship) 利略了利 20017980 Barber,1984xixiv34184 Barber 度了行參參來 (2001:11Barber,1984: 198-201) 度不數易數 Barber 論參度更量說論參利更見錄不 20018081Barber1984xixiv 34184 21

參 1960 年來度說度 deliberative democracy 200514 25 來念論說理論浪參理論浪 26 參更參量參利參來更參兩更理論來論理論 27 200064 理論 demos kratia 兩 rule by the people Plattner, Marc F.,1996172 不理數數行 25 度類參類參兩不類論參類理論立參念 200514 說參行列陸拉禮說 26 deliberative democracy2000 行更兩律 27 數行來理念 22

見見說參論見了練識例 (Sophists) 了說度 Sophists 見論臘流說 5 了力論論識聆說了 Deliberative 28 Deliberative 念老 5 29 20 復 30 28 論了參練劉論行理領裡論兩不識論見行量論行論 98-99 29 1215 年立契 (Great Charter) 了 1649 年倫 (olirer Gomwell 1599~1658) 立了數 1688 年了 (Glorious Reuolution) 了 (Parliamentary Democracy) 例 23

aggregative democracy deliberative democracy 了洛 Ian Shapiro 理論 Democracy's Place. 理論兩流麟 2005 Joshua Cohen,1997307Iris Young aggregative modeldeliberative modelyoung, 200018 說數 majority rule 行說數度來類度度力 Schumpeter, 1942269 了 Huntington, 1991: 7 女 Young 量不理理易數利不易數利數 Young, 200018-26 立立度劉 1999 30 復見論臘復 24

Elster, J. 1986 年 Elster 兩率論論理 2-1 2-1 論理量理 Elster 率率不不力不不不不見率行來惡不料來 Elster,1986104109111 理論識更更若理識識不論識參論說 25

便了理若量見了理理理論更理利量論理理識 Gutmann & Thompson 1996Bohman,199625-28 Elster 了都參理度參論理來 Elster,19988 不見流理論拉念率說不說了 26

料行 2004 年論理念理數力識理不利來參利來參理來利理論理 communicative rationality 31 行年 32 來參利來參良理來利益理論 discursive character of will-formation 論 public discussion 20057 31 理 (communicative rationality) 理識論 (consensus theory of truth) 識什行裡 32 力行年年參 27

論行 communicative action 念理見行行不理行 validity claim 理參狀落理識行識理識理 Habermas198935-36 理了力理論參理 1970 年理論 1984 年了行 validity claimhabermas, 1984a138 理 1984b355 行了 1rightnedd claim 行 2 理 truth claim 3truthfulness claim 說 4 理 comprehensibility claim 理理 ideal speech situation 來說論了 4 說行立 general symmetry requirement 念參 4 說行 19913 李 1986 28

118-119McCarthy, 1978483-84 理說行 1 行不 2 說行 ( 說 ) 見行 3 行了 4 行便力理說不 improbable conditions 不行類理不 33 理不識理理立 20038 識理理識識 1996 了理 19932006 參列 5 倫理 1 論 2 參 3 參理理理 4 參力異論力立 5 參來行度 33 4 理類理來不理行律論論便類 29

爲理論理念說力理更論行 2006 度了論 Elster,19981 了來論 Habermas,1993 Bent, 2000Mendelberg & Oleske, 2000Young, 2000 Dahlberg, 2001 了 Bohman199616 理 ideal procedure 參參見見理類念參參 Bohman, 1996Joshua, 1996 Witschge, 2004 Sanders,1997Barabas, 2002Stanley, Weare & Musso, 2002Witschge, 2004 Bohman199616 說見理論論念參若參識不參不 30

理 Gutmann Thompson 念見理不理論理論論識 34 Bohman,19966 不識 199814 Gutmann Thompson 理識切了理理論理論利度參不利識 (2002) 識不見 Gutmann & Thompson2006 35 (Deliberative) 念理論來論 34 例 consensus conference 識識 2005 年 8 金 8 2930 Lars Klüver ( 丹 ) 丹 consensus 不識易識 35 論不論理參 Benhabib1994 不來更理論參力行參識論來理料 31

識行什不論什行 Rawls1987 1-25 了理 1 理 2 理理 3 理參 4 理了理識參例 199813 Gutmann Thompson 1publicity 理行 Gutmann&Thompson 199695 2accountability Gutmann&Thompson 1996128 3reciprociety 理立來立 Gutmann & Thompson 19962-3 例參 Iris Young (Young,2000:18-26) 列 4 1(inclusion) 論 2(political equality) 不 3 理 (reasonable) 裡理參度 4 (publicity) 參見了說 32

理 Cohen,198921Rawls,198242 Rawls,198242Knight & Johnson,1927320Rawls,1982 42Cohen,198922Bohman,1996:25-28Gutmann & Thompson 199695 說論說識 36 說論理說了來理論類 ( 類 ) 類異了量了什立理立 2-2 便論 2-2 類 37 1 參 2 理 3 理 36 識利立識念 Elster 199712 論不說說便不兩狀狀念不參論利度例論類識離不論 37 不復歷說理論量論論論論說理論切 3 來更理率量理說論參 33

2-2 參兩念 Knight & Johnson1927 38 理 ideal speech situation 念理 ideal procedure 理 Bohman199625-58 Rawls19871-25 理了 39 理 2-2 參立裡列參參參量列理理利力論識列參理參參參參參參參見若識理 38 Knight,J and Johnson,J 1927 年 What Sort of Equality Does Deliberative Democracy Require? 參若不參例匿立行念量論更力來論參論識論 39 若識 Cohen, Joshua, 1996John, 2000 34

理理論念來度兩年度兩度立林麗 20051-3 年浪度利年立惡了降便降利不林麗劉例裡說理了 20052-4 理 3 1 4 理論裡來來 2 35

說不說 3 理類不理 2-3 料來理 36

不 issues 力 image attributes 度不度寧 2004128Becker & McCombs,1978301-307 Nimmo Savage (19768) 理見見力 Boulding195682-962001 35 參度參立度度更不更 37

不 Natchez & Bupp, 1968; Nimmo & Savage, 1976; Dannis,1979; Rarick, Duncan, Lee & Porter, 1977; Zandpour, 1985; Pike, 1985 金 1997204-205 Patterson,Thomas E.,1989l25 200136 來論見行論見便論論論論論 40 來論論了了論論參 Priming 理論 Iyengar & Kinder1987123-135 略了量例參見論 40 魯 Marshall McLuhan, 1911-1980 1967 年 Medium is the Message 不來了論若更力 38

