A critical examination of differentiation/synthesis theories on sciencies of physical education and sport : suggestions from 13 authors (1972)

Abstract

An attempt was made to critically review the characteristics of theories on differentiation and synthesis of the sciences of sport and physical education using a framework of analysis based upon scientific philosophy. The basic problems to be solved are: 1. Where can we find the knowledge that we need? What fields of science are there? What directions are they taking? What characteristics do they show as a whole, why? 2. How is the relationship between the sciences of physical education and sport developing? What relatioriships exist among general abstract notions such as "body", "movement", "physical education", "sport", and "physical fitness"? Where is the denotation of our field and what is its connotation? These two problems need to be answered before creating a framework. The framework for this review is based on 13 interrelated special research branches categorized by the Japanese Society of Physical Education and 21 registered societies having research connections to physical education and sport sciences of the Science Council of Japan. There are 4 standpoints for review: (1) technological cognitive systems, (2) value frameworks, (3) practical human bodily phenomena, (4) subjective standpoint of the practician. The technological cognitive systems are divided into 4 sub-systems, which are groups of technological knowledge gained from: 1) sciences focusing on the mammals and mankind, 2) philosophical-anthoropological sciences, 3) sciences of the natural environment, and 4) sciences of the social environment. The value frameworks along with its social needs make up each society. Human practical bodily phenomena are the sources for data which are produced by cognitive and evaluative frameworks, and the subjective standpoint of practicians is that of evaluation of this knowledge is done in accordance with their requirements. The materials of this study are theories by 13 authors published in a monograph in 1972, because these still influence the general direction of scientific complexing in Japan. The thoughts of these 13 authors were reviewed, and several tendencies were evident among them. After review, 3 more problems needed to be answered: 1) what is the influence of the contemporary era on research? The 13 authors had no interest in evironmental-technological problems on earth when theorizing about "differentiation and synthesis". They were interested mainly in physical education science as the core science for integration. 2) What scientific paradigm do we need as a substitute for "analysis and synthesis"? The answer is expansion of the notion of science such as teleological explanations through system theory and meta-system thepry. 3) How do we understand the paradigm of "theory and practice"? Many of the 13 authors found the synthesizing moment of sciences in practice. The present author, however, shows that the synthesizing moment lies in the framework itself and not in practice. They authors presupposed a paradigm of "theory and practice", "body and mind", and "natural science and spiritual science", and were latent followers of the binominal frame of reference. The present author suggests that there are 5 factors of the synthesizing moment: theory, technology, evaluation, practice, and the human being from the standpoint of philosophical pluralism.