961
个编辑
更改
→Theoretical background
==Theoretical background==
==Theoretical background==
理论背景
[[File:Penrose tiling.gif|thumb|Illustration of complexity ([[Penrose tiling]] [[fractal]])]]
[[File:Penrose tiling.gif|thumb|Illustration of complexity ([[Penrose tiling]] [[fractal]])]]
The American sociologist [[Talcott Parsons]] carried on the work of the early founders mentioned above in his early (1937) work on [[Action theory (sociology)|action theory]].<ref name="Parsons-a">Parsons, Talcott ([1937] 1949). ''The Structure of Social Action: A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to a Group of European Writers''. New York, NY: The Free Press.</ref> By 1951, Parsons places these earlier ideas firmly into the realm of formal [[systems theory]] in ''The Social System''.<ref name="Parsons-b">Parsons, Talcott (1951). ''The Social System''. New York, NY: The Free Press</ref> For the next several decades, this synergy between general [[systems thinking]] and the further development of [[social system]] theories is carried forward by Parson's student, [[Robert K. Merton]], and a long line of others, in discussions of theories of the [[Middle range theory (sociology)|middle-range]] and [[Structure and agency|social structure and agency]]. During part of this same period, from the late 1970s through the early 1990s, discussion ensues in any number of other research areas about the properties of systems in which strong correlation of sub-parts leads to observed behaviors variously described as [[autopoiesis|autopoetic]], [[self-organization|self-organizing]], [[Dynamical system|dynamical]], [[turbulent]], and [[Chaotic system|chaotic]]. All of these are forms of system behavior arising from mathematical [[Complexity science|complexity]]. By the early 1990s, the work of social theorists such as [[Niklas Luhmann]]<ref>Luhmann, Niklas (1990.) ''Essays on Self-Reference'', New York: Columbia University Press.</ref> began reflecting these themes of complex behavior.
The American sociologist [[Talcott Parsons]] carried on the work of the early founders mentioned above in his early (1937) work on [[Action theory (sociology)|action theory]].<ref name="Parsons-a">Parsons, Talcott ([1937] 1949). ''The Structure of Social Action: A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to a Group of European Writers''. New York, NY: The Free Press.</ref> By 1951, Parsons places these earlier ideas firmly into the realm of formal [[systems theory]] in ''The Social System''.<ref name="Parsons-b">Parsons, Talcott (1951). ''The Social System''. New York, NY: The Free Press</ref> For the next several decades, this synergy between general [[systems thinking]] and the further development of [[social system]] theories is carried forward by Parson's student, [[Robert K. Merton]], and a long line of others, in discussions of theories of the [[Middle range theory (sociology)|middle-range]] and [[Structure and agency|social structure and agency]]. During part of this same period, from the late 1970s through the early 1990s, discussion ensues in any number of other research areas about the properties of systems in which strong correlation of sub-parts leads to observed behaviors variously described as [[autopoiesis|autopoetic]], [[self-organization|self-organizing]], [[Dynamical system|dynamical]], [[turbulent]], and [[Chaotic system|chaotic]]. All of these are forms of system behavior arising from mathematical [[Complexity science|complexity]]. By the early 1990s, the work of social theorists such as [[Niklas Luhmann]]<ref>Luhmann, Niklas (1990.) ''Essays on Self-Reference'', New York: Columbia University Press.</ref> began reflecting these themes of complex behavior.
美国社会学家塔尔科特·帕森斯（Talcott Parsons）在他早期（1937年）关于行为理论的研究中，接手开展了上述早期创始人的工作。到1951年，帕森斯（Parsons）便坚定地将这些早期的想法融入正式的系统理论领域中，并写进了他的书《社会系统》中去。在接下来的几十年中，帕森斯（Parsons）的学生罗伯特·K·默顿（Robert K. Merton）和其他同行在关于中层（中程）理论，社会结构与能动性的讨论中，将一般系统思维与社会系统理论进一步发展之间的这种协同作用进行了更深入的推进。同一时期（自1970年代后期到1990年代初期），关于系统特性在其他许多研究领域也进行了讨论。其中，各个子部分之间的强相关性导致观察到的行为被不同地描述为自生系统，自组织系统，动力学系统，湍流系统和混乱系统。所有的这些系统行为模式都源于数学复杂性。直到1990年代初，诸如尼古拉斯·卢曼（Niklas Luhmann）等社会理论学者的工作才开始反映出这些复杂行为的主题。
One of the earliest usages of the term "complexity", in the [[Social science|social]] and [[behavioral sciences]], to refer specifically to a [[complex system]] is found in the study of [[Complexity theory and organizations|modern organizations]] and [[management studies]].<ref>Kiel, L. Douglas (1994). ''Managing Chaos and Complexity in Government: A New Paradigm for Managing Change, Innovation and Organizational Renewal.'' Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.</ref> However, particularly in management studies, the term often has been used in a [[metaphor]]ical rather than in a [[Qualitative property|qualitative]] or [[quantitative property|quantitative]] theoretical manner.<ref name="CCS-MMT" /> By the mid-1990s, the "complexity turn"<ref name=Urry>Urry, John (2005). "The Complexity Turn." ''Theory, Culture and Society'', 22(5): 1–14.</ref> in social sciences begins as some of the same tools generally used in [[complexity science]] are incorporated into the social sciences. By 1998, the international, electronic periodical, ''[[Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation]]'', had been created. In the last several years, many publications have presented overviews of complexity theory within the field of sociology. Within this body of work, connections also are drawn to yet other theoretical traditions, including [[constructivist epistemology]] and the philosophical positions of [[Phenomenology (philosophy)|phenomenology]], [[postmodernism]] and [[critical realism (philosophy of the social sciences)|critical realism]].