參 1960 年 Angus CampbellThe American Voter 來理漏狀不不行來見不 200184 Herbert F. Weisberg Jerrold G. Rusk19701167-1185 不連 Hart1982366-379 說來說來說來見見年 Patterson,1993Out of order 論來不論略略寧 2001114 Hwllweg Dionisopoulo1989 金 1997205 量論 39

略 1990 年 41 Jan Schaffer 行力切略來理 ( 2005) 了理參參 2005 年落林例異立不不度度落立不不 2005 便見里 Dick Morris 林 1999138 說了了 41 1988 年率不理念 (Pew center) 見 http://www.pewcenter.org/ 40

參了論論 42 2005 年了論栗論岀參論 2005 年論更里 43 了參了理歷度論行 42 理 1998 年 7 1 來立參歷見論力 1998 年北論 2004 年 2 度行論 2005 年 5 行理論 (2005) 43 2006 年 11 11 TVBS 北論 30 2006 年 11 26 聯 2006 北論六 41

論度歷度論 2005 年論行切行論見見說歷見見來歷歷論 1980 年論度度理年年來 1949 年 44 45 省 () 令見見論見說見不 44 1949 裂 5 19 省令亂 20 了見料 45 亂令行 ( 料 ) 42

見省女年省年省見錄錄列 1 切參見 2 見不行令 3 僚度見論 4 切參見 5 見省年行李見見論都不不行見見拉不李兩省錄裡了見行令見度歷歷料省理 43

1980 年 5 了 113 亂 46 里了見見見列不行見若見律見理行律列 12 449554 見見見見見不六兩不見不列不令見行行歷 19831989 年 47 1991 年 716 46 來 19 裡論 69 年 47 1989 年見見不說隆 1995 1989 年來了 1991 見 44

行 1991 年了見不行見 1980 年浪令 1987 年 7 見陸復 1986 年立見力量麗 200447 見論年年參 48 見論見論年類年年年年立論見見立見論年 49 論年北論理 48 論了 1991 年論聯立論論論 4 論 2005259 45

年北年省來烈年論見不立里更索領北論見略異不見見見論見論論見律了年了錄不省見不不理不行 1994 年 10 1995 年 10 省見行見來見論論行來例 2005 年 9 15 見見論參 49 年理 46

見列見論列見論 50 理 1960 年 Richard Milhous Nixon 參 John F. Kennedy 來論年年不略了論落領數了年年度參不論論律行年行論論年年年年了年 James Earl Carter Gerald Rudolph Ford 復論凌例參論不不不例論 (2001) 論見論例 6 參兩參論見若兩論 50 不 42 2 兩論理說論論兩行 47

50-1 2 不行 51 年見見不說隆年來了見了年浪度利不林麗例裡說理說率率理理 50-1 來參論例 2005 年年論栗岀歷了 2005 年參來不易 52 51 64122-131 論 52 2005 年論栗論說來論更了參理論 122-131 論 48

1989 年立 1994 年 24 立 1997 年 1998 年 1995 年 7 20 7 6 理見理 ( 行 45 ) 兩論理立 2004 年論 2001 年 9 5 理見 2 行 14 列理見立 () () 理見行見論論了 2006 年 1994 年 10 12 見 11 見論理見論論 49

論量來靈領了 3 論論 3 論 4 4 53 7 異論 6 行 citizen conference 54 參林識 (consensus conference) 丹來行行理論識論切 lay public 來什 53 不 4 例丹 scenario workshop 兩來林 4 4 54 料理林 2005 蘭 50

識來利識見 5 20 不識讀料行論領論列識論論識識參 (Study Circles) 55 立 812 參論領不老參來不識行參連行不切了聯聆不立都參了識了 ( 參 ) 參了識念行 55 料參行年料 51

參論 (National Issue Forum) 56 論 National Issues Forums NIF Kettering Foundation 1982 年了論論年數 (issue book) 說不論立勵參連例來說兩行不參什類論 56 料參劉 2006 劉 2004 52

(Deliberative Polling ) 57 James Fishkin 僚 Robert Luskin 行連不兩 (equality)(deliberation)(fishkin 1991, 1995; Fishkin and Luskin1999) 若參淪數了不見理更說參了理 rational ignorancedowns,1957 參見了了索參論不見了兩 Fishkin(1991,1995) 利來立 microcosm 更立論列參理論行了立行不理理狀略 57 料理 20022000Fishkin, J, and Luskin, R.,1999 行料 53

年來念了論論 3 說論 58 行行林 2003(Deliberative Polling ) 59 兩參論論參 2003 年行論行論勞 4 類 72 1-2 54 74 金論勞 4 4 論論不 1 識論不類論論參利聆 58 料理 2004 行料 59 2002 年論 54

論度參論例勞立不度論識不利理力說類論度參論立若論行論 60 論 61 說數了論 National Issues ForumsStudy Circles 兩 2005 年年劉 2005 2006 年連 2 年行 2 行 80 若練參行 100 類論留參 60 論立葉雷林林 ( 立葉 2004) 論路不列聯 61 不論兩參料年參 (http://www.nyc.gov.tw/chinese/all_in1/01_overview.php?mainid=6) 參 2006 年年料 55

行論行行論行行行參論論來論行行行行例論行行見參論立類論識識參了年量論論切了不論年論來論行識參說年來說論行數論例參理行列 56

參論 Deliberative Debate 62 論 Deliberative Debate 見 2005 年來 63 行理立理理理論流論例讀料論論 64 論 2005 年論林理參料理論論論度 65 論論 62 2005 年論 2006 年 2006 北論論 Deliberative Debate 63 來參林林玲 64 2002 年論 2005 年立勞論論論行論識 65 行兩輪輪輪識 ( 料來 ) 57

論理數不裡論見 ( 2005) 1 論來了更 2 切行更弄 3 論論論行利行論見數不不領見論論 (199128 ) 理見論兩 58

論 7 (4-1) 不 7 參見識論論論錄參錄錄識識參行行識行不不識不見不識見不識識識識參論行理論論論不兩例論力不識論行來 59

理論行理論理論論度了論理論念論論度論度兩度了更了論歷理理 60

論度來見論論行來 2005 年 9 15 見列見論 50-1 不行 20052-4 (Pew center) Jan Schaffer 行力切 2005 立不不度度落 2005 61

