市場、市民社會與國家等槪念是臺灣當前社會福利論戰的主角，尤其是市場與國家， 但是這三個槪念是西方社會福利理論精粹化的結晶品。這些槪念之假設性的意義往往多 於經驗性的意義，三者之間更是具有意識形態的對立狀況，如自由主義經濟學、費邊社 社會主義以及馬克思主義分別對市場、國家與市民社會的崇信。國內學者雖然認淸這些 理論與槪念的規範性格，卻都將其當作經驗性與普遍性的槪念，逕用來討論或爭辯臺灣 未來的社會福利發展，本文認爲有其不當之處。 此外，本文更進一步反省歐洲福利國家之市場、市民社會與國家的實際發展過程， 認爲這三個社會場域都只是歐洲福利國家之整體社會特質，裸露於外而明顯可辨的部分 而已。雖然這三個社會場域初看恰似孤峰對峙，然而卻有其共同的整體性盤座。而此盤 座正是公領域之社會規範法律化與私領域之隱私權相互穿透的產物。對於這個盤座的探 討，本文認爲可能必須從市場、市民社會與國家之外來理解。經由古典社會學與年鑑史 學之整體史的啓發，本文認爲這是重新理解歐洲福利國家的重要觀念，可以使得異文明 的我們更淸楚歐洲福利國家的可能與限制。

“Market,” “civil society,” and “state” are pivotal concepts in debates concerning the current situation in social welfare in Taiwan. In fact, however, each of these three concepts is a consequence of debates over social welfare in Western states. As such, each concept is itself an ideological construct reflecting the reverence awarded it by liberal economists, Fabian socialists, or Marxists. I find it unacceptable that Taiwan scholars, despite knowing better, continue to apply these concepts in their discussions about the future course of development of social welfare in Taiwan. After working through to the true nature of European markets, civil society, and the state, this essay also finds markets, civil society, and the state to be euphemeral phenomena. Also, though appearing to be antithetical, these three concepts in fact share a common basis. This common basis is the product of the legalization of social norms in the public sphere and their penetration into the private sphere. My discussion of this common basis concludes that it can only be comprehended by reaching beyond this common basis. Inspired by classic sociology and the Annales School, I find that this new understanding of the European social welfare state clarifies the possibilities and limits of European social welfare for social welfare in Taiwan.