1. 上課使用 Classroom Only 社會科學概論 高永光老師

2. 上課使用 Classroom Only Social laws

3. 上課使用 Classroom Only A. NOMOLOGICAL PROPOSITIONS

4.  In the social sciences there are many propositions that are called 'laws', such as, for example, the law of increasing specialization (sociology), the iron law of oligarchy (political science), the laws of motion of capitalism (Marxian economics), Pareto's law of income distribution (economics), the law of diminishing returns (economics), etc. When we examine such statements we discover that, while they all represent generalizations, they involve very different kinds of generalizations.

5. 1. Empirical laws In his System of Logic (Book VI, chapter V) John Stuart Mill defines an ‘empirical law’ as ‘an uniformity, whether of succession or of coexistence, which holds true of all instances within our limits of observation, but is not of a nature to afford any assurance that it would hold beyond those limits…’.

6. Let us look at two of the laws in the list above that are clearly empirical in nature: ‘Pareto’s law of income distribution’ and 'the iron law of oligarchy’ enunciated by Robert Michels. Vilfredo Pareto, Italian engineer-economist-sociologist, put forward the striking law of income distributions in his lectures at the University of Lausanne, published as Cours d’economie politique (Course in Political Economy, 1896-7).

7.  He examined the data on incomes in all countries for which statistics were then available and became convinced that the pattern of income distribution was substantially the same in all countries and could be represented by the formula :  log N = log A –α log X

8. where N is the number of people whose income exceeds X, and A and α are constants. If we plot the (cumulative) income distribution on double-log graph paper it will be a straight line with slope equal to α. The coefficient of α is a measurement of the degree of inequality in the income distribution.

9.  Pareto’s empirical studies showed not only that the above formula fitted the data well but that, when calculated, α turned out to have substantially the same magnitude in all countries, indicating that the degree of inequality in the distribution of income was uniform. This suggests that α in Pareto's formula is similar to Newton’s coefficient of gravitational attraction: a ‘natural constant’.

10. 2. Analytical laws  This term refers to the kinds of laws one finds in the disciplines of logic and mathematics. For example, the ‘law of contradiction’ states that: –A thing cannot be both X and not-X and the ‘law of the excluded middle’ states that: –Everything must be classifiable as an X or a not-X.

11.  The ‘law of transitivity’ states that quantitative relationships are such that: –If A is greater than B and B is greater than C, then A is greater than C.  A concrete example of the first two of these laws would be the statement: –A thing is either a swan or it is not; it can't be both and of the transitivity law: –If Albert is taller than Bertha, and Bertha is taller than Clarence, then Albert is taller than Clarence.

12. It is important to note that examples of this sort merely illustrate the relevant analytic laws; they play no role in proving them. Analytic laws are laws of reason or laws of rational thought, not laws of nature in any empirical sense.

13. When we state the transitivity law we are not asserting anything empirical, such as, for example, that people behave as if they believe that when A > B and B > C, then A > C; we are saying that any other behaviour would be irrational. We are not required to assert that people do always behave rationally; that would be an empirical statement, not an analytic one.

14. 3. Causal laws  What most people would find unsatisfactory about empirical laws and analytic laws is that they do not connect events together in a causal fashion. If a ‘law’ is expected to furnish an explanation of why the phenomena are as they are and not otherwise, then empirical laws and analytic laws are not laws at all.

15.  Many philosophers, and most scientists, emphasize the importance of causal laws in science but, unfortunately, there is little agreement as to what is meant by concept of ‘cause’. In this section I want to focus on a ‘model’ of causation which, though unsatisfactory in some ways, helps one to understand how the concept of cause is typically used in common speech, and by scientists in their professional work.

16.  Let us consider what is involved in making a statement like ‘The forest fire was caused by lightning’. Obviously lightning (L) was not sufficient to cause the fire (F), since the forest had to be dry (D) for it to have had the effect it did. But (L) was not necessary either, since, given D, F could have resulted from, say, a discarded cigarette (C).

17.  This is vitally important to the understanding of ‘laws’ of social behaviour. For example, the ‘law of demand’ in economics says: ‘Other things held constant, when the price of a commodity goes up, people buy less of it.’ It is not necessary that everyone buy less, however; the law merely says that the aggregate purchase will be less.

18. 上課使用 Classroom Only B. NOMOLOGICAL LEVELS

19.  If we were to jot down every time we encounter a nomological proposition in our reading and then looked over the list when we had, say, twenty items, we would be struck by differences in the level of organization that is represented by them. Suppose you are a student of biology.

20.  You read, for example, about (1) the constancy of the 'Chargaff ratios' in the nucleotides that are part of the DNA molecule inside the cell; (2) the principles that govern cell division in mitosis; (3) the mechanism of cell differentiation in embryonic development; (4) the processes of reproduction; (5) the ecological interaction among the species of plants and animals in an area.

21.  These represent very different levels of organization: (1) is at the chemical level; (2) is at the level of the cell; (3) Is concerned with tissues and organs; (4) deals with the functions of a whole organism; (5) focuses upon a community composed of different species of organisms.

22.  When scientists try to establish the 'laws of nature' they are dealing with a reality that is law-governed but one in which different laws operate at different levels of organization.  The Chargaff ratios and the principles of predator- prey equilibrium are both biological laws, but the ecologist has very little interest the former and the latter is not of much relevance to the work of a geneticist.

23.  So it serves no purpose to refer in general to 'the laws of biology*.A list of such laws would be so exceedingly heterogeneous that it would have little significance.  Biologists stick to specialities such as molecular genetics, cell physiology, embryology, and so on, because the laws that relate to such restricted domains of phenomena form a coherent set, and one can see how new research-fits into the body of already established knowledge in the restricted domain of interest.

24.  The methodology of analogical argument is too complex a subject to be examined here but it is worth noting that analogical reasoning is as dangerous as it is tempting. A common fallacy in reasoning is called by philosophers ignoratio elenchi.  This refers to the fallacy of setting out to prove one proposition, proceeding to prove a different one, and then claiming that the original objective has been achieved.

25.  A metaphor or analogy can effectively illustrate an argument for didactic purposes but it cannot serve as a valid demonstration unless the analogy is very close.

26. 上課使用 Classroom Only C. SOCIAL AND NATURAL SCIENCE: SOME PRELIMINARY

27.  The comparison of the social and the natural sciences will occupy our attention frequently in the following pages, as it has done already.  At this point it may be useful to draw upon what has been discussed in sections A and B of this chapter to make some remarks on the differences between the social and natural sciences.

28.  In previous sections and chapters their similarities have been stressed; but a recognition of their differences is also important. Six major points of difference should be noted.

29.  1. Nomological propositions are possible only with respect to phenomena that have some reasonable degree of uniformity.  2. The social sciences are able to make very little use of controlled experiments.  3. Perhaps because of the limited ability to experiment, research in social science cannot be conducted on the basis of pure curiosity to the degree that is possible in the natural sciences.

30.  4. Closely connected with the practical or applied aspects of the social sciences is the fact that they are more involved with value judgements than the natural sciences.  5. The social sciences deal with the behaviour of humans, and many (but by no means all) social scientists would claim that this makes them fundamentally different from the natural sciences.  6. Finally, we should note once again that whole- part relationships in social phenomena are not like those of the natural world.

31. 上課使用 Classroom Only D. POSITIVE AND NORMATIVE PROPOSITIONS

32.  The terms “positive” and “normative” are frequently used in the literature of social science to differentiate between propositions about empirical facts and propositions that are value judgements.  Distinguishing between these two types of propositions is essential if one is to think or speak clearly on any matter, but especially so in dealing with social questions.

33.  The origin of the term “normative” is even more peculiar. It derives from the Latin word norma, which is the name for a carpenter's tool, a square for setting right-angles.  From this clearly “positive” activity, the term came to be used to mean a standard of good conduct, or “norm”, perhaps derived from the notion that a carpenter conducts himself properly when he gets his angles truly ninety degrees when they should be.

34.  By the mysterious processes of language evolution “normative” is now used in English to refer to those aspects of social science where value judgements enter the picture.

35.  The essential difference between positive and normative propositions can be put this way: when a positive proposition fails to be supported by empirical evidence, the proposition is called into question; but when a normative proposition is at odds with the state of the world, the state of the world is called into question.

36.  Put somewhat differently, when a person's positive beliefs do not agree with the facts, he is rationally obliged to change his beliefs; but when the facts do not agree with a person's normative beliefs he is morally obliged to change the facts if he can.

37.  The member of the Flat Earth Society should change his geographical theory; the thief should change his conduct. Positive and normative propositions are both vital to social science in its efforts to understand and to deal with social problems, but it is essential to clear thinking that they should not be confused.