In 1949, at the end of a long period of wars, one of the biggest challenges facing leaders of the new People’s Republic of China was how much they did not know. The government of one of the world’s largest nations was committed to fundamentally reengineering its society and economy via socialist planning while having almost no reliable statistical data about their own country. Making It Count is the history of efforts to resolve this “crisis in counting.” Drawing on a wealth of sources culled from China, India, and the United States, Arunabh Ghosh explores the choices made by political leaders, statisticians, academics, statistical workers, and even literary figures in attempts to know the nation through numbers.
Ghosh shows that early reliance on Soviet-inspired methods of exhaustive enumeration became increasingly untenable in China by the mid-1950s. Unprecedented and unexpected exchanges with Indian statisticians followed, as the Chinese sought to learn about the then-exciting new technology of random sampling. These developments were overtaken by the tumult of the Great Leap Forward (1958–61), when probabilistic and exhaustive methods were rejected and statistics was refashioned into an ethnographic enterprise. By acknowledging Soviet and Indian influences, Ghosh not only revises existing models of Cold War science but also globalizes wider developments in the history of statistics and data.
Anchored in debates about statistics and its relationship to state building, Making It Count offers fresh perspectives on China’s transition to socialism.
Arunabh Ghosh is associate professor of history at Harvard University.
评分
评分
评分
评分
从统计的角度看state capacity/incapacity。全方面书写毛时代的统计史,成功建立起了一套非常自圆其说的narrative: 从1950s的exhaustive enumeration + periodic reporting system, 到1957年向印度借鉴random sample survey的经验,再到反右+大跃进期间的typical survey主导。推动线性叙事的深层动力是冷战下三种意识形态和政治力量的角逐: 排除数学和自然科学的社会主义统计(exhaustive) vs.建立在概率论上“驯服”偶然的资本主义的统计(stochastic) vs. Maoist的民族志-群众路线式“调查报告.”(Ethnographic)
评分期待已久
评分从统计的角度看state capacity/incapacity。全方面书写毛时代的统计史,成功建立起了一套非常自圆其说的narrative: 从1950s的exhaustive enumeration + periodic reporting system, 到1957年向印度借鉴random sample survey的经验,再到反右+大跃进期间的typical survey主导。推动线性叙事的深层动力是冷战下三种意识形态和政治力量的角逐: 排除数学和自然科学的社会主义统计(exhaustive) vs.建立在概率论上“驯服”偶然的资本主义的统计(stochastic) vs. Maoist的民族志-群众路线式“调查报告.”(Ethnographic)
评分期待已久
评分期待已久
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有