參 Young 列 4 1(inclusion) 論 2(political equality) 3 理 (reasonable) 裡理參度 4 (publicity) 參見了說理立 1 參 () 2 理 () 3 理 () Young 量不理理易數利 Young, 2000 論力不識論行來論不行岀論參 62

了令論輪廓例 2005 年論行理論料論流 2005 年論論論例度讀料論論論參理論論論度論論 2005 年論理讀識行論論 Time 63

論度論離參見列見論若見類 50-1 不行律 66 若理論度 66 行 2005 年論見 71-74 64

論 20052-4 力量不利路力了 67 見 5-3 理立降立立若參不不來切度 67 了 2005 年論率不理論率不不若論率更率參利切 65

參行 68 說例 69 6000 參論論降力參不若行力 (inclusion) 兩參理論論輪流若行力 (political equality) 理 (reasonable)(publicity) 行例料立行若行參理理兩理行兩輪輪輪 68 量兩不兩兩數 69 參 3 論類參來類列車參 66

例行論識不識理理立六若識 Cohen, Joshua, 1996John, 2000 論什論論類易見論量不理理易數利兩論了理理行行論見行不論參數更利力不量留識 67

論不行岀論易論 Fishikin Luskin 兩 (Fishikin &Luskin,1999) 論了了論論參行行理參淪數了不見理更說參了理 rational ignorance (Downs,1957) 說論 (equality) (deliberation) 了 68

六行了度理論理論度行來不行說 2006 行料料行論料行料論料行料料論兩行行料不料不力料力 2005 年論不行便論了更了 70 兩倂論便不料行 70 六念參 69

理識行論論 2005 年論 Time 行 6-1 理 6-1 3 11 流論度例讀數度論度更不 12 流度略不論 71 度理行識行論行 71 不論論不行不例力連行類了力參留切 70

理論離參見 2005 年 9 29 1.2.3. 4.5. 蘭 6.7.8.9 10 11 12 13 14 蓮 15 16 栗 17 北 18 19 林 20 隆 9 29 兩參不 4 參了兩兩論見兩兩參見行錄 71

不論兩參令量參理不兩立不立論理參數參論兩參理論更參都識參理念不參略了量論兩論參論不不利行不不不行金兩參行論 72

9 29 11 12 兩兩參論不量參旅行不兩更不 20 理論數見便論論留來力烈都見益力力了浪兩度兩不例見不若兩不參論 2006 72 若來量 72 2006 年年數讀論 73

狀 20 參論論兩 5 3 了見不 3 若度來不臨狀 5 見 3 參論度來不讀論說參率例行量理行了行見論 50-1 不行 73 74 更例行立論 75 73 來參論例不論若 TVBS 兩不說了論見 50-1 不 74 論類不率數領不拉數來金參更論離僚論參 75 見 122 127 論見 129 132 74

行行例刺數數不數論了量參行料量兩不兩兩數度年錄 () 例 P1 不立不藍綠立類參年例立聯立藍綠度年例料 75

() 數度年數數 () 例 P2 類數數類例 () 數數數 () 數數數兩數數說 () 立藍綠類 76 () 度歷類 () 女兩類例 () 年類 76 參量聯 ( 輪 ) 錄藍兩錄綠錄立藍綠不不 76

料例數女料 P1: 例 E1: 數 V: 數 P2: 例 E2: 數 N: 數立 2 10 61 63.54% 13 11 藍 1 5 10 10.42% 2 4 綠 1 5 25 26.04% 5 5 度 81.26% 16 36 37.50% 8 12 18.74% 4 60 62.50% 13 8 女 48.52% 10 24 25.00% 5 8 51.48% 10 72 75.00% 15 12 年 18-39 44.29% 9 39 40.63% 8 8 40-59 35.66% 7 50 52.08% 10 9 60 20.05% 4 7 7.29% 1 3 料來料料年例立聯立藍綠裡率兩數理行了了落綠藍數了 77

落類行力不理年論來來例不不參不立藍綠若力例量兩兩兩數量兩例量離例度見 6-1 E1 E2 例數 E1 了若立理度不度了兩數 78

行不利識 ( 2002) 識不見 Gutmann & Thompson2006 (Deliberative) 念來論來裡參理論論度參論參參見了識了識流論更了論螺 77 見力度識流兩 77 1970 年諾紐 Noelle -Neumann 兩力見了螺理論 Spiral of Silence Theory 論說類立論見見不論見見來見來諾紐類來見 climate of opinionquasi-statistical sense 見見 200370-72 79

識流若論理論參識列了了識流 6-2 療行年六來量力度行數了見參料錄論什論什福療六六療福利綠錄見見見見參料錄 80

料 20 歷 12 8 識流不 2005 年 11 12 4 什論什林老來林論說什老立理 11 參見老療綠 11 10 了良料識流老 6-3 錄料 81

來 78 理來理 79 不理理立了理不理識流識切見識了降不參來論易不參兩不了離了狀 6-4 78 林理 2 79 了參不見理理理兩說 2/3 82

了了聆論見了良兩錄料良了料類力說類練 80 來更識理立來論列類參 6-5 錄料 80 聆練兩聆若聆說說聆參聆 83

參立錄女來女料讀旅龍行療立龍老年都龍都老來老來參更立陸了來更理若數易了禮不數易例參數裡老 84

來不來說論論不論來說論來說不歷 81 見例年北論年論連量來年論論兩略不量來論參參烈力利來說若理了行行 82 力 81 2002 利了律利更見 82 參年量力力 85

