Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences - James Mahoney (EDT)

Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences

James Mahoney (EDT)

出版时间

2003-02-10

ISBN

9780521016452

评分

★★★★★
书籍介绍

The book considers the past accomplishments and future agendas of comparative-historical research in the social sciences. It defines the distinctiveness of this type of research and explores its strengths in explaining important outcomes (e.g. revolutions, social provision, democracy) in the world. It includes sections on substantive research accomplishments, methodology, and theory, and features essays by some of the most important political scientists and sociologists currently working.

This review of the accomplishments and future agendas of comparative historical research in the social sciences explores its strengths in explaining important worldwide outcomes (e.g., revolutions, social provision, democracy). It includes sections on substantive research accomplishments, methodology, and theory, and features essays by some of the most important political scientists and sociologists currently working.

James Mahoney is a comparative-historical researcher with interests in socioeconomic development, political regimes, and methodology. His most recent books are Colonialism and Postcolonial Development: Spanish America in Comparative Perspective (2010) and Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power (2010; co-edited with Kathleen Thelen). He is also the autho...

(展开全部)

精彩摘录
  • "We suggested that comparative historical analysis is best considered part of a long-standing intellectual project oriented toward the explanation of substantively important outcomes. It is defined by a concern with causal analysis, an emphasis on processes over time, and the use of systematic and co"
  • "...comparative historical researchers ask questions and formulate puzzles about specific sets of cases that exhibit sufficient similarity to be meaningfully compared with one another."
作者简介
James Mahoney is a comparative-historical researcher with interests in socioeconomic development, political regimes, and methodology. His most recent books are Colonialism and Postcolonial Development: Spanish America in Comparative Perspective (2010) and Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power (2010; co-edited with Kathleen Thelen). He is also the author of The Legacies of Liberalism: Path Dependence and Political Regimes in Central America (2001) and co-editor of Comparative-Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (2003; with Dietrich Rueschemeyer). His book Colonialism and Postcolonial Development: Spanish America in Comparative Perspective won four major awards from the American Sociological Association and American Political Science Association. His article publications feature work on political and socioeconomic development in Latin America, path dependence in historical sociology, and causal inference in small-N analysis. Mahoney is a past President of the American Political Science Association (APSA) Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research, and he is Chair of the American Sociological Association Section for Comparative and Historical Sociology. Dietrich Rueschemeyer is a Brown professor of sociology emeritus and Charles C. Tillinghast Jr. '32 Professor of International Studies emeritus. He currently works on state formation and historical antecedents of socioeconomic development. He was one of the founders of Brown's Center for the Comparative Study of Development, which merged into the Watson Institute. From 1997 to 2002, Professor Rueschemeyer led the Institute's Political Economy and Development Program. His books include Usable Theory: Analytic Tools for Social and Political Research (Princeton University Press, forthcoming in 2009); Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (Cambribge University Press, 2003, co-edited with J. Mahoney); Participation and Democracy East and West: Comparisons and Interpretations (M. E. Sharpe, 1998, co-edited with M. Rueschemeyer and B. Wittrock); States, Social Knowledge, and the Origins of Modern Social Policies (Princeton University Press, 1996, co-edited with Th. Skocpol); Capitalist Development and Democracy (University of Chicago Press, 1992, co-authored with E. H. Stephens and J. D. Stephen); Power and the Division of Labour (Stanford University Press, 1986); and Bringing the State Back In (Cambridge University Press, 1985, co-edited with P.B. Evans and Th. Skocpol). He received his doctorate in sociology at the University of Cologne. Before coming to Brown, he taught at the University of Cologne, Dartmouth College, and the University of Toronto. He also taught at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the Free University of Berlin, and the Free University of Brussels.
目录
1. Comparative-historical analysis: achievements and agendas James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer;
Part I. Accumulation of Research:
2. Comparative-historical analysis and knowledge accumulation in the study of revolutions Jack A. Goldstone;
3. What we know about the development of social policy: comparative and historical research in comparative and historical perspective Edwin Amenta;
4. Knowledge accumulation in comparative-historical research: the case of democracy and authoritarianism James Mahoney;

显示全部
用户评论
一帮比较反感或少采用量化和大样本研究的学者汇编这本论文集来论证“比较历史研究法”的优点缺点,多少有一些在量化风潮下证明自己存在意义的味道。比较历史的方法当然能看到量化研究看不到的很多细微之处和因果机理,平衡理论层次和案例研究相对较好,也不会过于抽象。刚好站在科学化和反科学化、普遍化和特殊化的中间地带,有时候会遭到两边同时的批评。而且由于是比较“历史”研究,往往受到研究者和整体风潮限制,有一个案例“进入”历史的过程。量化研究似乎也无文集中所批评那么弱,其中甚至还有学者指称比较历史才是符合现在社会科学“本体论”的研究方法,量化研究乃是二三十年前本体论粗糙时代的方法,实在过于激进。想来我自己一向的研究方法也是近于此路,不过我是因数理基础不好、量化训练不足而被迫为止,而非主动选择,限制很大。
中间好几篇文章写的非常有启发性,本书是纪念去世的顾尔德的,他就是赵鼎新谈到的美国社会学的一个天才
读了感兴趣的五六篇,各种大牛。导论入门为主,兼有梳理总结之功。
各路大牛对于CHA的总结梳理。方法内容大致类似,defend CHA against the rising of rational choice and quantitative dominant view.
能不能过关就靠你啦
为CHA正名,但也并没有要说定量研究和理性选择的路径就不行。CHA处于三个cleavages中:一是定量定性之争;二是比较历史和理想选择之争;三是文化或者是建构主义与CHA之争。至少对于前两者来说,书中的大部分的作者都是认可矛盾是可协调的甚至是可以相互借鉴和结合的,其实感觉吵哪个更好真的意义不大,但是刻意贬低一类方法是绝对不可取的。书中三大部分:关于几个知识领域的积累;分析tools;methods。其中第二部分tools中关于制度主义的争论很精彩,有关制度变迁approach被thelen分为两大类,一类是constant cause一类是路径依赖解释,前者无论是功能权力分配还是社会建构解释都是静态的,相比路径依赖则是动态的,催生和维持制度的因素在不同事件节点不同
查一个引文时又把其中一章读了一遍,再次深感此书之重要性。
ch1,2,3,7,8,9,10; (pierson & thelen读过书了) ch1, scope; ch2 review of revolution, Tilly's mobilization, Moore's various paths to modernization, Skocpol, social-revo; ch7, positional method 想到hunter 那本community power structure, reputational analysis; ch9 deal with agency; ch10, technical strategies for CHA
再看看2015,总有一种“吾道孤”的感觉…
首章和Thelen一章,入门学习。
下载
收藏