Individuals, institutions, and innovation in the debates of the French Revolution.
Individuals, institutions, and innovation in the debates of the French Revolution.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.1717729115
复制
发表时间：
2018-05-01
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
DeDeo S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Barron ATJ;Huang J;Spang RL;DeDeo S
民主国家如何做出决策？我们可以阅读议会大厦和立法厅的文字记录，了解特定想法是如何被引入和辩论的，但我们对这些系统如何处理信息的一般原则或这些原则的起源知之甚少。在这里，我们研究了法国大革命头两年的议会，这是全球民主和革命的典范，并展示了言论模式是如何创建、采用、忽视或传播的。政治意识形态、自上而下的规则和个人魅力都会影响词语模式的生存和繁荣，或者相反地消失和消失。法国大革命带来了“自由、平等、博爱”的原则，以应对治理当时欧洲最大国家的日常挑战。它的实验为全球未来的革命和民主提供了一个模型，但这第一次现代革命没有可供遵循的模型。利用重建的第一届革命议会辩论记录，我们对这个机构如何管理创新进行了定量分析。我们使用信息论来跟踪超过 40,000 场演讲和 1000 名发言者的词语使用模式的创建、传播和破坏。议会作为一个整体偏向于采用新的模式，但演讲者的个人素质可能会打破这些总体趋势。左边的演讲者创新速度更高，而右边的演讲者则保留了先前的模式。罗伯斯庇尔（左）和莫里神父（右）等关键人物扮演了象征其政治的信息处理角色。新设立的组织职能——例如议会主席和委员会主席——对辩论结果产生了重大影响，并且在议会中期出现了明显的转变，辩论过程之外的委员会获得了“提议和处置”的新权力。总而言之，这些定量结果与现有的定性解释相一致，但也揭示了迄今为止被忽视的关键信息处理动态。伟大的演说家吸引了公众的注意力，但掌握了委员会制度的代表（主要是政治左派）获得了制定革命立法的新权力。
How do democracies make decisions? We can read transcripts from parliament houses and legislative halls to see how particular ideas are introduced and debated, but we understand very little about the general principles of how these systems deal with information, or the origins of those principles. Here we study the parliamentary assembly of the first 2 years of the French Revolution, a model for democracies and revolutions across the globe, and show how patterns of speaking are created, picked up, and ignored or propagated. Political ideology, top–down rules, and individual charisma all affect how word patterns survive and thrive or, conversely, disappear and drop away. The French Revolution brought principles of “liberty, equality, fraternity” to bear on the day-to-day challenges of governing what was then the largest country in Europe. Its experiments provided a model for future revolutions and democracies across the globe, but this first modern revolution had no model to follow. Using reconstructed transcripts of debates held in the Revolution’s first parliament, we present a quantitative analysis of how this body managed innovation. We use information theory to track the creation, transmission, and destruction of word-use patterns across over 40,000 speeches and a thousand speakers. The parliament as a whole was biased toward the adoption of new patterns, but speakers’ individual qualities could break these overall trends. Speakers on the left innovated at higher rates, while speakers on the right acted to preserve prior patterns. Key players such as Robespierre (on the left) and Abbé Maury (on the right) played information-processing roles emblematic of their politics. Newly created organizational functions—such as the Assembly president and committee chairs—had significant effects on debate outcomes, and a distinct transition appears midway through the parliament when committees, external to the debate process, gained new powers to “propose and dispose.” Taken together, these quantitative results align with existing qualitative interpretations, but also reveal crucial information-processing dynamics that have hitherto been overlooked. Great orators had the public’s attention, but deputies (mostly on the political left) who mastered the committee system gained new powers to shape revolutionary legislation.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.1405984111
发表时间：
2014-07-01
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Klingenstein, Sara;Hitchcock, Tim;DeDeo, Simon
通讯作者：
DeDeo, Simon
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Murdock, Jaimie;Allen, Colin;DeDeo, Simon
通讯作者：
DeDeo, Simon
影响因子：
--
作者：
KULLBACK, S;LEIBLER, RA
通讯作者：
LEIBLER, RA
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
Itti L;Baldi P
通讯作者：
Baldi P
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Baron, DP
通讯作者：
Baron, DP