大结构、大过程、大比较

by Charles Tilly, 查尔斯·蒂利, 张熹珂 (Translator)

对于社会的整体研究被哪些始于19世纪的旧观念所束缚？

为什么大比较是最适合研究大结构和大过程的方法？

莱因哈特·本迪克斯、西达·斯考切波、巴林顿·摩尔和斯坦·罗坎的研究各有什么优劣？

本书是一本关于社会变迁的理论著作，主张用基于历史的大比较来理解大规模结构和过程。本书指出，19世纪遗留下来的八项误导性假设束缚了20世纪的社会科学理论，作者逐一批驳了这些假设，进而转向这些假设的替代性解释，尝试为具体的、历史性的比较方法寻找更合适的案例。在这个过程中，作者将社会科学比较方法分为四种类型，并结合各个类型中的代表性研究，鞭辟入里地剖析了四种比较方法的优劣得失，指明了对于社会大结构和大过程的研究的方向。

查尔斯·蒂利在本书中高瞻远瞩，综合比较社会科学经典研究成果的分析路径、因果论证和深远影响，清晰地指明我们应该如何理解社会结构和过程。尽管本书主题庞大、内容深邃，蒂利却始终保持了简洁直接的逻辑和幽默风趣的语言，犀利而精准的点评尽显其大师风采。

Genres: History, Sociology, Social Science, Research Methods

197 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 1984

About the author

Charles Tilly was an American sociologist, political scientist, and historian renowned for his pioneering contributions to the study of social change, state formation, and contentious politics. A prolific scholar, Tilly authored over 600 articles and more than 50 books, shaping disciplines ranging from sociology and history to political science. His research was grounded in large-scale, comparative historical analysis, exemplified by his influential works Coercion, Capital, and European States, Durable Inequality, and Dynamics of Contention.
Tilly began his academic career after earning his doctorate in sociology from Harvard University, where he studied under noted figures like George C. Homans and Barrington Moore Jr. He taught at several major institutions, including the University of Michigan, The New School, and ultimately Columbia University, where he held the Joseph L. Buttenwieser Professorship of Social Science.
He developed a distinctive theoretical approach that rejected simplistic, static models of society, instead emphasizing dynamic processes and relational mechanisms. Tilly’s theories of state formation, particularly his provocative comparison of war-making and state-making to organized crime, remain central in political sociology. He also played a key role in the evolution of historical sociology and the relational sociology movement, especially through his collaborations and influence on the New York School.
A leading theorist of social movements, Tilly outlined how modern protest became structured around campaigns, repertoires of contention, and public displays of unity, worthiness, numbers, and commitment. His work with scholars like Sidney Tarrow and Doug McAdam further redefined the field by linking social movements to broader political processes.
Tilly received numerous honors, including membership in the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, as well as multiple honorary doctorates. His legacy endures through awards bearing his name and through continued influence on generations of social scientists.

Reviews

[Sense of History]

The historical sociologist/sociological historian Charles Tilly (1929-2008) published his most important works in the 1970s and 80s, but still counts as an important academic, especially on the process of state formation. This booklet is a short literature study in which he tries to draw some general lessons from his own work and that of others, when it comes to analyzing and comparing major processes and large structures.

It is essential to note that for Tilly these analyses have to be much more grounded on real historical facts and data: "a plea for historically grounded analyses of large structures and large processes and alternatives to the timeless, place-less models or social organization and social change that came to us with the nineteenth-century heritage". Because indeed, according to Tilly it is mainly the 19th century way of looking at social change that has resulted in completely distorted analyses, with a bad afterlife throughout much of the 20th century. His culprit are very bourgeois studies that were drenched in progress and modernization thinking. Typical examples of these are the interpretation of revolutions and revolts as negative phenomena (resulting from a too rapid modernization), or the train of thought in 'necessary stages' that all societies have to go through towards true modernity.

Tilly does not stop at this criticism, he also proposes alternatives and defends the comparative analysis method. Comparing is risky, he admits. And in his analysis of the work of several of his colleagues, he does not spare his criticism on their faulty methodology. But at the same time he remains optimistic and believes with conviction that comparative analyses can yield very relevant insights, provided the right methodology is used (and he gives very concrete tips for that), and provided real historical data are used.

And as far as the latter is concerned, Tilly has a justified message to historians: they must not indulge to their fear for the study of large processes and structures and for comparative studies: "if the evils they reject are the search for universal historical laws and histories, the remedy to the evils is not the abandonment of deliberate comparison, but it is rooting in genuine historical structures and processes ". Given some prudence, I could not agree more!

