教育社会学研究
Online ISSN : 2185-0186
Print ISSN : 0387-3145
ISSN-L : 0387-3145
文化の概念
回顧と展望
石黒 毅
著者情報
ジャーナル フリー

1966 年 21 巻 p. 118-132,en241

詳細
抄録

This paper attempts to delineate the range of the cultural in its width and depth, and evaluate its huristic value in understanding education.
The first of the problems is examined by looking into some disputes over the conception of “superorganic.” This well-known, but often mistaken term, coined by H. Spencer, was first adopted by A. L. Kroeber. He used the term to refer to the suigeneris phenomenon, culture, which then (around 1917) was generally explained psycho-physically by social philosophers like L. Ward, G. Le Bon and F. Galton, It was against their interpretations of culture that kroeber was protesting.
He asserts the cultural is not transmitted from generation to generation through heredity: culture is not organic, but it must be learned by the new-born: culture is superorganic, although its locus is in an individual organism.
Having clarified some semantic confusions on the term culture, we examined various ways of defining culture. The Kroeber-Klukhohn categories were employed, and we found that such different definitions are to be understood as referring to and describing diverse facets of “real culture” in the Lintonian sense.
We shall mention two consequences of this interpretation.
As enumerative definitions like E. B. Tylor's of cutlure indicate, variables of socialization analysis should not be confined only to the emotive dimension alone, as most personality-culture researchers have thought (I. Child. J. W. M. Whiting, R. Sears and others, for instance), but they should be extended to the cognitive and evaluative dimension as well.
Explicit and implicit level of culture, too, is of great importance. As B.L. Whorf has shown in his studies of language, in interpreting our Umwelt we are usually unaware of our implicit assumptions, cognitive, emotive, and evaluative. While one is learning the way of life, he is also inter-nalizing the implicit assumptions of his culture. Accordingly, if education means transformation, and educators want it to be effective, this implicit level of culture must be taken into consideration.

著者関連情報
© 日本教育社会学会
前の記事 次の記事
feedback
Top