最新发表

最近发表的两篇文章。今年的发表应该结束了。希望明年也不错，呵呵。

欢迎下载，欢迎批评指正。

1. Shiping Tang, “Toward Generalized Evolutionism: Beyond “Generalized

Darwinism” and Its Critics,” JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ISSUES,

Vol. LI No. 3 September 2017. DOI 10.1080/00213624.2017.1353871

小文章，是我的下一部著作On Social Evolution《论社会演化》的副产品。尽管发表在一个（非主流，很一般）的经济学杂志，但是其实不是经济学文章（呵呵）。

Abstract:

This article seeks to transcend the debate regarding “generalized Darwinism” or “universal Darwinism” for the social sciences. Highlighting recent discoveries in evolutionary biology, the article argues that it is no longer tenable to insist that (neo-)Darwinism is the only proper doctrine for understanding biological evolution. Moreover, social evolution is much more than purely (neo-)Darwinian or (neo-)Lamarckian. As such, the debate on whether we deploy only (neo-)Darwinism or (neo-)Lamarckism — generalized or not — to understand social evolution is a red herring. Instead, social scientists should embrace “generalized evolutionism,” a more accommodating and versatile doctrine that subsumes “(generalized) Darwinism” or “(generalized) Lamarckism.” Empirical inquiries that deploy “generalized evolutionism” have shed important new light on some critical puzzles in human society: from institutional change to the foundation of economic development before 1500 AD, through the coming of the industrial revolution, to the evolution of the international system. More empirical efforts along this line of theorizing are needed.

2. Shiping Tang, 2017. “Understanding Ethnic Conflict: Four Waves and Beyond,”

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.340

这是一篇关于族群冲突研究的综述文章。对于本科生和硕士生的入门很有用。

Summary and Keywords

The past four decades have witnessed an explosion of research into ethnic conflict. The overarching question addressed in the voluminous and still growing literature is this:

Under what cultural, social, economic, political, and international conditions is ethnic conflict or peace more likely? Limiting my survey to the onset of ethnic war, I divide the literature into four waves and critically examine its theoretical and empirical progress.

I contend that the field has indeed made impressive progress, both theoretically and empirically. Theoretically, the field has moved well beyond the unproductive debate of the three paradigms (i.e., primordialism, instrumentalism, and constructivism), and there is an emerging consensus that we need to draw valid elements from all three paradigms and beyond. In addition, neo-institutionalism has (re-)emerged as a major approach in the field. Empirically, powered by increasingly sophisticated methods and technologies such as the Geography Information System (GIS) and the availability of more and better datasets, inquiries into ethnic conflict have not only ventured into exciting new territories but also gained deeper and fine-grained knowledge into the causes of ethnic war.

I then highlight several recent studies that bring out impressive theoretical and empirical syntheses that may well portend better things to come.

Finally, I identify several venues for further scientific progress, including tighter coupling between theorization and empirical hypotheses, getting the basics of methods right, gathering more fine-grained data that measure the level of ethnic politics, bringing together ethnic politics and other key topics in the wide social sciences, and forecasting the risk of ethnic war based on computational social sciences.

Keywords: ethnicity, ethnic group, ethnic conflict, ethnic war, onset, empirical international relations theory