臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　This research concentrates on explore what the students expected in daily living of students who are studying in Ho Chi Minh Buddhist boarding school (Le Minh Xuan campus) and propose the solutions for Buddhist university. The research was undertaken based on using Buddhist Systems Methodology (BSM) theory, which was developed by Chao-Ying Shen, combined both Buddhist philosophy and related ideas from systems thinking. The research methods to be used are Observational, Deeply Interviews, Analytical and Synthetic methods. This research displays the difficulties in Vietnam Buddhist University ( Le Minh Xuan campus) is the “whispering and grumbles” were communicated between the member to hunt harmony and peace, the complaints would imply dissonance. The resulting conclusion of this research is built the communication channel between the hierarchy structures.

ABSTRACT 　II
TABLE OF THE CONTENT 　III
LIST OF THE TABLE 　VIII
LIST OF THE FIGURES 　IX

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 　1
1.1 Research Background and Motivation 　1
1.2 Vietnam Buddhist Sangha and Vietnam Buddhist University 　3
1.2.1 Vietnam Buddhist Sangha(VBS) 　3
1.2.2 Vietnam Buddhist University (VBU) 　4
1.3 The Problems of Vietnam Buddhist University 　5
1.4 Research Objectives 　6
1.5 Research Procedure 　7
1.6 The Significant Of The Study 　8
1.7 The Structure Of The Study 　9
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 　10
2.1 Systems Thinking (ST) 　10
2.1.1 The Introduction Of Systems Thinking　10
2.1.2 The Systems Thinking Approach 　11
2.2 Buddhist Thinking 　15
2.3 The Buddhist Systems Methodology (BSM) 　16
2.4 Conclusion 　24
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 　25
3.1 Sampling Plan and Methodology 　25
3.2 Content Analysis 　28
3.3 Interview Process 　29
CHAPTER FOUR EMPIRICAL RESULT　31
4.1 The Summary of BSM (Boundary Critique Questions) 　31
4.1.1 What currently motivates you and other to define the issue at hand? What ought to be your/their motivation? 　31
4.1.2 Is covetousness, resentment or maliciousness influencing you or other in defining the issue? If so, what might the issue look like from yours or other points of view if these were removed? 　32
4.1.3 Is lying, deceitfulness, slander or any other “improper” use of language involved in the way this issue is being defined by you or others? If so, what might the issue look like from yours or other points of view if these were removed? 　33
4.1.4 Is there any major misconduct (killing, stealing, etc.) linked with the issue? If so, should this be included as an integral part of defining the issue? 　34
4.1.5 Is the issue being defined in a way that privileges your own concern over wider social concern? Is there a way to define the issue in a way that includes a wider set of concerns, without making the issue impossible to address? 　34
4.1.6 Is there idles, apathy or avoidance of the issue? Who should be engaged with the issue and how? 　35
4.1.7 Are there any misrepresentations of self, others or the non-human world in the definition of the issue? Have you test out what you attribute to others by asking them? Should you do so, and if not, why not? If there are misrepresentations, what might the issue look like from yours and other point of view if these were corrected? 　36
4.1.8 Has the mental discipline of Buddhist thinking been applied sufficiently in defining the issue? If not, can further Buddhist systemic investigation be undertaken? 　37
4.1.9 From the various points of view of those involved and (potentially) affected, what are the different possibilities for defining “middle path” between their ethical and practical concern? What risks might be associated with the different middle path, and which one should be chosen? 　38
4.1.10 From the various points of view of those involved and (potentially) affected, what cause-condition-effect relationships are important to understanding this issue? What are their potential consequences and the risks of ignoring them? Which should therefore be accounted for, and what conditions make this choice the right one? 　38
4.1.11 From the various point of view of those involved and (potentially) affected, what cultural and ecological contexts are relevant to understanding the issue? What is your view in relation to these other views, and why? 　39
4.1.12 From the various of view of those involved and (potentially) affected, what time scale for dealing with this issue should be adopted, and why? What is your view in relation to these other views? 　40
4.2 The Summary Of BSM (Choice and Methods Questions) 　40
4.2.1 What method(s) will foster desirable motivations and inhibit undesirable one (as defined through boundary critique)? 　40
4.2.2 What method(s) will eliminate or minimize any covetousness, resentment and maliciousness you have identified? 　41
4.2.3 What method(s) will eliminate or minimize any lying, deceitfulness, slander or any other “improper” use of language you have identified? 　41
4.2.4 What method(s) will tackle any major misconduct (killing, stealing, etc.) you have identified? 　42
4.2.5 What method(s) will help in preventing a narrow set of concerns being privileged over wider social concerns, but without making the issue impossible to address? 　42
4.2.6 What method(s) will work to counteract any idleness, apathy or avoidance that you have identified? 　43
4.2.7 What method(s) will help to minimize misrepresentation of self, other and/or the non-human world? 　43
4.2.8 What method(s) will help promote the mental discipline of Buddhist thinking, if this is not sufficiently in evidence? 　44
4.2.9 What method(s) will support people in developing the middle path between ethical and practical imperatives identified through the boundary critique? 　44
4.2.10 What method(s) will help people account for the key causecondition-effect relationships identified through the boundary critique? 　45
4.2.11 What method(s) will help people account for the key cultural and ecological contexts identified through the boundary critique, and will they work in those contexts? 　46
4.2.12 What method(s) will work in the time scale specified in the boundary critique　46
4.3 Conclusion 　47
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 　48
5.1 Discussions 　48
5.2 Contribution 　49
5.2.1 Academic Contribution 　49
5.2.2 Practical Contribution 　49
5.3 Research Limitations 　50
5.4 Implication for Future Research 　50
REFEFRENCES 　51
APPENDICES 　55

