1979 年 34 巻 p. 28-39,en204
1) There are four schools which have criticized the scientific standpoint of Sociological Functionalism, namely: Maxist Sociology, Psychoanalysis, Structuralism and Phenomenology. Marxist Sociology aims to find out thesuperconscious(objective) law ruling the artifacts system, Psychoanalysis aims to grasp theunconsciousstratum in personality system, Structuralism aims to dig out thenonconsciousrule ruling the cultural system, and, in contrast with these three schools, Phenomenology focuses its attention not on Noema but onNoesis.
2) The configuration of these four schools may be able to be drawn as a square with Sociological Functionalism in the middle and with other four schools at each vertex. In this configuration, we can locate Reflexive Sociology between Sociological Functionalism and Marxist Sociology, Phenomenological Sociology (including Ethnomethodology) between Sociological Functionalism and Phenomenology, Hermeneutics between Phenomenology and Structuralism, and lastly Symbolic Interactionism between Herme neutics and Sociological Functionalism.
3) Nevertheless, all these schools stand on the horizon ofbeing(Sein) and ofmeaning.They don't search the ground itself which makes the horizon of all these schools the figure. It is “Zen” that attempts to search this ground itself. In contrast with Western Philosophy, Zen breaks. through being, meaning and consciousness to feel actually the world of nothing (Sunya), and to experience the process of appearance of being, . meaning and consciousness from nothing. I would like to find a bud of new sociology in Zen.