Abstract:

Political science has always been a subject based on the history, but in the United States, the close relationship between the two has been eroded gradually after the behavioral revolution. From 1960s to 1970s, the “marginal revolution” sparked from historical sociology set off the first wave of historical turn. Based on big structures, large processes and huge comparison, a group of scholars who can be regarded as milestone ended the dominant position of structural functionalism and left many influential theories, concepts and works for later generations. At the beginning of the 21st century, the debates between quantitative and qualitative methods promoted the emergence of the second wave of historical turn. The new historical turn, represented by historical institutionalism, has a clearer sense of methodology, but less in enlightening works. In spite of the Ontological conflict , no matter  “scientific turn” or “cultural turn” are unable to effectively resist the  “temptation from natural science”which has been pervaded in American academia for a long time, which forces researchers to ignore the important role of history while pursuing the universal theory and the scientific logic. In the face of difficulties and challenges, the proposition of historical political science could provide a possible way to reshape the historical imagination and build the indigenous knowledge system.

Key words: American political science, historical turn, temptations from natural science, ontology, historical political science

摘要： 政治学从来都是一门以历史为基础的学科，但在美国，政治学与历史学的紧密联系却自行为主义革命之后日渐侵蚀。20世纪六七十年代，美国政治学的第一次历史转向在社会科学的边缘地带爆发。凭借大结构、大过程、大比较创造的恢弘想象力，历史社会学的开拓者们终结了结构功能主义一统天下的局面，并为后世留下了许多影响深远的理论、概念与作品。21世纪初，美国政治学迎来了第二次历史转向，以历史制度主义为代表的定性阵营与定量阵营展开了激烈的知识交锋。新一波历史转向具有更明确的方法论意识，但能启人心智的成分却越来越少。这是因为，无论采取“科学主义策略”还是“文化主义策略”，第二次历史转向的浪潮都无法有效抵御美国学界长期弥漫的“自然科学诱惑”，而流行的“混合方法”则容易出现本体论层面的根本冲突。面对困境与挑战，历史政治学有望成为重塑政治学历史想象力的可能出路

关键词: 美国政治学, 历史转向, 科学诱惑, 本体论, 历史政治学