Still, one critical note: Tilly never refers to systems thinking or 2nd order cybernetics, and that is strange. Because this scientific current deals with looking at complex realities, and in my opinion, it could be very relevant in the study of big structures and large processes. Of course, Tilly refers to the World Systems-studies of Wallerstein and Gunder Frank, but these have nothing in common with systems thinking. The only indirect reference I found in this book and that seems to indicate an academic that worked in line of systems thinking is Eric R. Wolf, especially his Europe and the People Without History. To be read, of course.

[Marc Lamot · Rating 3 out of 5]

This booklet is now more than 30 years old. And since it is mainly a literature study (a critical discussion of various, earlier publications), it inevitably is somewhat dated. But Charles Tilly is not just anyone (he was a leading historical sociologist, at the end of last century), and the global guidelines he gives remain relevant. In the first place this is the guideline to always refer back to concrete historical data when you talk about major social processes, otherwise you only build castles in the air (as a historian, I like to hear something like that of course). And secondly, he gives a number of very specific methodological guidelines for doing comparative (historical) analysis. Tilly is particularly critical of his colleagues (and himself), but ultimately he remains optimistic: provided the correct methodological approach, historical analyzes of big structures and large processes can certainly provide relevant insights for the present time.
See also my more elaborate review on SenseofHistory: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Elena Prieto · Rating 3 out of 5]

Me ha resultado interesante adentrarme en el contenido de esta obra, ya que considero que el sociólogo derriba los 8 postulados perniciosos de manera concisa y firme. Creo que es honorable el trabajo que ha realizado y el esfuerzo que ha supuesto enfrentarse a las teorías propias del siglo XIX a veces aún vigentes actualmente. Sinceramente, creo que gracias a su valiente trabajo, el pensamiento sociológico de finales del siglo XX pudo dar un giro.

Al leer esta obra, mi sensación es que Tilly no nos induce a seguir obligatoriamente un camino, sino que muestra la viabilidad de varias rutas posibles ya incorporadas en la investigación social. Por otro lado, me ha parecido a la vez contundente al indicar cuál es el destino de cada teoría social tomada, y cuáles son sus pros y sus contras.

Tilly hace creer que cada crítica que hagamos debe necesariamente venir acompañada de una propuesta resolutiva o de un camino alternativo. Se agradece por eso, también, los numerosos ejemplos que concede al explicar cada caso.

Una idea fundamental con la que estoy de acuerdo de esta obra y que retendré para el futuro es que para comprender los procesos sociales complejos no debemos centrarnos en los individuos, pero tampoco en los sistemas sociales, sino más bien en las interacciones sociales.

Como debilidad, en mi opinión creo que los capítulos 5, 6, 7 y 8 adquieren menor relevancia en cuanto al fin de este trabajo, cuya lectura se torna dificultosa. He de decir, además, que aunque el contenido me parece bien argumentado y justificado, en ocasiones es necesario detenerse a leer repetidas veces los conocimientos presentados, pues la claridad del lenguaje que se utiliza en la obra no siempre es nítida. Por ello, recomendaría sin duda procesos que involucren elaboración a partir de esa información, como puede ser técnicas de estudio como subrayado y realización de resúmenes.

Finalmente, considero que lo más importante que aporta esta obra a la sociología son las herramientas y recursos que podemos emplear para comprender procesos sociales complejos, teniendo en cuenta los errores cometidos en la historia de las teorías sociales para no caer nuevamente en ellos, y sin rechazar posibles vías para nuevas teorizaciones.

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

He argues that much of our analytical toolkit dates to the nineteenth century and that we have held on to eight "pernicious postulates" from that century, including many widely-held sociological beliefs (e.g. that "society is a thing apart" and that "Social behavior results from individual mental events, which are conditioned by life in society"). These postulates have prevented us from "integrating big structures, large processes, and huge comparisons into history." (147)

He argues that there is no eternal master process, but that "In a given era, specific historical processes dominate the changes occurring in a given population or region." (49) He argues that the two "master processes" of last two or so centuries have been the development of capitalism and the formation of nation-states. (14-15)

He divides historical analysis into four levels: world-historical, world-systemic, macrohistorical, and microhistorical. (61) He sees most value in a blend of macrohistorical and microhistorical analysis. (61-64)

He identifies four types of useful comparison: individualizing, universalizing, variation-finding, and encompassing. He sees particular untapped potential in encompassing comparison. (147)

A useful study of comparison that explores how it can go awry and proposes means of doing better.

[Matthias · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the worst book by Charles Tilly I've ever read, which is to say that it's quite good.