书评:ANDREW ABBOTT,《学科的混乱》,芝加哥,芝加哥大学出版社,2001年,第259页

Pub Date : 2003-01-01 DOI:10.1177/001946460304000105
Harish Naraindas
{"title":"书评:ANDREW ABBOTT,《学科的混乱》,芝加哥,芝加哥大学出版社,2001年,第259页","authors":"Harish Naraindas","doi":"10.1177/001946460304000105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chaos l)f ~~I.SC’I f)IllTt’.S’ is a theoretical tour deforce of the social sciences. While the last few decades have witnessed a large body of work on the structure and history of the natural sciences, there has been a surprising paucity of works that theorise the history of the social sciences. Using sociology as a stand in for the social sciences, Abbott argues that the social sciences have been unable to decide as to whether their brief is the study of facts, or the study of values (p. 35). This vacillation is reflected not only in each discipline, but also in every research tradition within the disciplines, whose practitioners soon divide into two antithetical groups of those who study facts and call for causal explanation, as against those who study values and offer inter-","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/001946460304000105","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Reviews : ANDREW ABBOTT, Chaos of Disciplines, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 2001, pp. 259\",\"authors\":\"Harish Naraindas\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/001946460304000105\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chaos l)f ~~I.SC’I f)IllTt’.S’ is a theoretical tour deforce of the social sciences. While the last few decades have witnessed a large body of work on the structure and history of the natural sciences, there has been a surprising paucity of works that theorise the history of the social sciences. Using sociology as a stand in for the social sciences, Abbott argues that the social sciences have been unable to decide as to whether their brief is the study of facts, or the study of values (p. 35). This vacillation is reflected not only in each discipline, but also in every research tradition within the disciplines, whose practitioners soon divide into two antithetical groups of those who study facts and call for causal explanation, as against those who study values and offer inter-\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/001946460304000105\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/001946460304000105\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/001946460304000105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

混沌1)f ~~I。SC(胡)IllTt”。S’是社会科学的理论力量。在过去的几十年里,我们见证了大量关于自然科学的结构和历史的著作,而将社会科学史理论化的著作却少得惊人。阿博特用社会学来代替社会科学,他认为社会科学一直无法决定它们的目的是研究事实,还是研究价值(第35页)。这种摇摆不仅反映在每一门学科中,也反映在学科内的每一种研究传统中,这些学科的实践者很快就分成了两个对立的群体:研究事实并要求因果解释的群体,与研究价值并提供相互解释的群体
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
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
Book Reviews : ANDREW ABBOTT, Chaos of Disciplines, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 2001, pp. 259
Chaos l)f ~~I.SC’I f)IllTt’.S’ is a theoretical tour deforce of the social sciences. While the last few decades have witnessed a large body of work on the structure and history of the natural sciences, there has been a surprising paucity of works that theorise the history of the social sciences. Using sociology as a stand in for the social sciences, Abbott argues that the social sciences have been unable to decide as to whether their brief is the study of facts, or the study of values (p. 35). This vacillation is reflected not only in each discipline, but also in every research tradition within the disciplines, whose practitioners soon divide into two antithetical groups of those who study facts and call for causal explanation, as against those who study values and offer inter-
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
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1