教學目標：
長期以來歷史學與社會學之間的曖昧，難以有明確的學術領域。省思其中的矛盾與進行所謂「知識領域保衛戰」的過程中，是否可以從其中找尋兩者結合的可能，以及彼此所獨有的觀點。不僅是社會學與歷史學的對話，同時也是對於知識的跨展。歷史學廣義的作為一個理解人類活動過程的知識訓練，歷史事實的挖掘與客觀的歷史事實的追求成為普遍的價值，問說「什麼是歷史？」其實某種程度也是在回應「什麼是真實？」如何「再現過去」的要求。對於過去的樣貌，兩個學門的研究立場與途徑，在1960年代開展了激烈的辯論，一方面歷史學者認為兩者在方法論上有著不同的認識，同時對於什麼樣的資料可以「代表」過去，也不斷與過往的檔案、文件的真實性進行長期的鬥爭。
而就社會學的立場與發問的角度，主要是從現今的社會型態，思考過去人類的歷史活動變遷，並以什麼樣的力量來推動？古典社會學的立論，長期以來對於諸多歷史變遷的課題有著莫大的興趣。對於社會學家而言，長期關懷於「社會是如何生成」這個命題。其研究的課題，雖說在概念上有著不同的切入，從馬克思的階級、韋伯的理性化到涂爾幹的集體意識，仍圍繞在對於當代社會中「現代性」這樣特質的好奇上。
因此從兩者發問的取逕，大致上可以理解彼此的核心關懷是有所差異。一個是在從過去的歷史活動中的疑點，為現在的社會尋找更準確的認識。而社會學反其道從現在的社會狀態，去質問歷史是如何的堆積出現在的樣貌。但就知識論的角度，兩者其實正是相輔相成的建構出人類如何依據過去的活動經驗，為未來找尋更適當的出路。面對社會學對於社會結構與行動者間的探討，歷史學在「從過去到現在」的因果態度，也提出了反轉的可能性：是否我們可以面對現今的疑問，從過去找尋線索，對過去進行了解。因此在問題的發問上，就不再僅限於靜態性的結構性問題，而賦予更多從問題的角度，以及在個人經驗的過程中，如何面對歷史變遷提出反省與檢討。透過這樣的對話，也使兩者的結合與對話更為可能且必須。
Charles Tilly在一篇演講稿中提到「未來的歷史學」與「過去的社會學」的期待，的確很能契合歷史社會學的態度。「 從長程來看，我期盼能找到一帖萬應靈藥：既能使歷史社會學的專業性消融，又能令它的前提，特別是其歷史意識，貫穿社會學的全部。……最後，一個奠基在歷史學基礎上的社會學，將遠比現在更具知識力量。」
歷史社會學強調對社會現象的研究必須考量歷史的面向及因素，社會現象本質上就是歷史過程中社會互動的結果。從1960年代以後對於美國社會學界以結構功能論與抽象的量化研究法佔主流地位進行深刻的反省與批判。尤其對於Parsons所主導的結構功能論的理論體系，去除了歷史的向度，將社會的形構是作為一種靜態的系統提出批判。社會學家如C.W. Mills、Skocpol等主張返回歷史的向度上，並以Weber與Marx的思想為主軸，對於當時的主流社會學進行挑戰。因此從跨學科交流所產生的影響來看，當時在歷史學界也正興起一股「何謂歷史？」的論戰，對於歷史學內部的狹隘，多有所不滿。而在法國年鑒學派以及社會史與新文化史等等新興研究課題不斷的出現後，除了對於歷史學本身的傳統有所應響外，也對社會學的歷史轉向有推波助瀾之效，並在方法跟主題上豐富了社會學家的歷史想像。
此處可舉一個例子：Charlers Tilly。Tilly關注在長期的社會結構轉變的背景下，歐洲的集體行動是如何被激發出來的研究課題上，我們可以從他晚年的著作《社會運動1768-2004》一書中可以看到他所思考的一種集體性的行動，在西方的政治制度形塑的過程中，具有什麼樣的影響，也因此Tilly的集體行動理論引入了社會學諸多概念，例如Weber的理性化、行動理論、Durkheim的集體意識、以及社會學諸多概念如結構、組織、階級等等。他關注人們共同行動中所追求共享利益的途徑是如何建立出來。雖然普通大眾有其創造性、自身的組織能力以及他們捍衛自身利益的能力。但在在特殊的時空中，實施了哪些具體的轉化措施來影響社會變遷的過程。Tilly強調行動者的重要性，人要如何通過一致的行動來形成整體。他賦予集體行動者更多積極、創造性的背景，並從政治與社會運動的角度，對於集體行動進行更連續性的歷史耙梳。
他認為社會變遷與現代化在形式上和政治衝突上並不一致，快速的城市化和工業化降低了衝突的程度。而群體資源的移轉時（例如手工藝轉至機械生產時），會與城市化與工業化產生對立。工業資本主義的出現，改變了認同與權力競爭者的利益，也改變了他們集體行動形式。集體衝突發生的頻率與後果取決於國家的運作，現代化改變了集體行動與暴力形式，而其中權力與政治過程是佔據了首要的位置。
Teaching objectives:
The long-term ignorance between history and society has been difficult to have a clear academic field. In the process of reflecting on the contradictions and carrying out the so-called "knowledge domain protection war", can we find the possibility of combining the two and the unique views of each other? It is not only a conversation between social science and history, but also a cross-exposition to knowledge. As an intellectual training to understand the process of human activities, the exploration of historical facts and the pursuit of objective historical facts become universal values, and ask "What is history?" In fact, a certain degree is also responding to the requirements of "What is reality?" How to "return to the past". Regarding the past appearance, the research stand and approach of the two academic areas started fierce discussions in the 1960s. On the one hand, historians believed that the two had different understandings in methodology, and at the same time, they fought long-term battles with the authenticity of past files and documents.
From the perspective of social science, the main thing is to think about the changes in the historical activities of humans in the past from the current social model, and what kind of force is it used to promote it? The discussion of classical society has long been very interested in the topic of many historical changes. For sociologists, long-term concerns are concerned about the topic of "how society is generated". Although the subjects of his research have different concepts, from Marx's level, Veber's rationalization to Tull's collective consciousness, they still surround curiosity about the characteristics of "modernity" in contemporary society.
