空間作為方法：社會與物的空間存有論

Space as Method Spatial Ontology of ＂the Social＂ and Objects

10.6161/jgs.201809_(90).0001

王志弘(Chih-Hung Wang)

空間性 ； 拓樸學 ； 物質性 ； 批判實在論 ； 關係存有論 ； spatiality ； topology ； materiality ； critical realism ； ontology of relationality

地理學報

90期（2018 / 09 / 01）

1 - 26

繁體中文

本文回顧有關空間性質及作用的重要文獻，嘗試提出空間作為方法的論點。作者討論批判的政治經濟學、結構化理論、批判實在論、關係存有論等取徑，說明社會與空間、物與空間之間關係的代表性著作。作者主張：無論強調空間是促成的產物或建構的力量，往往易將空間物質化和物化。最好將空間視為方法，來探討社會和物的空間存有。空間作為方法，首先是大霹靂展開的相對空間之間隙，令萬物的存在得以區辨；其次是構築絕對空間座標來衡量萬物的形態和運動；第三是以關係空間來掌握萬物的性質和作用。空間作為方法，意味了空間是促成的過程，而非靜態的形式；空間的三重方法，也體現了物質和社會存在的多重層次。最後，空間政治雖可溯及空間的多重性和變動可能，但必須連結上利益、價值及權力，亦即連結上對社會的理解。

This article reviews literature on spatiality and its inherent effects, and proposes to conceptualize space as a method. Seminal works that elucidate the relationships between society (＂the social＂), objects and space are reviewed by discussing critical political economy, structuration theory, critical realism and relational ontology. Previous works tend to materialize and reify space, whether it is conceptualized as an enacted product or a force of construction. In contrast, this investigation proposes that we take space as a method to analyze the spatial ontology of ＂the social＂ and objects. First, relative space as a method describes the gaps between objects and the expansion of the universe after the Big Bang. Therefore, space as such renders everything distinguishable. Second, absolute space as a method refers to the system of coordinates for measuring the shape and motion of an object. Third, the existential qualities and effects of objects may be grasped through the relative space. Taken as a method, space becomes a process of enactment rather than a static form, and the three methods embedded in the notions of space embody the multifarious ontologies of materials and ＂the social＂. The author concludes that although the multiplicity and changing possibilities of spatiality determine the politics of space, researchers still need to consider interests, values, power, and understandings of the social sphere.

1. Bryson, J.(ed.),Daniels, P.(ed.),Henry, N.(ed.),Pollard, J.(ed.)(2000).Knowledge, space, economy.London:Routledge.
2. Castells, M.(1983).The city and the grassroots: A cross-cultural theory of urban social movements.Berkeley:University of California Press.
3. Castells, M.(2000).The rise of the network society.Oxford:Blackwell.
4. Castells, M.(1977).The urban question.Cambridge, Mass.:The MIT Press.
5. Cooke, P.(1989).Localities: The changing face of urban Britain.London:Unwin Hyman.
6. Crang, M.(ed.),Thrift, N.(ed.)(2000).Thinking space.London:Routledge.
7. de Laet, M.,Mol, A.(2000).The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology.Social Studies of Science,30(2),225-63.
8. Duncan, S.,Savage, M.(1989).Space, scale and locality.Antipode,21,179-206.
9. Freiberg, J. W.(ed.)(1979).Critical sociology: European perspective.New York:Irvington.
10. Giddens, A.(1984).The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration.Berkeley:University of California Press.
11. Harman, G.(2016).Immaterialism: Object and social theory.Cambridge, UK:Polity.
12. Harvey, D.(2009).Cosmopolitanism and the geographies of freedom.New York:Columbia University Press.
13. Harvey, D.(2006).Spaces of global capitalism.London:Verso.
14. Harvey, D.(1982).The limits to capital.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
15. Harvey, D.(2001).Globalization and the 'spatial fix.Geographische Revue,2,23-30.
16. Harvey, D.(1973).Social justice and the city.Oxford:Basil Blackwell.
17. Huggett, N., and C. Hoefer. 2017. Absolute and relational theories of space and motion. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition), ed. E. N. Zalta. https:// plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/spacetime-theories/ (last accessed 18 February 2018).
18. Janiak, A. 2016. Kant's views on space and time. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), ed. E. N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/kant-spacetime/ (last accessed 18 February 2018).
19. Jones, M.(2009).Phase space: Geography, relational thinking, and beyond.Progress in Human Geography,33(4),487-506.
20. Latour, B.(1997).Trains of thought: Piaget, formalism, and the fifth dimension.Common Knowledge,6(3),170-91.
21. Latour, B.(2005).Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
22. Latour, B.,Yavena, A.(2008)."Give me a gun and I will make all buildings move": An ANT's view of architecture.Explorations in architecture: Teaching, design, research,Basel:
23. Law, J.(2002).Objects and spaces.Theory, Culture and Society,19(5/6),91-105.
24. Law, J.(1986).On the methods of long distance control: Vessels, navigation, and the Portuguese route to India.Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge?,London:
25. Law, J.,Mol, A.(2001).Situating technoscience: An inquiry into spatialitis.Environment and Planning D: Society and Space,19,609-21.
26. Lefebvre, H.(2003).The urban revolution.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
27. Lefebvre, H.(1991).The production of space.Oxford:Basil Blackwell.
28. Löw, M.(2008).The constitution of space: The structuration of spaces through the simultaneity of effect and perception.European Journal of Social Theory,11(1),25-49.
29. Löw, M.,Goodwin, Donald(trans.)(2016).The sociology of space: Materiality, social structures, and action.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
30. Massey, D.(2005).For space.London:Sage.
31. Massey, D.(1992).Politics and space/time.New Left Review,196,65-84.
32. Massey, D.(1984).Spatial division of labour: Social structures and geography of production.New York:Methuen.
33. Mol, A.,Law, J.(1994).Regions, networks, and fluids: Anaemia and social topology.Social Studies of Science,24(4),641-71.
34. November, V.,Camacho-Hübner, E.,Latour, B.(2010).Entering a risky territory: Space in the age of digital navigation.Environment and Planning D: Society and Space,28(4),581-99.
35. Peet, R.(1998).Modern geographical thought.Oxford:Blackwell.
36. Sayer, A.(1985).The difference that space makes.Social relations and spatial structures,New York:
37. Sayer, A.(2000).Realism and social science.London:Sage.
38. Soja, E.(1989).Postmodern geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory.London:Verso.
39. Soja, E.(1996).Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places.Oxford:Blackwell.
40. Soja, E.(1980).The socio-spatial dialectic.Annals of the Association of American Geographers,70(2),207-25.
41. Thrift, N.(2006).Space.Theory, Culture and Society,23(2/3),139-46.
42. Tuan, Y.-F.(1977).Space and place: The perspective of experience.London:Edward Arnold.
43. 王志弘(1996)。女性主義與後現代主義的地理學鍵結—重要文獻之評介。建築與城鄉研究學報，8，117-28。

1. 黃明利,吳連賞(2022)。東港現代商業階層的形成。地理研究，76，1-42。
2. 蔣正和(2023)。臺灣媽祖信仰的空間重構及其影響－卡斯特網路社會理論之視角。華岡地理學報，35，84-99。
3. 倪晶瑋,李佳(2020)。海峽兩岸空間領域通用設計之系統性文獻回顧。設計學研究，23(2)，1-32。
4. (2024)。空間如何媒介時代感？探討博物館物質性與參訪者身體感實踐的交織。新聞學研究，161，1-46。