良見臨不邏論若見見力力亂來見李都良說類不益益不來益不來什不量林來李女了兩見量李女見論見流 86

金臨年來來來老福利兩說說老來兩兩林年來李金了兩見了見年老利老率年老了兩來力 83 年來 84 流 83 錄料不漏論見度力 84 理量 87

利路洞洞什洞洞說來路都弄了洞洞女車路車來都滑了車都泥不林若說利說了了車了路車了行易了類例論車車行車了識更來見度識不兩例不練不列了便兩例 88

識來論識識論論論識論論來索識行識 5 論論 3 論論 10 率流度不錄料參 6-6 論錄料 89

論 10 30 30 不行類見兩若異立更見立來了論不論 6-7 論錄料 90

劉利劉 3 4 來說論不浪 6-8 了練了論降了論亂 4 論數裡連了參參了來行了了錄料例參 91

來說北六行劉利錄不行力裡說列不說行理念行劉錄不來不來了來了來來流了錄不不劉利說了不了不了例例劉利劉兩行論不利論說論立例論不不見立更更 92

度料列不易識列來數 1 1 3 來說論類類度連來識輪 3 便輪異 1 1 3 了 1 立 2 立 3 論論數不行不例力連參留量度參論度 93

論論錄料陸錄女飯來說說不來行不說都行福利說都行女見什來料都了不說福利不什更不什裡不更不錄料論論 94

識若量力不漏論見亂不立理識識見朗讀若見朗類見見句句見識識句 6-9 識 1 95

識見見理 8 了 10 流利了練 6-10 識 2 6-2 6-2 識 1. 立例 2. 年老 3. 惡降若 4. 來 5. 年金利 6. 立行療老 7. 率 8. 女 96

來說識錄料來論論論識見理行不理參行論留量不烈行不類量拉說行留說論料 97

參行論行識行論 3 2005 年 11 1112 兩論念老 5 論了參練劉論行理領裡論兩不識論見來更論立行量論劉 20042006 了利理識見論論來論了論兩兩論兩 98

理 6-3 理識行論參行論 6-3 類類 2005 年論類理讀識論行論行論 Time 料來理裡論行參 85 力識論論兩不 85 2005 年 11 1112 論 19 99

說論兩兩來論了錄理 2005 歷論不度不論不論度了論見論行行不便切離理論兩力 86 離論錄料力不力離錄料錄論例 86 來兩輪流來兩兩兩來兩行 100

立錄數兩年立來立立烈烈兩什不立立立立立林來數量說見落年見說來說來說年度留說都不說不來來裡說六年來來來行列來年度金年度立說年列立不說年來什力立鈴落來不立落落鈴例數立聯不不 101

林來兩來參論立了不說年行說年列行都行來立來列年度裡來了更路來路立來更連立立力說不年來力立六離立立來立來立立立鈴力立裡來立來來立來了來鈴諾立立不了不不不見立更更不 102

林兩不李李兩說立立來說立來林兩立說立更來說立來來來林兩兩來兩來來兩輪流來兩若不兩立立不立兩立兩 87 李了 88 來立論不李不來 87 不兩兩 88 不歷了不論行 103

林兩兩來兩來年來來都不了來來都精不了說說什來什來來說讀來都來來說來立來來說來來說都立都說來都更鈴不不裡裡來說來練來來鈴來立略立不錄略來 83% 17% 84% 16% 104

林來來說來說說說年年年不說數說裡來留來利說落了零不利來來裡樂來都兩說兩兩說列不了留來念來鈴年便不立鈴列來不零年錄略不見兩 75%25% 兩論 105

論錄料論兩兩論力不力論離錄狀類兩料若不行兩論略異不不若例行輪離行 106

2005 年論不見了更 Ian Shapiro 理論 Shapiro,1996 麟 2005 論識更更立識良論見 2005 年論論 8 理見 2005 年論論來參論論理了論論行了參參見 107

2005 年論年 2006 年 11 行 2006 年 11 1 11 27 10 89 力行 90 錄匿律 01 10 10 度 91 見立 1 論 7 3 2 論參見 2 8 3 論 ( 度 ) 8 2 4 論 8 識 6 1 3 5 論兩了 10 數 6 參論行 5 1 4 見 7 年論 3 7 理 89 數略 20 19 參 19 3 聯 6 10 參 52.6% 年行率李 90 錄錄 3 數匿欄律理 91 見立不見 6-4 立 108

度度論見更見理度論論更參 3 念不異若理更不理 3 錄 05 論不來說異說來了來 06 不若參論論更力更 01 不論不類來說念不 02 念來 03 來說行狀更更參例行論 109

論參見理不不見錄不力不不不不 01 見都不論都來不不來說來 02 不兩裡都見不不見不都見見裡說不說都來裡 10 識不什來不不不論 02 見不若論兩不更裡 03 論不不見不例見不見論更更 110

不論論不不了不數論 03 更來論論兩不了參讀參料不料都更來論更論來更了拉更見識 04 來論都來論更數 09 都不說數了論來說了 10 數量見都不什來不不若來兩理了不說不參料理 111

論度不 92 了參 93 錄識了了 94 06 見更識了識度 03 論不了了不識度不識不見聆見論 01 不了論見說識 02 論不度見識不識論說 92 了 Ian Shapiro1996 麟 2005 理論論識更更 93 裡來理論理 94 更識了識不了念 112

更 2 不錄兩 09 不度更力了力更見 05 都識年來參說說來來說見不說了不了不什立什說不易識錄 05 09 2 度不參度度參 95 09 更說說論更論 05 了參了狀見 05 說說不類了參 95 類易見類不來 113

論識 3 見立見 3 論度 8 理識 6 錄 2 不 2 見 03 不識論論不了了不識度 08 不識若見不不識度不識來 03 08 2 了了了說識識識 8 識數量裡理了若論立列識例不論兩識 114

若論立列識不若論不論若利識 03 08 2 識離論論識度 96 96 行年劉識不了兩見參列見 1 離識臨論行見不了了浪不不 2 8 例參 7 度識 8 見 7 識參 9 9 見識不不 115

論兩了見兩見不來立錄 01 兩來說不了力僚參 04 不說說 05 兩都利說兩金了 10 不離離了來了了不行來參不 97 05 都什說說 97 見 116

若異更 02 來說兩都若說不說都見了不兩都離不 03 兩參來說都論來見來說年裡了什不切 06 來來了論更來了裡了 98 了 99 不不 98 見論 96 99 參李論 103 117

參論行見數行錄 02 不說行論兩說若不行不論兩 03 不論論兩論度論識度列度不不行 07 來說了更來兩都立來兩參兩都來 08 來說參論更了來行料讀論理狀了不見狀易 100 了 100 論例了 118

年論論 10 7 3 不不立不亂 10 行見不力不行行類參不見量歷行理力見理行不見來不不例例說不來不 119

2005 年論了論兩說了識兩來論 1 行說參行 2005 年論不 1 論行參論栗 2005 年 10 16 不參見行 101 1 論 10 19 2005 年論 1 論論 2005 年參論了切來論了 7 5 不數行理料凌 3 數念 101 若論 10 16 栗立聯見論理 120