One of the earliest usages of the term "complexity", in the [[Social science|social]] and [[behavioral sciences]], to refer specifically to a [[complex system]] is found in the study of [[Complexity theory and organizations|modern organizations]] and [[management studies]].<ref>Kiel, L. Douglas (1994). ''Managing Chaos and Complexity in Government: A New Paradigm for Managing Change, Innovation and Organizational Renewal.'' Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.</ref> However, particularly in management studies, the term often has been used in a [[metaphor]]ical rather than in a [[Qualitative property|qualitative]] or [[quantitative property|quantitative]] theoretical manner.<ref name="CCS-MMT" /> By the mid-1990s, the "complexity turn"<ref name=Urry>Urry, John (2005). "The Complexity Turn." ''Theory, Culture and Society'', 22(5): 1–14.</ref> in social sciences begins as some of the same tools generally used in [[complexity science]] are incorporated into the social sciences. By 1998, the international, electronic periodical, ''[[Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation]]'', had been created. In the last several years, many publications have presented overviews of complexity theory within the field of sociology. Within this body of work, connections also are drawn to yet other theoretical traditions, including [[constructivist epistemology]] and the philosophical positions of [[Phenomenology (philosophy)|phenomenology]], [[postmodernism]] and [[critical realism (philosophy of the social sciences)|critical realism]].
在现代组织和管理研究中发现，在社会和行为科学中，“复杂性”一词最早用于专称复杂系统。但是在管理研究中，该术语通常以隐喻而不是定性或定量的理论方式使用。直到到1990年代中期，社会科学开始向“复杂性转变”，因为复杂性科学中通常使用的某些工具同时被纳入社会科学中。到1998年，国际电子期刊《人工社会与社会模拟杂志》创建。在过去的几年中，许多出版物对社会学领域的复杂性理论进行了概述。这一系列工作，还与其他传统理论建立了联系，包括建构主义认识论和现象学，后现代主义和批判现实主义的哲学立场。
===方法论===
===方法论===
Methodologically, social complexity is theory-neutral, meaning that it accommodates both local and global approaches to sociological research.<ref name="CCS-MMT"/> The very idea of social complexity arises out of the [[Historical comparative research|historical-comparative]] methods of early sociologists; obviously, this method is important in developing, defining, and refining the theoretical construct of social complexity. As complex social systems have many parts and there are many possible relationships between those parts, appropriate methodologies are typically determined to some degree by the research level of analysis [[Differentiation (sociology)|differentiated]]<ref>Luhmann, Niklas (1982). ''The Differentiation of Society.'' New York, NY: Columbia University Press.</ref> by the researcher according to the level of description or explanation demanded by the research hypotheses.
Methodologically, social complexity is theory-neutral, meaning that it accommodates both local and global approaches to sociological research.<ref name="CCS-MMT"/> The very idea of social complexity arises out of the [[Historical comparative research|historical-comparative]] methods of early sociologists; obviously, this method is important in developing, defining, and refining the theoretical construct of social complexity. As complex social systems have many parts and there are many possible relationships between those parts, appropriate methodologies are typically determined to some degree by the research level of analysis [[Differentiation (sociology)|differentiated]]<ref>Luhmann, Niklas (1982). ''The Differentiation of Society.'' New York, NY: Columbia University Press.</ref> by the researcher according to the level of description or explanation demanded by the research hypotheses.
从方法上讲，社会复杂性这一特征是无关乎于理论的，这意味着无论是地方性（局部）或全球性（全局）社会学研究都将适用。社会复杂性的想法源于早期社会学家的历史比较方法。显然，这种方法对于发展，定义和完善社会复杂性的理论构造非常重要。由于复杂社会系统包含了许多部分，而且这些部分之间又存在许多可能的关系。因此不同的适用方法在一定程度上取决于不同的分析研究深度【地方性（局部）或全球性（全局）】，再进一步说，便是由研究人员根据研究假设所要求的描述或解释程度来区分。
从方法上讲，社会复杂性这一特征是无关乎于理论的，这意味着无论是地方性（局部）或全球性（全局）社会学研究都将适用。社会复杂性的想法源于早期社会学家的历史比较方法。显然，这种方法对于发展，定义和完善社会复杂性的理论构造非常重要。由于复杂社会系统包含了许多部分，而且这些部分之间又存在许多可能的关系。因此不同的适用方法在一定程度上取决于不同的分析研究深度【地方性（局部）或全球性（全局）】，再进一步说，便是由研究人员根据研究假设所要求的描述或解释程度来区分。