北京师范大学
教育研究方法讲座系列
Lecture 2
The Theoretical Foundations of
Comparative-Historical Method in the Social Sciences
Why was there Revolution in 1911 in China?
Why was there Communist Revolution in Russia in 1917?
Why was there Communist Revolution in China in
1949?
Was there any relationship between these revolutions?
Why wasn’t there any Communist revolution in
Western European countries in the 20th century?
Why did capitalism initiate in Western Europe in the 18-19th
centuries?
Why didn’t capitalism initiate in China in the 18-19th
centuries?
What is capitalism? Why is it there?
Why was there mercantile capitalism in 16th century in
southern Europe?
Why was there industrial capitalism in 19th century in
Western Europe?
Why was there financial capitalism in early 20th century in
Europe and the US?
Why has there been global-informational capitalism since
the end of the 20th century?
What is globalization? Why is it there?
What
How and
is the
why
Japan
Japan
or underwent
Dragon-head
economic
model?take-off in 1960s?
How and why Korea underwent economic take-off in the
1970s?
How and why Taiwan underwent economic take-off in the
1970s?
What
is thewhy
Asian
Four-Dragon
model?
How and
Hong
Kong underwent
economic take-off in
the 1970s?
How and why Singapore underwent economic take-off in
the 1970s?
How and
PRCModel?
underwent economic take-off in the
What
is thewhy
China
1980-90s?
Why did compulsory schooling system initiate in Western
European states in the 18-19th centuries?
Why were compulsory schooling systems constituted earlier in
France and Prussia than in the UK?
Why did schooling systems in France take a centralized
structure, while in England it took a de-centralized structure?
Why was compulsory schooling introduced in Taiwan in the
1960s?
Why was compulsory schooling introduced in Hong Kong in
the 1970s?
Why was compulsory schooling introduced in PRC in the
1980s?
Why has there been universal-compulsory, state-controlled,
bureaucratic-structured schooling system instituted around
the world since the second half of the 20th century?
Why was mother-tongue MOI imposed on the majority of
HK secondary schools in 1998 (proposed in 1997)?
Why was non-mother-tongue MOI imposed on all
Singapore secondary schools in 1991 (proposed in
1978)?
Why did HK and Singapore take a totally different
approach towards their MOI policy?
Why have there been MOI controversies in most of
the post-colonial schooling systems, such as HK,
Singapore, Malaysia, India, South Africa, Canada,
etc.
Why did HKSAR government initiate education reform -Education for Life and Education through Life -- in
2000?
Why did Singapore government initiate education reform
-- Education for Learning Societies in the 21 Century
-- in 2000?
Why did Taiwan government initiate education reform -教育改革行動方案-- in 1998?
Why did South-Korean government initiate education
reform –Lifelong Education -- in 2002?
Why did the US government initiate education reform -No Child Left Behind Act of 2001?
Why did the British government initiate education
reform --The Learning Age -- in 1998?
Why were there Lifelong-learning education reforms in
all these countries at the turn the millennium?
Are the any similarities and differences among the 21st
century Education Reforms in all these countries?
Why?
Why did discussions about setting up of General Teaching
Council (GTC) emerge at the end of the 19th century in the
UK?
Why was GTC set up in Scotland in 1965? And why was GTC
set up in England 60 years later in 2005?
Why is there no GTC in HK after 25 years since its initiation
by the Visiting Panel in 1982?
Why is there no policy discussion about setting up of GTC in
PRC even though teachers have been awarded the status of
professional (專業人員) in the PRC Teacher Act (中華人
民共和國教師法) in 1993
Why is there no policy discussion about setting up of
professional council of any profession in PRC?
