革命研究中的比较结构

IF 4.1 1区社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY

Sociological Theory Pub Date : 2018-06-01 DOI:10.1177/0735275118777004

C. Beck

{"title":"革命研究中的比较结构","authors":"C. Beck","doi":"10.1177/0735275118777004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The social scientific study of revolution has been deviled by a lack of progress in recent years, divided between competing views on the universality of patterns in revolution. This study examines the origins of these epistemologies. Drawing on an insight that different modes of comparison yield different types of knowledge, I argue that the network structure of how cases are compared constrains or enables the development of a field’s theoretical sensibilities. Analysis of comparative studies of revolution published from 1970 to 2009 reveals that the field overall is most amenable to knowledge about particular cases rather than the phenomenon of revolution broadly. Analysis of the changing structure of comparison over time reveals that comparison precedes the development of an epistemology. The results suggest that conclusions about the possibility, or lack thereof, of generalization may be an artifact of the comparative method.","PeriodicalId":48131,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Theory","volume":"36 1","pages":"134 - 161"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0735275118777004","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Structure of Comparison in the Study of Revolution\",\"authors\":\"C. Beck\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0735275118777004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The social scientific study of revolution has been deviled by a lack of progress in recent years, divided between competing views on the universality of patterns in revolution. This study examines the origins of these epistemologies. Drawing on an insight that different modes of comparison yield different types of knowledge, I argue that the network structure of how cases are compared constrains or enables the development of a field’s theoretical sensibilities. Analysis of comparative studies of revolution published from 1970 to 2009 reveals that the field overall is most amenable to knowledge about particular cases rather than the phenomenon of revolution broadly. Analysis of the changing structure of comparison over time reveals that comparison precedes the development of an epistemology. The results suggest that conclusions about the possibility, or lack thereof, of generalization may be an artifact of the comparative method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Theory\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"134 - 161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0735275118777004\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275118777004\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275118777004","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 26

摘要

近年来，革命的社会科学研究因缺乏进展而陷入困境，在革命模式的普遍性方面存在着相互矛盾的观点。本研究考察了这些认识论的起源。根据不同的比较模式产生不同类型的知识这一见解，我认为案例比较的网络结构限制或促进了一个领域理论敏感性的发展。对1970年至2009年发表的革命比较研究的分析表明，该领域总体上最适合于特定案例的知识，而不是广泛的革命现象。对比较结构随时间变化的分析表明，比较先于认识论的发展。结果表明，结论的可能性，或缺乏归纳，可能是一个比较方法的人工制品。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The Structure of Comparison in the Study of Revolution

The social scientific study of revolution has been deviled by a lack of progress in recent years, divided between competing views on the universality of patterns in revolution. This study examines the origins of these epistemologies. Drawing on an insight that different modes of comparison yield different types of knowledge, I argue that the network structure of how cases are compared constrains or enables the development of a field’s theoretical sensibilities. Analysis of comparative studies of revolution published from 1970 to 2009 reveals that the field overall is most amenable to knowledge about particular cases rather than the phenomenon of revolution broadly. Analysis of the changing structure of comparison over time reveals that comparison precedes the development of an epistemology. The results suggest that conclusions about the possibility, or lack thereof, of generalization may be an artifact of the comparative method.

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

Sociological Theory SOCIOLOGY-

CiteScore

6.90

自引率

6.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Published for the American Sociological Association, this important journal covers the full range of sociological theory - from ethnomethodology to world systems analysis, from commentaries on the classics to the latest cutting-edge ideas, and from re-examinations of neglected theorists to metatheoretical inquiries. Its themes and contributions are interdisciplinary, its orientation pluralistic, its pages open to commentary and debate. Renowned for publishing the best international research and scholarship, Sociological Theory is essential reading for sociologists and social theorists alike.