Political Studies as Narrative and Science, 1880–2000
Political Studies as Narrative and Science, 1880–2000
复制标题
作为叙事和科学的政治研究，1880-2000
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Bevir
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Bevir
今天，我们经常怀疑民族国家的代表在构建和合法化生活方式和公共政策中所扮演的角色。我们把曾经看起来中立的东西描绘成我们的实践和我们的遗产的科学代表，作为偶然的历史对象。我们怎么会变得如此怀疑？答案有几个部分：发展历史主义在19世纪后半叶主导了人文科学;世纪之交见证了认识论的断裂和现代主义历史主义的兴起，它开始主导社会科学;现代主义历史主义者在20世纪后半叶重新制定了他们的方法，以回应社会科学的不同愿景;最后，在20世纪末，一种激进的历史主义兴起，从哲学和文学蔓延到历史甚至社会科学。简而言之，我们已经变得怀疑，因为我们已经走向了一个激进的历史主义，挑战科学主义，并偏离了过去的宏大叙事。
Today we are often skeptical of the role played by representations of the nation state in constructing and legitimating ways of life and public policies. We portray what once appeared to be neutral, scientific representations of our practices and our heritages as contingent historical objects. How did we become so skeptical? The answer has several parts: developmental historicism dominated the human sciences in the latter half of the nineteenth century; the turn of the century witnessed an epistemic rupture and the rise of a modernist empiricism that came to dominate the social sciences; modernist empiricists reformulated their approach during the latter half of the twentieth century in response to alternative visions of social science; and, finally, the close of the twentieth century also saw the rise of a radical historicism that spread from philosophy and literature to history and even social science. In short, we have become skeptical as we have moved toward a radical historicism that challenges scientism and decenters the grand narratives of yore.