政治与社会学

Edmund S. Ions
{"title":"政治与社会学","authors":"Edmund S. Ions","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9248.1968.tb00422.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AFTER a tradition of conspicuous neglect, British universities now display a marked enthusiasm for the study of sociology. The enthusiasm-one might even say the cult-is much in evidence at the new universities, but the civic universities, Oxbridge and the C.A.T.s all share it. Students of politics have been among the first to welcome and to appropriate the methods of sociology, and it must seem something of a heresy to air fundamental doubts about these enthusiasms. It must also seem ungracious to doubt the credentials of a subject which has struggled so long for recognition in this country and which is only now coming into its own. It is not my main concern in this article to revive old controversies about whether sociology is indeed a subject: whether it is no more than a technique, a set of heuristic devices which may, to limited degrees, throw fresh light on existing subjects or areas of study; whether it is parasitical, rather than an all-embracing social science as some of its devotees insist. These issues have been raised in the past (which is not to say that they have been satisfactorily settled), and they deserve a lengthier treatment than the confines of an article permit. I wish only to advance some observations on the validity and the suitability of certain concepts, methods and modes of thought which are borrowed by those who term themselves political sociologists, or who otherwise share current enthusiasms for sociological techniques. I begin with a platitude in order to introduce some less obvious remarks. The study of politics is as old as the history of man. Historical accounts of political theory or institutions normally take as their starting points the Greeks reflecting on the problems of the city states, but a moment’s thought suggests that positive attempts to solve the problems of politics are much more ancient. The study of politics began long before the Greek polis. The earlier civilizations of the Nile and the Euphrates valleys sought to solve the problems of law, order and authority just as positively as the Greek or the modern nation State, though not democratically. Ancient myths and oral traditions were by implication political theory in so far as they bolstered the State, however defined, by justifying the ruling hierarchy in terms of tradition. Seen as the attempt to meet the problems of power, its uses and abuses, politics has existed from pre-history to the present: neither the problems it attempts to solve, nor the modes of thought involved, are the prisoner of any language or era.","PeriodicalId":151999,"journal":{"name":"Jewish Sociology & Social Research","volume":"90 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1968-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Politics and sociology\",\"authors\":\"Edmund S. Ions\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.1467-9248.1968.tb00422.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AFTER a tradition of conspicuous neglect, British universities now display a marked enthusiasm for the study of sociology. The enthusiasm-one might even say the cult-is much in evidence at the new universities, but the civic universities, Oxbridge and the C.A.T.s all share it. Students of politics have been among the first to welcome and to appropriate the methods of sociology, and it must seem something of a heresy to air fundamental doubts about these enthusiasms. It must also seem ungracious to doubt the credentials of a subject which has struggled so long for recognition in this country and which is only now coming into its own. It is not my main concern in this article to revive old controversies about whether sociology is indeed a subject: whether it is no more than a technique, a set of heuristic devices which may, to limited degrees, throw fresh light on existing subjects or areas of study; whether it is parasitical, rather than an all-embracing social science as some of its devotees insist. These issues have been raised in the past (which is not to say that they have been satisfactorily settled), and they deserve a lengthier treatment than the confines of an article permit. I wish only to advance some observations on the validity and the suitability of certain concepts, methods and modes of thought which are borrowed by those who term themselves political sociologists, or who otherwise share current enthusiasms for sociological techniques. I begin with a platitude in order to introduce some less obvious remarks. The study of politics is as old as the history of man. Historical accounts of political theory or institutions normally take