Logics of History - William H. Sewell Jr., 小威廉·休厄尔

Logics of History

William H. Sewell Jr., 小威廉·休厄尔

出版时间

2005-08-01

ISBN

9780226749181

评分

★★★★★
书籍介绍
While social scientists and historians have been exchanging ideas for a long time, they have never developed a proper dialogue about social theory. William H. Sewell Jr. observes that on questions of theory the communication has been mostly one way: from social science to history. Logics of History argues that both history and the social sciences have something crucial to offer each other. While historians do not think of themselves as theorists, they know something social scientists do not: how to think about the temporalities of social life. On the other hand, while social scientists’ treatments of temporality are usually clumsy, their theoretical sophistication and penchant for structural accounts of social life could offer much to historians. Renowned for his work at the crossroads of history, sociology, political science, and anthropology, Sewell argues that only by combining a more sophisticated understanding of historical time with a concern for larger theoretical questions can a satisfying social theory emerge. In Logics of History, he reveals the shape such an engagement could take, some of the topics it could illuminate, and how it might affect both sides of the disciplinary divide.
AI导读
核心看点
  • 批判单向理论交流,主张历史学与社会学应平等对话。
  • 提出双重结构概念,融合文化、偶然性与能动性。
  • 重构时间性逻辑,以事件视角挑战决定论历史观。
适合谁读
  • 历史学、社会学及人类学专业的研究生与学者。
  • 对史学理论、新文化史及社会理论感兴趣的读者。
  • 希望理解结构与行动关系、跨学科研究方法的读者。
读前提醒
  • 理论密度高,建议结合具体历史案例辅助理解抽象概念。
  • 部分章节论述繁复,可先把握核心论点再细读论证过程。
  • 需具备一定社会科学理论基础,否则阅读门槛较高。
读者共识
  • 被视为历史社会学领域的经典之作,常读常新。
  • 对文化转向的反思及双重结构理论极具启发性。
  • 部分读者认为行文啰嗦,但公认其理论梳理价值极高。

本导读基于书籍简介、目录、原文摘录、短评和书评生成,不等同于全文精读。

精彩摘录
  • "读过前几章的人,应该留意到了我对方法论的强烈偏好。坦率地说,我承认自己是把社会生活首先视为阐释(诠释)性和历史性的。在此前提下,思考任何社会行动、公共团体或事件时,都涉及两个核心问题:其一是受众体验;其二是,对我们自己和我们研究的对象来说,变动的框架在彰显意涵的过程中扮演了什么角色。研究者所面临的最大挑战,是如何重构变动世界的意义和经验,使读者也认可这种解读,尤其读者本身也在研究研究和捕捉这些内容。"
  • "但把“社会”当成话语事实理解,最终想解决的问题,与其在18世纪新出现的用法试图解决的一致,是要为人类生活提供本体论基础。"
  • "但用语言隐喻为何符号性编码采取特定种类,或其如何产生、保持和转型,恐怕力有不逮。"
  • "话话话语中,衔接意味着特定话语与另一种话语处于附属或关联的状态。 用后结构主义的话来说,关联不同话语的操作通常被称作“缝合”(suturing)。 反之,“衔接”也能用来指话语间自然地结合或配合,一如人类体内节节接合的脊椎,所以,“缝合”也指外科医生的积极干预,即把之前相互分离的肌理缝在一起。 对文化史来说,与衔接或缝合话语有关的问题,就像面包跟黄油一样不可或缺例如,莱奥诺·达维多夫(Leonore Davidoff)* 与凯瑟琳·霍尔(Catherine Hall)曾论及,在19 世纪的不列颠,一种女性气质(femininity)的话语已附着在有关中产阶级家庭话语中,并形成了家庭生活(dom"
  • "In the post-Fordist period, advertising and design have worked to diversify consumer tastes by creating and commercially exploiting a multitude of consumer "lifestyles"."
  • "…… But it does seem to have made strong structural determinisms less plausible across the board and to have induced thinkers in a number of different intellectual locations and with a whole range of political and epistemological proclivities to turn toward more micro-level or actor-based forms of ex"
  • "The remainder of this book, by demonstrating the compatibility of structural thinking with an emphasis on culture, contingency, and agency, attempts to respond to this looming historiographical challenge—by providing a theoretical language transcending the antinomy of social and cultural history."
  • "I will argue that the dominant teleological and experimental concepts of temporality are seriously deficient……eventful notion of temporality, which sees the course of history as determined by a succession of largely contingent events."
作者简介
William H. Sewell Jr. is the Frank P. Hixon Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science and History at the University of Chicago. He is the author of three previous books, including Work and Revolution in France and A Rhetoric of Bourgeois Revolution.
用户评论
“...a reality previously represented by such religious concepts as Divine Will or Providence”成了“过去由诸如神意和天道这类宗教概念主宰的人类身处的现实”@@不得不说,两个译者讨巧得很……可能要很久才读得“完”……不“读过”就会永远在读了……
这段时间的读书计划没有顺利完成。。。。:(我很自责。。
:无
强推,前两章的社会史/新文化史综述,对cultural turn的反思以及自己的dual structure的概念建构都值得认真反思,最后提出的return of social也是我希望踏足的领域
不同学科的人对这本书的评价很不一样,跟与这本书有关的学术史有关,也跟各学科方法和材料-立论-分析之间的度有关。如何理解和评价是个有些意思的话题。|休爷您就不能不那么罗嗦么?完全可以化约节省至少四分之一的篇幅也讲得清诶
非常同意culture的定义和特征,以及确实从“亲缘性”上说历史学和人类学相比起历史学和其他社会科学要更近一点。
Chapters 1-2 尤其是第二章对cultural turn历史知识生产和资本主义关系的反思很精彩 (出这本书的时候似乎还没有neoliberalism 这个词🤔
第五章,在后现代遗产下丧失了抵抗力的人类学
读了一个学期,算是文化和历史社会学这两个subfield的必读书了。Sewell给历史社会学乃至社会理论带来的转变可谓是历史社会学的康德了。
出乎意料地好读,并在艳羡中同样生出了对本人所在的搅屎棍学科全无立足理论的担忧(。
收藏