Understanding Peasant China: Case Studies in the Philosophy of Social Science

by Daniel Little

In this innovative book, Daniel Little compares the positions of various social scientists regarding debates in China studies. Little focuses on four topics: the relative importance of individual rationality and community values in explaining traditional peasant behavior; the role of marketing and transportation systems in Chinese society; the causes of agricultural stagnation in traditional China; and the reasons for peasant rebellions in Qing China. He not only makes a constructive contribution to these controversies but also provides examples of the diversity of social science research.

Genres: China, History

333 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 1989

Reviews

[Victor Wu · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent, highly original work of both philosophy of social science and China studies. It deserves to be much more widely known than it is. (I suspect the distinctive hybrid nature of this study works against it; philosophers likely assume it is a work of China studies, while social scientists likely assume it is a work of philosophy—both are true.) Little engages deeply and critically with the details of argumentation, theory, and evidence in many influential works of social science (James Scott, Samuel Popkin, etc.) and studies of pre-modern China (G. William Skinner, Elizabeth Perry, etc.), while drawing more general conclusions for the theory and practice of social science. An important caveat is that this book was published in 1989 and as such relies on an older generation of scholarship, so the social scientific analyses—though not, I think, the more general philosophical conclusions—require significant updating. Any discussion today of what Little calls the "breakthrough debate," for instance, must engage with more recent landmark works such as Kenneth Pomeranz's 2000 book The Great Divergence.

[sube · Rating 4 out of 5]

Analytical Marxist investigating a series of historical disputes seeking to give a more firm footing to doing social science. It has a very good discussion of generalization and theories, what an explanation is and how empirical reasoning works.

Especially his argument that unlike unlike non-causal concepts ("revolution", "famine"), generalizations that are either theoretical constructs (marginal gains) or ideal-type concepts (village society) are can help us understand social phenomena and its causal mechanisms.

His discussion of how empirical debates are often fundamentally theoretical and conceptual debates is also good. His actual discussions of case studies are skippable however, except for his discussion of moral economy debate where he shows well how rational choice theory can allow an account of rising stratification and class conflict that is compatible with collective choice/institutions - against Scott's rejection of rational choice theory.

The rest are however more boring, even if useful as introduction to problems in doing social science (I simply factored them out of the rating for this one, and unless the topics at hand interest someone, would not really view them as being worthwhile to read particularly).

I also find his "weak" methodological individualism, where once you describe a social entity reliant upon assumptions of individual behavior you can ignore individual action and just focus on social entites not convincing, since individual behavior could change in the process and is not stable.

His argument that one should also largely focus on "middle-range theories" is also not justified enough, despite being an undercurrent in a variety of statements - beyond a scepticism such concepts at a high level, like for instance modes of production, being able to be made causal concepts. Since it seems to me a misunderstanding of the purpose of such categories generally. Nonetheless, an excellent book factoring the mentioned chapters out.