English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 93244/123616 (75%)
Visitors : 27786033      Online Users : 535
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/61748


    Title: 歷史社會學的方法論爭議
    Authors: 苗延威
    Miao,Yen-Wei
    Contributors: 社會系
    Keywords: 歷史社會學;比較社會學;歷史轉向;方法論爭議;穆勒比較法
    Historical sociology;Comparative sociology;The historical turn;Methodological debates;Mill's methods
    Date: 2013.03
    Issue Date: 2013-11-21 09:10:58 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: This article reviews the process whereby Theda Skocpol and other pioneers of the "historical turn" in the 1980s, by employing J. S. Mill's methods and other comparative research designs, have led a generation of sociologists to claim legitimacy for historical sociology and how they have been involved within the so-called "methodological debates" with mainstream sociologists in the 1990s. The debates show more than confirming the already confirmed. The warnings proposed by critics help sociologists rethink and deal with the possible limits of historical sociology. Historical sociology is viewed as a gray area not only because of its obscure relations both to sociological theories and historical data, but also because of its being "domesticated" as a methodologically-oriented subfield in the discipline rather than maintaining its critical spirit and its longing for reviving the classical tradition since the early postwar period. This article discusses several waves of the methodological debates over historical sociology. By analyzing these debates, it aims to provide us a useful frame of reference to define historical sociology among relevant academic disciplines and to overcome the challenges we are going to face with.
    本文回顧了「歷史社會學」在1980年代由Theda Skocpol等先驅者引領的「歷史轉向」風潮,以及在這個發展裡,包括它與穆勒比較法和比較社會學的結合,其中所涉及的一些重要方法論爭議。透過1990年代批評者的種種質疑,以及歷史社會學者的多方向辯護,將有助於我們省思歷史社會學的侷限,並探索可能的化解途徑。歷史社會學躋身為社會學學門旁支或次領域的「方法化」過程,反映了歷史社會學仍處於灰色地帶,這不僅是由於它在社會學理論與歷史材料之間,存在著模糊難分的關係,同時也是由於它與戰後初期渴望回歸古典社會學傳統的批判精神漸行漸遠,而這正是晚近歷史社會學者意識到的「馴化」危機。本文討論了數波歷史社會學的方法論爭議,藉由剖析這些一來一往的攻防論辯,期盼可以為歷史社會學在相關知識體系中的位置,及其可能遭遇的難題,提供一個有所助益的參考架構。
    Relation: 社會科學論叢, 7(1), 99-147
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[社會學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    99147.pdf3585KbAdobe PDF853View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback