scholarly journals Terra forming of social systems and human behavior: a new era for AI, human-robotic interactions (HRI), and multidisciplinary social science?

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 165-169
Author(s):  
Édgar Giovanni Rodríguez Cuberos
2017 ◽  
Vol 22-23 ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Dolfin ◽  
L. Leonida ◽  
N. Outada

1993 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles D. Brockett

Many people [in Guatemala] did begin to join the guerrillas, while many more were sympathetic or quietly supportive. The guerrillas are the only remaining source of defense left to a community or family. I know of villages that experienced actual massacres against innocent campesinos, who were not even members of coops. The survivors of these massacres would often turn to the guerrillas. With all their anger about the murders of their kin and neighbors, there was nowhere else to turn.—quoted in S. Davis and J. Hodson, Witnesses to Political Violence in GuatemalaCentral american events of recent decades show human behavior at both its most courageous and its most barbaric. The opposing phenomena of popular mobilization and state terrorism pose some of the most profound questions that can be asked by social science. How can we explain the willingness of political elites and their agents to slay thousands—tens of thousands—of their fellow human beings, even when their victims are unarmed? Conversely, how do we account for ordinary people undertaking collective action under circumstances so dangerous that even their lives are at risk?


Social Forces ◽  
1976 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 734
Author(s):  
Bernard S. Phillips ◽  
Alfred Kuhn

1999 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Oldroyd

The article reviews recent developments in accounting historiography in relation to the underlying positioning of the participants. It finds that accounting history has located itself within the tradition of social science, which subsumes events into generalizations and generalizations into theory. It reviews the efficacy of causal theories of human behavior and proposes an alternative nontheoretical approach.


2005 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 95-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Byrne

How can we make complexity work as part of a programme of engaged social science? This article attempts to answer that question by arguing that one way to do this is through a reconstruction of a central tool of a distinctively social science – the comparative method – understood as a procedure for elucidating the complex and multiple systems of causation that generate particular trajectories towards a desired future from the multiple sets of available futures. The article distinguishes between ‘simplistic complexity’ and ‘complex complexity’. ‘Simplistic complexity’ seeks to explain emergence in complex systems as the product of simple rules and defines complex science as the process of establishing such rules. It can and does serve as the basis of technocratic social engineering in the interest of the powerful. In contrast ‘complex complexity’ recognizes the significance of social structure and willed social agency and does not reduce emergence to the mere working out of a restricted set of rules. Research programmes informed by this second approach must necessarily engage with social actors in context – they must be dialogical. This opens up the possibility of ‘complex complexity’ as a frame of reference for action-research directed towards the transformation of complex social systems. Comparative methods, and in particular Ragin’s qualitative comparative analysis approach, when deployed as part of such a programme, can provide meaningful information about the range of possible futures and the different configurations of causes which might generate particular desired social outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document