Arnold, R. D. & Wade, J. P. (2015), A definition of systems thinking: a systems approach. Procedia computer science, No.44, pp.669-678.
Bapat, P. V. (1956), 2500 years of Buddhism. Government of India: Publications Division.
Bosch, O., Maani, K. & Smith, C. (2007), Systems thinking-Language of complexity for scientists and managers. In Improving the Triple Bottom Line Returns from Small-scale Forestry, No.1, pp.57-66.
Caldwell, R. (2012), Systems thinking, organizational change and agency: A practice theory critique of Senge's Learning Organization. Journal of Change Management, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 145-164.
Cavana, R. Y. & Maani, K. E. (2000), A methodological framework for systems thinking and modelling (ST&M) interventions. In ICSTM.
Chang, O. H. (2002), Humanistic Buddhism and Knowledge Management. Hsi Lai Journal of Humanistic Buddhism, No. 3, pp. 227-243.
Checkland, P. (1999), Systems thinking. Rethinking management information systems, pp. 45-56.
Churchman, C. W. (1964), An approach to general systems theory. Chapter 14, pp. 173-175.
Combs, A., Burneko, G., Goerner, S., Brown, T. & Guenther, H. (2002), The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, Vol. 9, No.2, pp. 83-91.
Davidson, N. & Worsham, T. (1992), Enhancing Thinking through Cooperative Learning. Teachers College Press, 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027.
Dien mao moi cua hoc vien PGVN tại Tp. Ho Chi Minh co so Le Minh Xuan (http://phatgiao.org.vn/van-de-quan-tam/201501/dien-mao-moi-cua-Hoc-vien-PGVN-tai-Tp-HCM-co-so-Le-Minh-Xuan-17059/).
Flood, R. L. & Ulrich, W. (1990), Testament to conversations on critical systems thinking between two systems practitioners. Systems Practice, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 7-29.
Ha, L. K. (2009), Buddhist education, Religious Publisher.
Harvey, P. (1990), An Introduction to Buddhism. Cambridge University Press.
Henry, B. C. (2013), New Paradigm of Systems Thinking. International Journal, Vol 2, No. 5.
Hoang, T. Q. (2015), Higher Buddhist Education in Vietnam: challengers and solution, paper presented to “ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) International Buddhist Conference” on “Buddhist Social Work and Education in AEC””.
Huang, C. L. & Wang, D. M. (2003), Human resource management and systems thinking—A potent combination. Journal of Chinese management, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 93-107.
Kalupahana, D. J. (1976), Buddhist philosophy: A historical analysis. University of Hawaii Press.
Koizumi, T. (1997), Nature, Spirituality, and Environmental Ethics: East Meets West, Cybernetics and Human Knowing, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 5-24.
Maani, K, E. & Cavana, R. Y. (2007), Systems thinking, system dynamic: Managing change and complexity, 2 edn, Prentice Hall, Pearson.
Nakthong, B., Jumpadaeng, S. & Phothisane, S. (2015). Wat Phra Tat, Space and Environment Management of Buddhist Temples and Relics in the Esan Region. Asian Culture and History, Vol. 7, No. 1,p 16.
Nhieu, T. T. (2013), Result report “Ensure and promote the rights of religious freedom in Vietnam through the actual actions of Vietnam Buddhist Sangha”.
Rarick, C. A. (2007), Enlightened management: an analysis of Buddhist precepts applied to managerial activity. Journal of Global Business Management.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998), Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theor. Sage Publications, Inc.
Szczygiel, P. A. (2015), A Buddhist-informed conceptual framework for approaching difficult emotions in psychotherapy. University of Pennsylvania.
Senge, P. M. (2014), The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. Crown Business.
Shen, C. Y. (2014), The Study on the Construction of a Buddhist Community as a Learning Organization Based on Systems Thinking & Perspective, and its Prospects. Applied Science and Management Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 134-146.
Shen, C. Y. & Midgley, G. (2007), Toward a Buddhist systems methodology 1: comparisons between Buddhism and systems theory. Systemic Practice and Action Research, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 167-194.
Midgley, G. & Shen, C. Y. (2007), Toward a Buddhist systems methodology 2: An exploratory, questioning approach. Systemic Practice and Action Research, Vol.20, No. 3, pp. 195-210.
Shen, C. Y. & Midgley, G. (2014), Action research in a problem avoiding culture using a Buddhist systems methodology. Action Research, 1476750314558428.
Shen, C. Y.,& Midgley, G. (2007), Toward a Buddhist systems methodology 3: an application in a Taiwanese non-governmental organization. Systemic Practice and Action Research, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 211-244.
TT. Thich Nhat Tu noi ve tu hoc noi tru cua tang ni sinh
http://thuvienhoasen.org/a25238/tt-thich-nhat-tu-noi-ve-tu-hoc-noi-tru-cua-tang-ni-sinh.
Wang, P. Y. (2006), Human resource management plays a new role in learning organizations, The journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, pp. 52-56.