當前學界以各種意識形態觀點和理論典範來探討台灣歷史。在光譜一端有「兩岸不可分」的論述，視台灣為中國固有、不可切割的疆域；光譜另一端是「台灣為主體」的觀念，認為台灣居民長期以來一向自治自決，跟中國大陸沒什麼瓜葛。近年來學者的討論逐漸想跳脫方法學、理論、詮釋觀點的二分法，他們致力於在不同史觀之間開始對話，建立共識。本論文指出：欲達成共識，唯有要先檢視各種論證邏輯的區別，才能掙脫空間二分法的局限。因此本文宗旨在於鑒定，從原住民起源到日本殖民時期，「兩岸不可分」和「台灣為主體」兩種歷史觀點的主要差異有哪些，並且評估這些差異在當前學術討論的思維中扮演甚麼角色。

Current scholarly work looks at Taiwanese history through a wide spectrum ofideological viewpoints and theoretical paradigms. At the extreme ends of this palette,the ‘Pro-China’ disposition which views Taiwan as an integral part of China “sinceancient times” is challenged by the ‘Pro-Taiwan’ proposition which argues that theinhabitants of Taiwan were basically always autonomous and averse to the Mainland.In ongoing recent discussions, researchers now thrive to overcome dichotomies onquestions of methodology, theory, and interpretational perspectives. They aim toestablish dialogue between different historical viewpoints and to establish consensus.This paper argues that consensus building first requires appraisal of thedifferences in argumentation before spatial-bound dichotomies can be overcome.Therefore the objective of this paper is to identify the major differences in ‘Pro-China’versus ‘Pro-Taiwan’ historical viewpoints as they unfold from the Aborigines’ origin tothe Japanese colonial period and to relate their assessment to the latest insights of theongoing discussion.