Therefore, from the questions asked by the two, we can roughly understand that the core relationship between each other is different. One is to find more accurate understanding of the current society in history. On the contrary, social sciences do not understand how history is piled up in the present social situation. But from the perspective of knowledge, the two are actually a mutually integrated structure to find a more appropriate way out for the future based on past activities. Faced with social explorations between social structure and actors, history’s causality from “from past to present” also raises the possibility of a reversal: whether we can face today’s questions, find a trace from the past, and understand the past. Therefore, in terms of problem development, it is no longer limited to quiet structural problems, but gives more reflection and review on how to face historical changes from the perspective of problems and in the process of personal experience. Through such dialogue, the combination and dialogue between the two is more possible and necessary.
In a speech, Charles Tilly mentioned the expectations of "the history of the future" and "the social science of the past" which are indeed very consistent with the attitude of historical society. "From the long run, I hope to find a post of tens of thousands of spiritual medicines: the professional ablation of historical society and the premise of it, especially its historical consciousness, to wear all of society. ... Finally, a society that lays the foundation of historical science will be far more intellectual than it is now."
Historical and social sciences emphasize the study of social phenomena, which must consider the orientation and factors of history. In essence, social phenomena are the result of social interaction in the historical process. Since the 1960s, he has conducted profound reflection and criticism on the mainstream position of quantitative research in the American social science community with structural function theory and abstract quantitative research. Especially for the theoretical system of structural functional theory led by Parsons, it removes the historical dimension and criticizes the social form as a static system. Socialists such as C.W. Mills, Skocpol, etc. actively returned to the dimension of history, and mainly focused on the ideas of Weber and Marx, challenging mainstream social studies at that time. Therefore, from the impact of interdisciplinary exchanges, a "what is history?" debate was also emerging in the historical community at that time, which was mostly dissatisfied with the narrowness within history. After the continuous emergence of new research topics such as the French junior school, social history and new cultural history, in addition to being somewhat responsive to the tradition of history itself, it also contributes to the historical transformation of social science, and enriches the historical imagination of socialists in terms of methods and themes.
