國立臺灣大學社會系所柯志明2006-09-272018-06-282006-09-272018-06-282005-12http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/20060927115910320898不少社會學者視敘事為認識論上不可相容的異類，急切地要將說 故事自社會學的歷史解釋裡逐出。本文基於敘事性與人類生活經驗的時間性間相互依存的關係，倡議社會科學的歷史解釋應納入敘事作為更多樣而成熟的選擇。筆者以為，社會科學的解釋與敘事的理解非但不應相互排斥，甚且可以相輔相成。社會學的歷史研究裡，敘事究竟可以扮演什麼角色，其與傳統社會科學的解釋又有什麼關連？本文嘗試從認識論與方法論來探究兩者結合的可能性與方式，並以《番頭家》一書的寫作經驗作為實例。Narrative is regarded as the epistemological "other" by many sociologists, who are eager to drive story telling out of their historical explanations. Adhering to the reciprocity between narrativity & temporality, this paper advocates incorporating the narrative mode into historical explanations in sociology as a sign of both methodological diversity & maturity. This article illustrates the compatibility of narrative understanding & social science explanation through the writing experience of The Aborigine Landlord: Ethnic Politics & Aborigine Land Rights in Qing Taiwan.application/pdf707827 bytesapplication/pdfzh-TW敘事社會科學歷史社會學narrativesocial sciencehistorical sociology[SDGs]SDG2journal articlehttp://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/20060927115910320898/1/10-s-ko.pdf