2005 年兩率論了不不論念說了藍見凌亂更論更殺不不 2005 年 2005 年論參說年 2006 年北 2 了參 TVBS 率了 5 論北 TVBS 論 102 度兩 103 參論 104 了 11 北 2 論 105 6 106 聯北論 102 北 5 27 TVBS-NEWS 5 6 2 率北參見論北 TVBS 論 5 13 2 兩論 103 理 1 1 TVBS 1 見 1 104 論行 TVBS 30 論行兩見論 105 TVBS 北 2 論 2006 年 11 5 11 北 TVBS 論 106 北論 2005 年論聯 2006 年 11 26 121

來行論理 2005 年論論 12005 年 10 16 栗論論栗 6 行了數 3 劉龍 TVBS 度 3% 107 龍 4 參論論見論行 22005 年 10 19 論論論 4 行了數 2 108 行 2 行論論行論年度行不 20 量識論論 8 論 107 栗參龍龍參 10/16 立聯栗參論倫理龍龍不論行龍 11 15 108 2 不理論 2 2 不不行離 122

3TVBS 2006 年 5 6 北論論北參龍葉金參 TVBS 論度兩參論論行 TVBS 30 論參行參不見論兩 TVBS 論參 2 見參來 TVBS 30 北參 8 陸 30 參兩 2006 TVBS 論參度立 TVBS-NEWS 9 TVBS 論論讀 4TVBS 2006 年 5 13 論 9 參李羅立不 8 參論數不行 TVBS 5 6 北論 TVBS 參見參來 TVBS 列參行 8 陸 TVBS 論參度立 TVBS-NEWS 9 TVBS 論論讀 123

5TVBS 2006 年 11 5 論論 TVBS 了 5 3 羅參 109 聯參林不鈴 TVBS 110 令見論林 TVBS 北見論北 5 參數參 111 參參林 2 TVBS 說 112 不林類裡 TVBS 92 90 54 50-1 6 7 21 24 43 109 TVBS 藍 TVBS 10 23 2 參參 110 林 TVBS 參見論異不 92 90 54 50-1 6 7 21 24 43 林理說令錄 2006a 111 林北 6 龍李 TVBS 5 漏不了 TVBS 漏連 TVBS 林了說 TVBS 北見論北 5 參數參參參林 2 112 林不 TVBS 令 TVBS 行見論 TVBS 不見羅 2006 TVBS 令說 TVBS 見不 TVBS 見不 TVBS TVBS 2006b 124

6TVBS 2006 年 11 11 北論 TVBS 北 6 龍李 5 漏 113 4 參論 TVBS 論臨參臨狀良 2006a TVBS 呂論 TVBS 不 114 2006b 論數不行論行 3 論 TVBS 論 115 龍 5 度 23% 18% 不論 23% 龍 18% 16% 李 9% 7% TVBS 數來龍度 3 論 113 了連 TVBS 林了 2006 年 11 11 北論, 參, 參不了來諾見來料 114 來 TVBS 不 TVBS 行連不料 2006 115 料來 2006/11/11 TVBS-N 125

72006 年 11 26 北論 2 116 論論北 6 龍 3 117 118 李狀不李利參論不良論 2005 論論 Deliberative Debate 行論年度行不 20 量識論論論 2005 論略不量參 2005 年 2 3 2005 年 8 6 2005 論林 116 1 論 2005 年行理立理理理了 2006 年聯 117 2006 年 11 11 TVBS 論 2 118 李狀論見參論見利 2006 北論 11 26 北論狀李 11 20 路 6 列 3 見論參北李弄 17 2006 蓮 2006 126

7 論不列 6-5 論來度 119 2005-11-16 栗 1 論不 6 參 4 2/3 2005-11-19 1 論識論識 120 4 參 2 2/3 不 TVBS-N 2006-05-06 北 1 參論不 4 參 4 TVBS-N 2006-05-13 不 9 參 8 TVBS-N 2006-11-05 1 論不 5 參 2 2/3 不 TVBS-N 2006-11-11 北不 6 參 5 2/3 2006-11-26 北識論識 121 6 參 3 2/3 不料來理 119 裡見見見論若不裡 120 論料料錄論錄 121 論料了料不料 127

6-5 論 2005 年論了論參論不論 The Commission on Presidential Debates 122 1992 年林洛 3 論 2 Town Hall Meeting 行不 209 uncommitted voters 更了參 1996 年林 2 論 2 113 參 2000 年 1 了 3 論 1 了 2004 年更 2002 年 3 CPD 兩凌 2004 CPD 來 2004 年 2 論論 2004 2005 年論更不參論了參 122 論 The Commission on Presidential Debates CPD 立 1987 年立了年論 CPD 行論論不年度力不凌 2004 128

不見見見論論若類 1. 類 50-1 1 理 2. 類 50-1 2 不行來參論例 123 不論兩不說了論見 50-1 2005 年論例不不量率 124 不不不論了 123 2006 年北李不林類 TVBS 92 90 54 50-1 6 7 21 24 43 連不論律 124 不量理不例不行見 129

論論 access right the right of access to media 念來理理論念來度兩年度林麗 20051-3 來類年來年領論不烈都不論數量了流識識了識見歷理論數見便論論留來力烈見力 130

若見論行不論易來壟不識論量見度度律力說見度若類參論量兩度見不兩 2006 度理不不見參論來參論不說參參來參理 125 不論類 125 例說論了了流療療不降了復類參來參理論什例來例不參 131

見不 Auer 論力行 1942 2005261 若論參力 of matched contestants 類理見論力論淪論理 126 理見度 127 理見度 126 例 2006 年北例見不論不度見度 127 不論類 132

論歷 5 理 2005 年論歷 2005 年論行論便參索便行參論更來論兩識立立立不不立見識立裂論力若落劣弄理立論論度參了論兩說了兩零立 133

歷來論 Deliberative Democracy 復數論量來領年來了論論 2005 年論 1 行論 1 論參里論更度 institutional approach 度理參例 138 139 參來論理說率率理理參更 5 7 不論論念論殺不不 2005 年 134

來論論參識參論了力參論不見行見 107 119 138 139 律來論論來 2005 見參見列論類 50-1 1 理若類 2 不行來例例不論兩不說了論見 50-1 參易壟不理理 135