Here you can have an example: Charlers Tilly. Tilly focuses on how European collective action was inspired in the context of long-term social structure changes. We can see a collective action he was thinking about in Western politics from his later book Social Sports 1768-2004. What impact does Tilly have in the process of shaping the system? Therefore, Tilly's collective action theory introduces social concepts, such as Weber's rationalization, action theory, Durkheim's collective consciousness, and social concepts such as structure, organization, level, etc. He focused on how the path to shared benefits pursued in people's joint actions was established. Although ordinary people have their creativity, their own organizational abilities, and their ability to defend their own interests. But in special time and space, what specific transformation measures have been implemented to affect the social transformation process. Tilly emphasizes the importance of actors and how people form a whole through consistent actions. He gives collective action actors more positive and creative backgrounds, and conducts a more continuous historical comb for collective action from the perspective of political and social movements.
He believes that social change and modernization are inconsistent in form and political conflicts, and rapid urbanization and industrialization have reduced the degree of conflicts. When group resources are transferred (such as when manual art to mechanical production), they will be in conflict with urbanization and industrialization. The emergence of industrial capitalism has changed the interests of cognitive and power competitors and their collective action forms. The frequency and consequences of collective conflicts depend on the national operation, modernization has changed the forms of collective action and violence, and power and political processes occupy a primary position.
1、 概述馬克斯、涂爾幹、韋伯、芝加哥社會學派、傅柯、卜爾迪、哈伯瑪斯等的歷史社會學。
2、 探討歷史和社會學共同關注的課題，包括社會移動、社會衝突、社會變遷、集體行為、「交流理性」、「相互結構」、個人和共同體的主體性。
1. Overview of the historical and social sciences of Max, Turrgan, Veber, Chicago Socialist School, Fuku, Buldy, Habermas, etc.
2. Explore topics of common concern to history and society, including social movement, social conflicts, social changes, collective behavior, "communication rationality", "mutual structure", and the subjectivity of individuals and common.
社會理論與歷史學
Alex Callinicos 2007《創造歷史：社會理論中的行動、結構與變遷》，萬毓澤譯，台北：群學。
Arpad Szakolczai 2008《反思性歷史社會學》，凌鵬等譯，上海：上海人民出版。
Barrington Moore 1992《民主與獨裁的起源》，台北：遠流
Charles Tilly 1990“Coercion, Capital, and European States AD 990-1992” Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
Social theory and history
Alex Callinicos 2007 "Creating History: Actions, Structures and Changes in Social Theory", Translated by Wan Yuzhe, Taipei: Group Studies.
Arpad Szakolczai 2008 "Reflective History and Society", translated by Ling Ling et al., Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing.
Barrington Moore 1992 "The Origin of Democracy and Independence", Taipei: Far
Charles Tilly 1990 "Coercion, Capital, and European States AD 990-1992" Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
| 評分項目 Grading Method | 配分比例 Grading percentage | 說明 Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1.issue memo 20％（三次沒繳就沒分囉 ）1.issue memo 20％（三次沒繳就沒分囉 ） 1.issue memo 20% (no difference if you don’t get three times) |
20 | |
| 2.學期報告整體表現50％ （含期中與期末的課堂報告）2.學期報告整體表現50％ （含期中與期末的課堂報告） 2. Overall performance of the school period report is 50% (including mid-term and end-of-term class reports) |
50 | |
| 3.平時參與討論及出席30％3.平時參與討論及出席30％ 3. Regularly participate in discussions and attend 30% |
30 |
