The "controversies " in Japanese geological community that lasted for 20 years after World War II are widely recognized as "historicity controversies " between "physicochemicalism " (denying "historicity " in geological objects) and "historicism " (against employing physicochemical methods). Mitsuo HUNAHASHI, professor of petrology at Hokkaido University, has been considered to be a "historicist. " However, reexamination of his "historicity controversies " reveals that he was not a man of "historicism. " The true point of the "controversies " was whether historical or physicochemical methods should have priority in geological studies. To Hunahashi, it was on historical methods; however, he never denied the other methods. That is, he was not a man of "historicism. " He thought that "historicity " was found within such micro structures as the irregularity of mineral crystals. The more details could he observe, the more precise his understanding of "historicity " would be. Therefore, employing physicochemical methods for more detailed observations was matter of course to him. Some of his researches even suggest that he tried to unify both of the approaches. The reason he was seen as a "historicist " is that Hunahashi thought his opponents were "physicochemicalists. " Actually, they (S. BANNO, K. ITO, and A. MIYASHIRO) were well aware of "historicity " and never "physico- chemicalists. " Consequently, Hunahashi's claims became as if he had been criticizing all physicochemical methods as "physicochemicalism. " Criticized as if they had been "physicochemicalists, " Miyashiro, et. al. had to argue back that Hunahashi's claim was a sort of "historicist " arguments. The "controversies " also have political and ideological contexts. These will be discussed in later papers.
The Vaisesika system is known as ancient Indian realism. In this paper, the author intends to examine the concept of time and space in Prasastapadabhasya (6C. A.D.), which is one of the main texts in this system. The concepts of Time and Space in Prasastapadabhasya are contemplated as three types of, substance. They are kala(time), akasa(ether), and dis(direction). First, kala is the cause of idea of differences between past phenomenon and non-past (future and present). Therefore, the concept of time in Prasastapadabhasya is not considered to be a linear, which is its understanding in modern physics. It might be clear truth that such concept is absolutely differs from one. Next, as for space there are two types of concept. One is dis, the other is akasa in Prasastapadabhasya. Dis is what informs us the place where substance with the form is. It should be emphasized this concerned with substance with the form. Thus, we can see that dis is the visual space form is vision perceives. On the other hand, akasa is the substance which functions is a medium of the transmission of the Sabda (sound). Hence, we can see that akasa is the auditory space. To sum up, the theory of time and space in this system can be concluded that is composed of Empirical Epistemology and Categorical Realism.