Clouds, Clocks, and the study of Politics
Clouds, Clocks, and the study of Politics
复制标题
云、时钟和政治研究
DOI：
10.2307/2010037
复制
发表时间：
1977
期刊：
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Stephen J. Genco
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. Almond;Stephen J. Genco
政治科学在其渴望成为科学的过程中，近几十年来往往失去了与其本体论基础的联系。它倾向于将政治事件和现象视为自然事件，从而使其具有与物理学和其他硬科学相同的解释逻辑。这种趋势可以部分地理解为科学革命的一个阶段，是本体论和方法论假设从非常成功的硬科学中分两步扩散的过程：首先是心理学和经济学，然后从这些领头羊人文科学扩散到社会学、人类学、政治学，甚至历史学。在采用硬科学议程时，社会科学，特别是政治科学，受到了科学哲学新实证主义学派的鼓励，该学派将本体论和元方法论同质性的假设合法化。最近，一些科学哲学家、心理学家和经济学家重新考虑了硬科学中使用的策略对人类主题的适用性。
In its eagerness to become scientific, political science has in recent decades tended to lose contact with its ontological base. It has tended to treat political events and phenomena as natural events lending themselves to the same explanatory logic as is found in physics and the other hard sciences. This tendency may be understood in part as a phase in the scientific revolution, as a diffusion, in two steps, of ontological and methodological assumptions from the strikingly successful hard sciences: first to psychology and economics, and then from these bellwether human sciences to sociology, anthropology, political science, and even history. In adopting the agenda of hard science, the social sciences, and political science in particular, were encouraged by the neopositivist school of the philosophy of science which legitimated this assumption of ontological and meta-methodological homogeneity. More recently, some philosophers of science and some psychologists and economists have had second thoughts about the applicability to human subject matters of strategy used in hard science.