as their starting points the Greeks reflecting on the problems of the city states, but a moment’s thought suggests that positive attempts to solve the problems of politics are much more ancient. The study of politics began long before the Greek polis. The earlier civilizations of the Nile and the Euphrates valleys sought to solve the problems of law, order and authority just as positively as the Greek or the modern nation State, though not democratically. Ancient myths and oral traditions were by implication political theory in so far as they bolstered the State, however defined, by justifying the ruling hierarchy in terms of tradition. Seen as the attempt to meet the problems of power, its uses and abuses, politics has existed from pre-history to the present: neither the problems it attempts to solve, nor the modes of thought involved, are the prisoner of any language or era.\",\"PeriodicalId\":151999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jewish Sociology & Social Research\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1968-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jewish Sociology & Social Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1968.tb00422.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jewish Sociology & Social Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1968.tb00422.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在经历了一段明显被忽视的传统之后,英国大学现在对社会学的研究表现出了明显的热情。这种热情——甚至可以说是一种狂热——在新兴大学中非常明显,但普通大学、牛桥大学和高考都有这种热情。政治专业的学生是最早欢迎并采纳社会学方法的人之一,对这些热情提出根本的质疑肯定会显得有些异端邪说。怀疑一门学科的资格也一定显得有失厚道,这门学科在这个国家为获得承认而奋斗了这么长时间,直到现在才得到认可。在本文中,我主要关心的不是重新引起关于社会学是否确实是一门学科的旧争论:它是否只不过是一种技术,一套启发式手段,在有限程度上可以为现有的学科或研究领域带来新的启示;是否它是寄生的,而不是像它的一些信徒所坚持的那样是一门包罗万象的社会科学。这些问题在过去已经被提出(这并不是说它们已经令人满意地解决了),它们应该得到比物品许可证范围更长的处理。我只想就某些概念、方法和思维模式的有效性和适用性提出一些看法,这些概念、方法和思维模式被那些自称为政治社会学家的人所借鉴,或者是那些对社会学技术有着同样热情的人。为了介绍一些不太明显的评论,我以陈词滥调开头。政治学的研究和人类历史一样古老。政治理论或制度的历史记载通常以希腊人对城邦问题的反思为起点,但稍作思考就会发现,解决政治问题的积极尝试要古老得多。政治学的研究早在希腊城邦出现之前就开始了。尼罗河和幼发拉底河流域的早期文明试图像希腊或现代民族国家一样积极地解决法律、秩序和权威问题,尽管不是民主的。古代神话和口头传统隐含着政治理论,因为它们支持国家,无论如何定义,通过传统来证明统治等级。政治被视为解决权力、权力的使用和滥用问题的尝试,从史前到现在一直存在:它试图解决的问题和涉及的思维模式都不受任何语言或时代的束缚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Politics and sociology
AFTER a tradition of conspicuous neglect, British universities now display a marked enthusiasm for the study of sociology. The enthusiasm-one might even say the cult-is much in evidence at the new universities, but the civic universities, Oxbridge and the C.A.T.s all share it. Students of politics have been among the first to welcome and to appropriate the methods of sociology, and it must seem something of a heresy to air fundamental doubts about these enthusiasms. It must also seem ungracious to doubt the credentials of a subject which has struggled so long for recognition in this country and which is only now coming into its own. It is not my main concern in this article to revive old controversies about whether sociology is indeed a subject: whether it is no more than a technique, a set of heuristic devices which may, to limited degrees, throw fresh light on existing subjects or areas of study; whether it is parasitical, rather than an all-embracing social science as some of its devotees insist. These issues have been raised in the past (which is not to say that they have been satisfactorily settled), and they deserve a lengthier treatment than the confines of an article permit. I wish only to advance some observations on the validity and the suitability of certain concepts, methods and modes of thought which are borrowed by those who term themselves political sociologists, or who otherwise share current enthusiasms for sociological techniques. I begin with a platitude in order to introduce some less obvious remarks. The study of politics is as old as the history of man. Historical accounts of political theory or institutions normally take as their starting points the Greeks reflecting on the problems of the city states, but a moment’s thought suggests that positive attempts to solve the problems of politics are much more ancient. The study of politics began long before the Greek polis. The earlier civilizations of the Nile and the Euphrates valleys sought to solve the problems of law, order and authority just as positively as the Greek or the modern nation State, though not democratically. Ancient myths and oral traditions were by implication political theory in so far as they bolstered the State, however defined, by justifying the ruling hierarchy in terms of tradition. Seen as the attempt to meet the problems of power, its uses and abuses, politics has existed from pre-history to the present: neither the problems it attempts to solve, nor the modes of thought involved, are the prisoner of any language or era.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信