Dear wsnetters:
I have received the following response from Prof. Edward Tiryakin.
I am reposting it to the net because I think the comments
have important implications for anyone interested in
w-s theory and social science.
Quee-Young Kim
Department of Sociology
University of Wyoming
Laramie, WY 82071
Kim@uwyo.edu
(307) 766-5230
> Date sent: Mon, 02 Oct 1995 15:28:50 -0400 (EDT)
> From: durkhm@soc.duke.edu (Edward Tiryakian)
> Subject: Re: collapse
> To: KIM@uwyo.edu
> I am sure that the collapse/implosion of the Soviet Empire will lead
> to as long-lasting debates as that of the Roman Empire. There is a set
> of essays in the May 1995 issue of the American JOurnal of Sociology
> which has as a focus the problematic of *Prediciton in the Social
> Sciences*. There are three important essays in particular, one by the
> economist Kuran saying one cannot make predicitons of abrup regime
> changes because social actors hae private preferences different from
> their publicly expressed ones; a second essay by Randall Collins says
> yes, predictions are possible and that HE DID predict the collapse of
> the Soviet empire when nobody else was doing it (if you check his
> writings before 1990, you may question just how much of a prediction
> he did in fact make), and the third essay is by Charles Tilly, which
> takes a judicious middle ground.
> While a world system argument might appeal -- especially in
> the light of wst having anticipated a decline of capitalism before one
> of socialism -- there are two endogenous factors to be retained: the
> breakdown of commitment and credibility in the system structure and
> its ideology and the significance of a reform-minded leader who
> pushed for reforms, like the 18th century enlightened rulers, but who
> lacked the steel rigor of Metternich and other reactionaries who
> cracked the whip in 1848.