政治学方法论(中山大学政治所)

政治學方法論

（中山大學政治所）

八十七學年度第二學期授課人：黃紀

上課時間: 週五下午 2：00 至 6：00 中正大學政治所(社科院二館705室)

電話：（05）2720411 ext. 6299 or 5570

Fax: （05）2721195

一、課程宗旨

This course is designed to introduce first-year graduate students to the philosophy of social science in general and methodology of political science in particular. Before plunging into the "jungle of thoughts," you are asked in the first week to review the development of modern day political science in the past four decades or so. The rest of the semester then focuses on some enduring methodological controversies in the discipline. We will survey the process of political research from concept formation to theory/model building and hypothesis derivation. You need to study these subjects carefully even if you may disagree with empirical approaches in general. It is currently considered "mainstream" social science and will probably remain so for a while. Needless to say, we also need to examine the interpretive views of human actions and reflect upon their implications for political science. Keep in mind that the purpose of the class is not advocating a certain school of thought so much as exposing you to different perspectives and stimulating your own ideas and syntheses.

二、必備課本

Conway, David A. and Ronald Munson. 1990. The Elements of Reasoning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Isaak, Alan C. 1985. Scope and Methods of Political Science, 4th Edition. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.

Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Sayer, Andrew. 1992. Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach, 2nd Edition.London: Routledge.

Susser, Bernard. ed. 1992. Approaches to the Study of Politics. New York: Macmillan.

Winch, Peter. 1958. The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

三、指定作業

(1) 作業、練習

There will be some in-class exercises and homework.

(2) 期中短篇報告（以五千字為限）

Every student will write two short papers based on two selected biweekly reading assignments listed below in the 課程內容及指定閱讀section. You should synthesize the main points in the readings, list the central issues (and the problems that you may have had with the readings) which you think ought to be addressed in the class, and whenever appropriate, critically evaluate the assigned readings, discuss other relevant works, and/or suggest a new research agenda. You must circulate your paper to other students and me (through fax or attached e-mail Word file) no later than the Wednesday 5:00pm prior to each Friday meeting.

?Papers must be written in a scholarly style with footnotes (or endnotes) and references. They must be typed in a word processor and printed with a letter-quality printer. ?

(3) 期末考試

A comprehensive final exam will be held by the end of the semester.

(4) 出席及參與討論

The following biweekly reading assignments are organized only to match our meeting schedule. The reading load is quite heavy and sometimes difficult, so you should not even attempt to do biweekly readings in a single week! In any case, you must complete all required readings and reflect upon them before coming to the class. Since this is a graduate seminar, my lectures will be brief and discussion among all the students about the readings will account for most of the class time. If I detect any sign that you fail to do your reading, I discount your class participation scores heavily.

四、計分方式

●作業、練習、小考等15%

●期中短篇報告30%

●期末考試40%

●出席及參與討論15%

I reserve the right to administer pop quizzes during lectures. Each quiz will be counted as an exercise. Unexcused missed papers, exam, exercises, and pop quizzes will receive a score of zero. No incomplete grade will be assigned unless the deficiency is due to cause beyond the control of the student. Also, be aware that the minimum punishment for either cheating or plagiarism is a zero for that assignment.

五、課程內容及指定閱讀

This is a tentative schedule for the semester. Unless we fall behind or move through some sections more quickly than expected, your reading assignments will be as indicated here. If adjustments are required along the way, I will announce them in class.

I. Political Science in Retrospect

3/5Isaak, Chapters 1, 2, and 3;

Susser, pp. 16-50;

Gabriel A. Almond. 1996. “Political Science: the History of the Discipline,” (Chapter 2) In A

New Handbook of Political Science, eds. Robert E. Goodin and Hans-Dieter Klingemann.

Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 50-96;

Gary King (1991), “On Political Methodology,” Political Analysis 2: 1-12.

黃紀、朱雲漢、郭秋永、蕭全政、何思因，〈政治學學門成就評估報告〉，載〈「全國人文社會科

學會議」會前會：社會科學組會議手冊〉，行政院國家科學委員會，民87年9月，頁83-90。II. Science and Its Progress: What Can We Learn from the Philosophy and History of Natural Science?

1.Logic vs. History

3/19Karl R. Popper (1962), “Conjectures and Refutations,” in Susser, pp. 134-165;

Thomas S. Kuhn (1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd Edition (Chicago:

University of Chicago Press), entire book (skip Chapters V, XI, XII and pp. 174-210 if you are

short of time).

2.Attempts to Synthesize Logic and History

4/2Imre Lakatos (1970), “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”

in Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press), pp. 91-180 (skip pp. 139-172 if you find those examples not

illuminating);

Dudley Shapere (1984), “The Character of Scientific Change,” Chapter 11 in his Reason and the

Search for Knowledge: Investigations in the Philosophy of Science (Dordrecht: D. Reidel), pp.

205-245.

III. For Naturalism: “Scientific” Study of Politics

1. Generalizations and Explanations

4/16Conway and Munson (1990), Chapters 3, 4, and 5 (pp. 37-118);

John P. Frendreis (1983), "Explanation of Variation and Detection of Covariation: The Purpose

and Logic of Comparative Analysis," Comparative Political Studies, 16: 255-272;

Isaak, Chapters 5, 6 and 7;

John A. Vasquez (1987), “The Steps to War: Toward a Scientific Explanations of Correlates of

War Findings.” World Politics 40(1): 108-145.

2. Theories and Models

4/30Isaak, Chapter 8;

Charles A. Lave & James G. March (1975), An Introduction to Models in the Social Sciences

(New York: Harper & Row), Chapters 1, 2, and 3;

James A. Davis (1985), The Logic of Causal Order (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage), pp. 1-34;

Chi Huang, Woosang Kim & Samuel S.G. Wu (1995), “Expected-Utility Model of Regional

Rivalry.” in T.J. Cheng, Chi Huang & Samuel S.G. Wu eds. Inherited Rivalry: Conflicts Across

the Taiwan Straits (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner), pp. 38-43.

3. Contending Approaches: Socio-Psychological vs. Individualistic-Rationalist

5/14Brian Barry (1978), Sociologists, Economists, and Democracy (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press), Chapter 1 (pp. 1-12);

Isaak, Chapters 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15;

Susser, Chapters 6 and 7.

IV. Against Naturalism: Subjectivity, Meaning and Values in Human Actions

5/28Egon G. Guba & Yvonna S. Lincoln (1994), “Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research.”

Chapter 6 in Norman K Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research

(Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage), pp. 105-117.

Peter Winch (1958), The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy (London:

Routledge & Kegan Paul), entire book.

Isaak, Chapter 4.

V. Critical Naturalism: Uncover the Underlying Real Structures in order to Critique and Make Changes

6/11Sayer, Chapters 1, 2, 3, and 4;

March, James G. and Johan P. Olsen. 1984. “The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life.” American Political Science Review 78(3): 734-749.

6/25**期末考試 **

路漫漫其修遠兮，吾將上下而求索。

---屈原