Statement of the Questions
Explaining
Big Structures
Large Processes
Great Communities
Huge Events
Legacies of the Grand Masters: Marx,
Durkheim, and Weber
Comprehending Changes in Big Structures, Large
Process in the nineteenth century Europe with Big
Comparisons: Charles Tilly at the beginning of his
book Big Structure, Large Process, Hugh Comparison
underlines
Legacies of the Grand Masters: Marx,
Durkheim, and Weber
Charles Tilly underlines …
"Nineteenth-century Europe's great shift in organization set the
frame for this book in two complementary ways. First, those
shifts formed the context in which our current standard ideas for
the analysis of big social structures, large social processes, and
huge comparisons among social experiences crystallized.
Second, they marked critical moments in changes that are
continuing on a world scale today. …We must look at them
comparatively over substantial blocks of space and time, in order
to see whence we have come, where we are going, and what
alternatives to our present condition exist." (Tilly, 1984, Pp. 1011)
Legacies of the Grand Masters: Marx,
Durkheim, and Weber
Legacy of the Grand masters
Emile Durkheim’s theory of industrialism
Karl Marx’s historical materialism
Max Weber’s theory of Occidental rationalism
1818-1883
1858-1920
1864-1920
Emile Durkheim’s
Theory of Industrialism
 Durkhiem’s orientation to history: To Durkheim, historical
processes are part of the “social facts” that take the forms of
externals constraints exerting over individuals and independent
manifestation over the society as a whole. (Durkhiem, 1982, p.
59)
 Durkheim has theorized the tremendous changes confronting
him in the nineteenth century as a process of structural
differentiation of industrialism, which entails specialization of
production and complex division of labor. More specifically, he
conceives these changes would bring the mechanical solidarity,
which holds the preindustrial society together, to an end.
Emile Durkheim’s
Theory of Industrialism
 However, “Durkhiem seems undecided” in what comes next.
“On the one hand he observes that in practice nothing seems to
have taken its place; that the actual condition of industrial
society is one of unfettered egoism, confusion, disintegration and
chronic anomie. On the other hand he argues that in principle
the division of labour does in itself generate a new basis for
solidarity,” namely organic solidarity. (Abrams, 1982, P. 26)
Karl Marx’s Historical Materialism
 Marx’s orientation to history: "Men make their own history, but
they do not make it just as they please, they do not make it under
circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances
directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past."
(Marx, 1962, P. 252; Quoted in Abrams, 1982, P. 34)
 The materialist conception of history:
"The whole of what is called world history is nothing but the creation of
man by human labour." (Marx,; Quoted in Abrams, 1982, P. 35)
“The materialist conception of history starts from the proposition that the
production of means to support human life - and the basis of all social
exchange of things produced - is the basis of all structure." (Engels, 1962;
Quoted in Abrams, 1982, P. 35)
Karl Marx’s Historical Materialism
 The basic components of historical materialism (Cohen, 1978;
Wright, Levine and Sober, 1992)
The Primary Thesis on the relationship between force of production and
relation of production of a society
The Base/Superstructure Thesis on the relationship between the economic
structure of a society and its legal and political structures and forms of
consciousness.
 Analytical Marxists' reconstructing the Base/Superstructure
Thesis: (Wright Levine and Sober, 1992)
Structural determinism: Inclusive historical materialism
Functional explanation: Restrictive historical materialism
Karl Marx’s Historical Materialism
 Analytical Marxists' reformulating the Primacy Thesis: (Wright,
Levine and Sober, 1992)
The compatibility thesis (1): use-compatibility or developmentcompatibility
The development thesis (2)
The contradiction thesis (3)
The capacity thesis (4)
The transformation thesis (5)
The optimality thesis (6)
Karl Marx’s Historical Materialism
 Reorganizing the Six Theses into Four Components of the
Theory of Change
The necessary conditions for change, i.e. Thesis (1)
The direction of change: Thesis (2) & (3)
The means through which change is achieved: Thesis (4)
Sufficient conditions for change: Thesis (5) & (6)
 Reconstructing the Primary Thesis
Strong historical materialism: Maintaining all four components, i.e. six
theses
Weak historical materialism: Maintaining only theses (1) to (4) only
Quasi-historical materialism: Maintaining only (1), (2) & (3).
