Theory of practice, rational choice, and historical change

被引:18
作者
Ermakoff, Ivan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Sociol, Madison, WI 53706 USA
关键词
Crisis; Endogamy; Matrimonial strategies; Norms; Revolution; REVOLUTION; SOCIOLOGY;
D O I
10.1007/s11186-010-9121-5
中图分类号
C91 [社会学];
学科分类号
030301 ; 1204 ;
摘要
If we are to believe the proponents of the Theory of Practice and of Rational Choice, the gap between these two paradigmatic approaches cannot be bridged. They rely on ontological premises, theories of motivations and causal models that stand too far apart. In this article, I argue that this theoretical antinomy loses much of its edge when we take as objects of sociological investigation processes of historical change, that is, when we try to specify in theoretical terms how and in which conditions historical actors enact and endorse shifts in patterns of relations as well as shifts in the symbolic and cognitive categories that make these relations significant. I substantiate this argument in light of the distinction between two temporalities of historical change: first, the long waves of gradual change and, second, the short waves of moments of breaks and ruptures. Along the way, I develop an argument about the conditions of emergence of self-limiting norms and the centrality of epistemic beliefs in situations of high disruption.
引用
收藏
页码:527 / 553
页数:27
相关论文
共 106 条
[1]  
Adams J, 2005, REMAKING MODERNITY P
[2]  
Adams Julia, 1999, State/Culture: State Formation After the Cultural Turn
[3]  
Adams Julia., 2005, FAMILIAL STATE RULIN
[4]  
[Anonymous], FDN SOCIAL ACTION
[5]  
[Anonymous], ACTES RECHERCHE SCI
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1986, HEGEMONY CULTURE POL
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1991, Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement
[8]  
[Anonymous], MARC BLOCH HISTORIKE
[9]  
[Anonymous], 1987, WERE THEY PUSHED DID, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511735868
[10]  
[Anonymous], 1988, RATIONALITY REVOLUTI