陸來論理了了 34 說理論量論論論論說理論切 3 理率量參理說論參行論 Deliberative Debate 2005 年論不論 2 更論不若量 2 更不了行更不理理立了理不理說 3 了參理理練 136

不來說論 Deliberative Debate 度論行量領連了論更了例行立量論見度理理論度省論理數暴數來論理論論年度立行更論力度便理論便理 137

類論 2 列 () 理 () 行 () 識流 () 識論論論識 () 行論 () () 2/3 論量類類參論類參論類數裡連了參 7-1 1 138

() 理 () 行 () 識流 () 識論論論識 () 行論 () () 7-2 2 類立行論留離不參料理類論識度了參若量論參見度 139

行立論了不歷更了理歷參論歷度論 3 理論不 2005 論論類量參 200443-48 論兩錄 7-1 參參度參論論立度論度識料來理 200443-48 140

論量領數量理參參來不力度不不領論理參參 141

參料 1. 蓮 2006 論李 2006-11-26 http://news01.cdns.com.tw/20061127/news/zyxw/733290002006112622262572.htm 2. 李不北論 2006/11/27 http://www.atchinese.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=25689&itemi d=35 3. 2006 聯聯 2006-10-26 http://magazine.sina.com.tw/nfweekend/000/2006-10-25/23544960.shtml 4. 2004 理論路 http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/41/index.htm 5. 2007 歷度立論 96 年 1 論年論 8. 2002Democracy 念 workshop 2002 年 10 25-26 http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~jiang/pdf/d7.pdf 9. 2003 領理識 http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~jiang/pdf/d8.pdf 10. 行年 2004 年論北行年 2004 年 12 11. 2002 理北立 25-44 12. 2002 錄北 13. 2000 不 89-10-30 2 14. 199738 9-13 15. 李 1986 北 1986 年 10 16. 沈 2002 兩歷 1-34 17. 2001 北理論 142

18. 2003 沈螺理論 2001 年北理 3 1 69-10 19. 易 1984 理論北 1984 年 9 20. 林麗 2005 北立 85 http://www.jour.nccu.edu.tw/mcr/0085_pdf/85_01.pdf 21. 金 1997 年北例北立 55 203-223 22. 2001 2001-11-21 http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2001/new/nov/21/index.html 23. 2005 論 2005 年 12 http://www.rthk.org.hk/mediadigest/200512.html 24. 2003 歷度 92 年年北 92 年 10 26 25. 2001 年北行裂 77-127 26. 2004 北 263 129-132 年 28. 劉 2006 KMT 參 5/6 論 2006-04-19 29. 紐 200 理論北年 30. 1998 理論北 31. 2005 聯來 159-166 32. 1991 論北流 33. 2006 論利論省聯 2006 No.2 11-15 34. 2005 參數參論 2005/10/11 http://www.cdns.com.tw/20051012/news/ncxw/u91003002005101119365096.htm 35. 凌 2004 索論 2004 年 2 http://www.pts.org.tw/~rnd/p1/2004/040209.htm 36. 2000 論 13 61 92 37. 力 2001 北 90 年 38. 2001 理論北聯 2001 年 12 143

39. 立論 92 年 40. 李 2006a TVBS 北論 http://mo1.mcu.edu.tw/show.php?nid=80624 41. 李 2006b TVBS 論 http://mol.mcu.edu.tw/show.php?nid=80164 42. 1999 例論 5 3 : 57-7http://www.moea.gov.tw/~ecobook/season/sag3.html 43. 龍 2005 龍料 2005-11-15 http://www.wretch.cc/blog/donsuan&article_id=2361301 44. 2003 立論 45. 林葉林 20052005 年 3 行年北 46. 1998 理論 85-122 47. 2000I 107-142 48. 讀 49. 隆 2001 省參臨省省歷李錄省 90 年 50. 1987 北北北 27-58 51. 20042004-8-4 http://ashaw.typepad.com/editor/2004/08/post.html 52. 2005 不立參度 2005-12-04http://news.sina.com/cna/101-102-101-101/2005-12-03/1723422912.html 53. 寧 2001 度聯兩年例北立 69 113-140 54. 寧 2004 2002 年北例北立 81 125-162 55. 麗 2004- 論 56. 2005 北論 2005 年 11 57. 2001 歷度論 195-206 58. 20062005 年論 2006 年年北立 95 年 9 16 59. 2006a 不見林怒 TVBS2006-11-01 http://news.yam.com/cna/life/200611/20061101503902.html 144

60. 2006b TVBS 見了林 2006-11-3http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/6/11/3/n1508805.htm 61. 2002 金 91 年 8 15 http://www.npf.org.tw/publication/cl/091/cl-b-091-060.htm 62. 2005 論兩 2005/10/12http://www.ettoday.com/2005/10/12/389-1855963.htm 63. 2000 行北 123-143 64. 2003 論北行 65. 2006 TVBS 論 TVBS-N2006/11/11 http://www.tvbs.com.tw/news/news_list.asp?no=arieslu20061111175213 66. 1996 北 67. 2006 金 95 年 8 16 http://www.npf.org.tw/publication/cl/095/cl-r-095-027.htm 68. 2005 年論例立 94 年 1 69. 1997 歷立論 70. 劉 2000 料北連料金六 24-27 71. 劉 2000 料北連料金六 24-54 72. 劉 2004 識 2004-12-7 http://blog.yam.com/lakatos/article/4983075 73. 劉 2006 識 - 論識 2006-9-27http://blog.yam.com/lakatos/article/6487783 74. 劉 1999 兩歷立識 http://www.general.nsysu.edu.tw/plan/plan4.htm 75. 隆 1995 理論略例北 76. 葉 /2004 論參北金 35-36 77. 2001 女料省參臨省省料省 90 78. 2005 參理論年 93 年 12 http://tpsa.ccu.edu.tw/2005pdf/5_2_4.pdf 145