Karl Marx’s Historical Materialism
Analytical Marxist’s Typology of Historical Materialism
Base/Superstructure Thesis
Inclusive
Primacy
Strong
Thesis
Weak
Quasi
Restricted
Karl Marx’s Historical Materialism
Two methodological orientation of Marx's historical
materialism
Orthodox Marxism conceives historical materialism as
scientific method discovering universal law of social change
Western and analytical Marxism conceives the development
of capitalism in selective economies in Europe in the
nineteenth century as but an episode in the genealogy of
capitalism in human history
Karl Marx’s Historical Materialism
Two definitive natures of capitalism:
 As perceived by orthodox Marxists, the nature of capitalism
is of the exploitative nature of class structure, which will
subsequent leads to inevitable class struggle and class
revolution.
 As perceived by humanist Marxians, the nature of capitalism
is it its alienating imperatives on human existence, which
demands liberation subsequently transformation into
autonomous and meaningful lifeworld
Max Weber's Theory of Occidental
Rationalism
Weber's conception of historical and social realities and
cultural science: Paradox between finite human minds
and infinite realities
"Life confronts us in immediate concrete situations, it
presents an infinite multiplicity of successively and
coexistingly emerging and disappearing events, both 'within'
and 'outside' ourselves. The absolute infinitude of this
multiplicity is seen to remain undiminished even when our
attention is a single 'object', for instance, a concrete act of
exchange, as soon as we seriously attempt an exhaustive
description of all the individual components of this 'individual
phenomenon', to say nothing of explaining it causally."
(Weber, 1949, P.72).
Max Weber's Theory of Occidental
Rationalism
Weber's conception of historical and social realities and
cultural science: …
"All the analysis of infinite reality which the finite human
mind can conduct rest on the tacit assumption that only a
finite portion of this reality constitutes the object of scientific
investigation, and that only it is 'important' in the sense of
being worthy of being known." (Weber, 1949, P. 72)
Max Weber's Theory of Occidental
Rationalism
Weber's conception of historical and social realities and
cultural science: …
"We have designated as 'cultural sciences' those disciplines
which analyze the phenomena of life in terms of their cultural
significance. …The significance of cultural events
presupposes a value-orientation towards these events. The
concept of culture is a value-concept. Empirical reality
becomes 'culture' to us because and insofar as we relate it to
value ideas." (Weber, 1949, P. 76) "Culture is finite segment
of the meaningless infinity of the world process, a segment on
which human beings confer meaning and significance."
(Weber, 1949, P. 81)
Max Weber's Theory of Occidental
Rationalism
Weber's materialistic-spiritualistic approach to history
and culture: In the concluding sentence of his famous
empirical study The Protestant Ethics and Spirit of
Capitalism. Weber writes
Max Weber's Theory of Occidental
Rationalism
Weber's materialistic-spiritualistic approach to history
and culture: In the concluding sentence of his famous
empirical study The Protestant Ethics and Spirit of
Capitalism. Weber writes
"It is, of course, not my aim to substitute for one-sided
materialistic an equally one-sided spiritualistic causal
interpretation of culture and of history. Each is equally
possible, but each, if it does not serve as the
preparation, but as the conclusion of an investigation,
accomplishes equally little in the interest of historical
truth." (Weber, 1958, P. 183)
Max Weber's Theory of Occidental
Rationalism
Weber agrees with Marx that the definitive nature of
their epoch (i.e. nineteenth-century Europe) is the rise
of capitalism. However, Weber differs substantively
from Marx in discerning the essence of capitalism.
