A Passion for Facts

Tong Lam

出版时间

2011-11-01

ISBN

9780520267862

评分

★★★★★
书籍介绍

In this path-breaking book, Tong Lam examines the emergence of the “culture of fact” in modern China, showing how elites and intellectuals sought to transform the dynastic empire into a nation-state, thereby ensuring its survival. Lam argues that an epistemological break away from traditional modes of understanding the observable world began around the turn of the twentieth century. Tracing the Neo-Confucian school of evidentiary research and the modern departure from it, Lam shows how, through the rise of the social survey, “the fact” became a basic conceptual medium and source of truth. In focusing on China’s social survey movement, A Passion for Facts analyzes how information generated by a range of research practices—census, sociological investigation, and ethnography—was mobilized by competing political factions to imagine, manage, and remake the nation.

Tong Lam is Associate Professor of History at the University of Toronto.

目录
List of Illustrations
Acknowledgments
Introduction
1. The Rise of the Fact and the Reimagining of China
2. From Divide and Rule to Combine and Count

显示全部
用户评论
常读常新
非常喜歡,借了圖書館的書不捨得還回去。。從「社會調查」看政治權力的運籌帷幄以及modern nation state怎麼在個人的身份認同的構建中發揮作用,以晚清和民國的人口普查爲例,算是清晰、完整。特別喜歡涉及到少數民族的方面,以及他是一位歷史學教授,同時還是是visual artist(星星眼)
很喜欢。一本好书不需要面面俱到,我喜欢这种视野广阔,思维发散,理论功底深厚的书。
重点在第二、三章。对此书的讨论,仅纠缠于方法论似乎意义不大。
Foucault,Ann Stoler,不知道是不是写census都会这么用. 不管怎么说,对我自己帮助很大。 但是不可否认的是,作者似乎完全用福柯的框架去引领材料的组织,让人难以接受...
A study of the culture of fact gathering at the turn of China's transition from a dynastic empire to a nation state. Besides the expected Anderson and Foucault citation, his argument on the rise of the social" as an object of investigation and governance is incisive. The part on the role of affect in knowledge production is not compelling though.
真是精致的以论代史~
怎麼說呢,現在自己課題做久了以後就會覺得這本書其實真的過於強調後現代理論,接著前後矛盾地方還是很多…但大概還是會推薦吧… 因為這方面的學術研究確實太少了.
切入点很有启发,大规模开展社会调查、生产社会事实可以是国家介入社会生活的起点。后面论证确实在用理论填补史料的不足,理论用得也不好。作者的分析主要围绕社会调查的实证方法和结果是如何被当时的媒体呈现,以及如何被学者、调查者、官员言说的,并没有太多涉及到调查过程是怎样的,具体数据是怎么来的,以及当时的社科学者是怎么分析这些数据的。而且人口统计、农村调查和考古实证追求的似乎不是一类“事实”,方法也相差太多,放在一本书里有些奇怪……
收藏