79. 羅 20052000 年輪 167-174 80. 羅 2004 論例行北立北行 105-142 81. 羅 2006 TVBS 見 2006-11-02http://news.yam.com/cna/life/200611/20061102507728.html 料 1. Arend Lijphart2001 類六北 2. Gutmann & Thompson2006Why Deliberative Democracy? 北 3. Habermas1989 倫理北 4. Held, David 李 199(Models of Democracy) 北 5. Huntington Samuel P. 劉寧 1994 浪北 6. Huntington, Samuel P.1997 錄 Larry DiamondMarc Plattner,, 北 : 料 http://www.inpr.org.tw/publish/pdf/120_2.pdf 7. Huntington, Samuel P 劉寧 1992 浪北 8. Ian Shapiro 麟 2005 理論北 2005 年 7 9. Joshua Cohen, 1997 論理 Bohman J. Rehg W. 北 2006 10. Kie-Duck Park2005 2005 年 6 http://www.tfd.org.tw/docs/d2t1/023-050.pdf 11. Macpherson, C.B.1993(The life and times of liberal democracy.) 北 12. Madison, J., Hamilton, A. and Jay, J.,17881980 聯 The Federalist Papers 北 13. Madison, J., Hamilton, A. and Jay, J.,17882000 聯論 The Federalist Paper 北 14. Mill,J.S18611982 北 1982 年 15. Morris, Dic1998 林 1999 略北 1999 年 1 16. Sartori, Giovanni 利論 1993 年 6 17. Tocqueville, (1835,1840)2005Democracy in America 北 18. Tocqueville, (1835,1840) 良 1997 論 Democracy in America 北 146

料 1. Barabas, Jason2002 Virtual Deliberation: Knowledge from Online Interaction versus Ordinary Discussion. Paper Presented at Prospects for Electronic Democracy Sept. 20-21: Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. Barber, Benjamin 1984 Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age CA: University of California Press. 3. Becker, Lee B. and Maxwell E. McCombs1978 The Role of the Press in Determining Voter Reactions to Presidential Primaries. Human Communication Research 4(Summer): 301-307. 4. Bell, Stephen2002 The Limits of Rational Choice: New Institutionalism in the Test Bed of Central Banking Politics in Australia. Political Studies 50 : 477-496. 5. Benhabib, S. (1994). Situating the self : gender, community and postmodernism in contemporary ethics. Cambridge : Polity Press. 6. Bent, Flyvbjerg2000"Ideal Theory, Real Rationality: Habermas Versus Foucault and Nietzsche." Paper for the Political Studies Association's 50 th Annual Conference, The Challenges for Democracy in the 21 st Century, London School of Economics and Political Science, 10-13 April 2000, 20 pp. 7. Bohman, James2002 Electronic Media and the Prospects for Transnational Democracy: Cyberspace as a Cosmopolitan Public Sphere,,Paper for the Prospects for Electronic Democracy, Sept. 20-21. 8. Boulding, K1956The Image, Ann Arbor. Michigan, USA. University of Michigan Press. 9. Brighouse, Harry1996 Is There a Neutral Justification for Liberalism?, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 77: 193-215. 10. Cohen, Joshua1989"Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy," in The Good Polity, 17-34. 11. Cohen, Joshua1996 Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy, in Seyla Benhabib, ed., Democracy and Difference, Princeton University Press, 1996. 12. Cunningham, Frank2002Theories of Democracy: A Critical IntroductionLondon and New York :Routledge. 13. Downs, Anthony1957An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row. 14. Elster, J. Hylland, A.eds. 1986Foundations of Social Choice Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press. 15. Elster, Jon (ed.)1998deliberative Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press. 16. Elster, Jon.1997 The Market and the Form: Three Varieties of Political Theory. in James Bohman and William Rehg. eds. Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 3-33. http://philosophy.wisc.edu/streiffer/rpa98folder/981030.html 147

17. Giovanni Sartori2001 How Far Can Free Government Travel?, in Larry Diamond and Marc F. Plattner, eds., The Global Divergence of Democracies.(Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press and the National Endoement for Democracy, 2001) 18. Gutmann.A and Thompson D1996Democracy and Disagreemant,Princeton University Press. 19. Habermas, J.1984aWahrheitstheorie. In Ders., Vorstudien und Ergänzungen zur Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (S. 127-186). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag. 20. Habermas, J.1984b Was heißt Universalpragmatik? In Ders., Vorstudien und Ergänzungen zur Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (S. 353-440). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag. 21. Habermas, Jürgen1993Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 22. Habermas, Jürgen.1996Between Facts and Norms: Contribution to A Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Translated by William Rehg. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 23. Hart, R. P1982 A commentary on popular assumptions about political communication. Human Communication Research, 8, 366-389. 24. Held, David1987 Models of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press. 25. Hellweg, S. A., Dionisopoulos, G. N. & Kugler, D. B.1989 Political candidate image: A state-of-the-art review, in B. Dervin & M. J. Voigt (Eds.)Progress in Communication Sciences IX, pp. 43-78. Norwood, N. J.: ABLEX Publishing Corp. 26. Henneberg, S. C. M.2002 Understanding political marketing. In N. J. O'Shaughnessy, & S. C. M. Henneberg (Eds.), The idea of political marketing (pp. 94-170). Westport, CT: Praeger. 27. Herbert F. Weisberg and Jerrold G. Rusk in their 1970 paper "Dimensions of Candidate Evaluation," American Political Science Review, 64 (Dec. 1970): 1167-1185. 28. Huntington, Samuel P.1991The Three Wave: Democratization Century. Oklahoma University Press. 29. Immergut, Ellen 1998 The Theoretical Core of the New Institutionalism Politics and Society. Vol. 26no.1. 30. Iyengar, S. & Kinder, D. R. 1987 News that matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 31. John Ferejohn2000 Instituting Deliberative Democracy, in Ian Shapiro and Stephen Macedo Edited, Designing Democratic Institutions, New York University Press. 32. Joseph A. Schumpeter1947 Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 2 nd.ed.(new York: Harper & brothers,1947) 33. Knight, Jack and Johnson James1997 What Sort of Equality Does Deliberative Democracy Require? in James Bohman and William Rehg eds. Deliberative Democracy 279-320. 148