According to Randell Collins, one the prominent
Weberian in the US, these essences are (Collins, 1980)
Rational accounting and methodical enterprising and
production
Calculability
Predictability
Max Weber's Theory of Occidental
Rationalism
Institutional components of rational capitalism
Private appropriation of means of production and
entrepreneurial organization of capital
Rational technology
Free labor
Unrestricted market
Calculable law
Public administration of bureaucratic state
Components of
rationalized
capitalism
Intermediate
conditions
Background
conditions
Ultimate
conditions
Literate
administrators
Entrepreneurial
organization of
capital
Bureaucratic
state
Favorable
Transportation &
communication
Writing & recordkeeping
Coinage
Rationalized
technology
Centrally supplied
weapons
Calculable
law
Citizenship
Self-supplied,
disciplined army
Free labor
Greek civic cults
Unrestricted
market
Methodical Nondualistic
economic ethic
Judaic
prophecy
Christian
proselytization
Reformation sects
Weber’s Causal Chain of the Rise of Capitalism
Church law &
bureaucracy
Contemporary Paradigm in ComparativeHistorical Method in the Social Sciences
Vision and Method in Historical Sociology (1984)
Marc Bloch
Karl Polanyi
S.N. Eisenstadt
Reinhard Bendix
Perry Anderson
E.P. Thompson
Barrington Moore
Immanuel Wallerstein
Charles Tilly
Contemporary Paradigm in ComparativeHistorical Method in the Social Sciences
Theda Skocpol and Margaret Somers’s codification
(1980)
Typology of comparison
Parallel demonstration of theory
Contrast of context
Macro-causal analysis
Parallel
Comparative
History
Triangle of
Comparative History
theory
C C C
(a) Theory/theme
applied to each case
(b)
concern with
explanation
Macro-Analytical
Comparative
History
bounded
generalization
theme
CC C
C C
(c) comparison across cases intrinsic
Contrast-Oriented
Comparative
History
Contemporary Paradigm in ComparativeHistorical Method in the Social Sciences
Theda Skocpol and Margaret Somers’s codification
(1980)
Typology of comparison
Parallel demonstration of theory
Contrast of context
Macro-causal analysis
The Triangle of Comparative History
A Cycle of Transitions
3.
Parallel
Comparative
History
Cycle of Transition
hypotheses
developed into
general theory
limits set to overly
general theory
2.
MacroAnalytical
Comparative
History
contrasts suggest
testable hypotheses
1.
ContrastOriented
Comparative
History
Contemporary Paradigm in ComparativeHistorical Method in the Social Sciences
Charles Tilly’s Codification (1983)
Levels of analysis in comparative-historical method
World-historical level
World-system level
Marcohistorical level
Microhistorical level
Tilly advocates that the marcohistorical level should be the
attainable and fruitful level for social scientists to work on
(Tilly 1984, P. 64)
1929-2008
Contemporary Paradigm in ComparativeHistorical Method in the Social Sciences
Charles Tilly’s Codification (1983)…
Tilly’s typology of Comparative-historical studies
Individualizing comparison
Universalizing comparison
Variation-finding comparison
Encompassing comparison
(Tilly, 1984, p. 81)
(No. of conceptual properties)
(No. of cases)
(Tilly, 1984, p. 81)
(No. of conceptual properties)
MOI policy
in HKSAR
Language policy
in HKSAR
Legitimation
crisis
in HKSAR
MOI policy
in British
colonies
in south Asia
(No. of cases)
MOI policy
in all
Post-colonial
societies
Legitimation
crisis in
competition
states
Contemporary Paradigm in ComparativeHistorical Method in the Social Sciences
Charles Tilly’s Codification (1983)…
Tilly’s typology of Comparative-historical studies
Individualizing comparison
Universalizing comparison
Variation-finding comparison
Encompassing comparison
Ontological and epistemological assumptions on
marcohistorical comparison
Contemporary Paradigm in ComparativeHistorical Method in the Social Sciences
James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer’s
codification (2003)
Mahoney and Rueschemeyer characterize
“comparative historical analysis as defined by three
emphases – a concern with causal analysis, the
exploration of temporal processes, and the use
systematic and contextualized comparison typically
limited to a small number of cases.” (Mahoney and
Rueschemeyer, 2003, p. 14)
Lecture 2
The Theoretical Foundations of
Comparative-Historical Method in the Social Sciences
END