34. Kwak, Jin-Young 2002 "Open System or Cartelized System: Redefining the Korean Party System after Democratization." In Young Rae Kim, Hochul Lee and In-Sub Mah (eds.), Redefining Korean Politics: Lost Paradigm and New Vision (pp. 403-30). Seoul: Korean Political Science Association. 35. Macpherson, C. B.1977The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 36. Marshall, T.H. 1950 Citizenship and Social Class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 37. Marx, K. 1970The Civil War in France. Peking: Foreign Languages Press. 38. McCarthy, W. A.,1978, The Critical Theory of Jurgen Habermas. Cambridge Mass: MIT Press. http://physicsed.buffalostate.edu/danowner/habcritthy.html 39. Mendelberg, Tali and John Oleske2000 Race and Public Deliberation. Political Communication 17: 169-191. 40. Mill, J.S.1861Considerations on Representative Government. 41. Morris, Dick1998 Behind the Oval Office: Getting Reelected Against All Odds.by Dick Morris (Author). 42. Nimmo, D. & Savage, R. L. 1976Candidates and Their Images: Concepts, Methods, and Findings. Santa Monica, California: Goodyear Publishing Company, Inc. 43. Nimmo, Dan and Robert L. Savage1976Candidates and Their Images: Concepts, Methods, and Findings. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing. 44. Pateman, Carole1970Participation and Democratic Theory, reprinted, N. Y.: Cambridge University Press. 45. Patterson, T. E.1989 The press and candidate images, International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 1 (2): 123-135. 46. Plattner, Marc F.1996 Liberalism and Democracy:Can t Have One Without the Other, Foreign Affairs. vol.77.no.2p.172 47. Rawls, J.1982"The Basic Liberties and Their Priority." In Sterling M. McMurrin, ed., The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, III (1982), pp. 1-87. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 48. Rawls, J.1987 The Idea of Overlapping Consensus, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7. 49. Sanders, Lynn M.1997 Against Deliberation. Political Theory, Vol. 25, No. 3: pp.347-384. 50. Sartori, G.1987The Theory of Democracy Revisited. Chatham, N.J: Chatham House, 1987 51. Shapiro, Ian 1996Democracy's place: Cornell University Press, 52. Stanley, J. Woody, Weare, Christopher, and Musso, Juliet2002 Participation, Deliberative Democracy, And The Internet: Lessons From A National Forum On 149

Commercial Vehicle Safety. Peter Shane, Ed. Democracy Online: The Prospects for Democratic Renewal through the Internet.; 2004 53. Thomas E Patterson1993Out of order,new York : A. Knopf, 1993. 54. Thompson, Dennis F.1976John Stuart Mill and Representative Government, Princeton University Press. 55. Witschge, Tamara2004 Online deliberation: Possibilities of the Internet for deliberative democracy. In P. Shane (Ed.), Democracy online: The prospects for political renewal through the Internet. New York, NY: Routledge.26. 109-122 56. Young, Iris M.2000Inclusion and democracy. New York: Oxford University Press. 料 1. 2005 http://www.taiwanthinktank.org/ttt/attachment/article_430_attach3.doc 2. 行年年參 http://www.nyc.gov.tw/chinese/all_in1/01_overview.php?mainid=6 3. 論 CPD)2004 年料 http://www.debates.org/pages/his_2004.html 4. 料 http://www.drnh.gov.tw/www/page/b/page-b-02_a_04.htm 5. 2004 論例論 http://www.doh.gov.tw/ufile/doc/200410_3-3-1.pdf 150

錄料數略 20 19 參 19 3 聯 6 10 參 52.6% 年行率李料理理 3 理料 3 見更 2 錄錄錄 2 01 參論論見識論論什不說類不異類不不見例來說立不若來參不來不論不類來說念不若更累兩裡參見什見不論來不不來說來例來不利來來說見不 151

利不兩裡不見度說見度若識了什識說不了論見說識了類來論見了論行什論兩不來論見見不切兩力見力令論了度見兩來說不了力僚參年論論金 02 參論論見識論論什不例立不論念來類易利念來不不若論不論了理念 152

兩裡參見什不兩裡見不不見不見見裡說不說來裡句說不說來理不兩理見不若論兩不更裡力什什見不離來說兩論更來兩裡不見度說見度若識了什度度識論不度來說論見了列不了見識不識論說論行什不說行論兩說若不行不論兩論了度見來說兩若說不說見了不兩離不年論 153

不不不便 03 參論論見識論論什更了參論念了念更更了更來說行狀更更參例行論兩裡參見什更來論論兩不了參讀參料不料更來論更論來更了拉更見識論不不見不例見不見論更更論數論讀料論見來兩裡不見度說見度若識了什不識論論不了了不識度例來說更了不不識不見聆見論論行什不論論兩論度論識度列列論例 154

療度不不行論了度見兩參來說論來見來說年裡了什不切來說不見更了參更年論見說不論了參不了類念更參 04 參論論見識論論什見見參兩裡參見什來論來論更數更論更更見不識利識兩裡不見度說見度若識了什識論了見論拉離更 155

了度識論行什裡了見論了度見不說說年論不說了來說 05 參論論見識論論什論不來說異說來了來理不來說見不兩裡參見什參來見說參了了論來見更論不裡論領了不什見說數更了說什不說說來若兩裡不見度說見度若 156

識了什識年來參說說來來說見不說了不了不什立什說不易識論行什論不不不利論了來來說裡裡論說說什利說行不論了度見兩利說兩金了什說不不了了例了來說漏洞說說年論來說不便不了了了不力 06 參論論見識論論什不若參論論更力更不例里更來行兩裡參見 157

什說來見不見行類行參不歷來行不例不兩裡不見度說見度若識了什度識見更識了識度識論行什論了度見來來年論什什 07 參論論見識論論什論參參參兩識識論說不參見參兩裡參見什兩拉不拉更更來參不更不行說 158

說不不說不參論兩裡不見度說見度若識了什來識兩不參見來不說理不參利了論行什來說了更來兩立來兩參兩來論了度見不諒了了說來不說年論不說不說來不例力量不說來老 08 參論論見識論論什不了見來了參兩裡參見什了見數裡見更了更參率來率更 159

兩裡不見度說見度若識了什不識若見不不識度不識論行什來說參論更了來行論了度見不兩說年論率不見數 09 參論論見識論論什參不參了了參類類兩裡參見什不說數了論來說了兩裡不見度說見度若識了什不度更力了力更見 160

論行什行論了度見度見不不更更來參更更不不年論不 10 參論論見識論論什不不兩來論來念力不不見說力不論識不兩論不不力說量歷立量立不不參不什論參勵說不年見勵參兩裡參見什數量見不識不什來不不若什論參不 161

兩裡不見度說見度若識了什不說識說見說說見說什裡說見說什不見識論行什論了度見不離離了年論說說了 162

錄料錄 1 理流 3 更 2 錄錄數匿欄律理 163

164

165

166

167