Some mathematical models have been developed in the area of sociology. These models are classified into gravity models proposed by Stewart, Zipf and Dodd and intervening opportunity (and competing migrant) models proposed by Stouffer. This paper is concerned with the problems of these models in application to the empirical data on the internal migration in our country. In order to research the problems, following two models were tested with the data on intercity migration in Hokkaido prefecture. MI =aX/Ib (intervening opportunity model) MD=cX/Dd (distance model) In the formulas MI and MD are the numbers of migrants from A to B, X is the number of in-migrants between A and B, I is the number of all in. migrants to B, D is the shortest transportation distance from A to B, and a, b, c, d are constants. The test was done by correlation and regression analysis between the observed and expected numbers of migrants presented logarithmicaly from each city of origin to all other cities of destination. The conclusions the test indicated are as follows. The availability of these models is checked by other two factors, namely (1) the factor of direction and (2) the specific push-pull relation between cities. And the effect of distance factor is raised inversely to the population size of the source city. Consequently, migration patterns of cities are classified into next four types. (1) The central city of the prefecture interacts most frequently with each of all other city without the effect of disturbing factor of distance. (2) The data on the cities as secondary center, interacting especially with the cities in specific direction, are not applicable to the models. (3) The data on the cities which interact frequently only with cities of short distance are conformity with the models. Thus, in these cities migrants are powerfully disturbed by distance factor. (4) The data on the cities which interact frequently with cities of the same socio-economic character are not conformed to the models. In comparison of two models, no significant difference concerning availability was found.
It is the purpose of this paper to explore the relationship between the post-secondary educational aspirations and career perspectives in some detail. The data are taken from questionnaires given in December 1966 to over seven thousand Japanese senior-secondary school boys. The study begins with a classification of college-aspiration types (1) day-college type, (2) night-college type, (3) Yes-No type, and (4) non-college type. The responses to questions concerning expected or contingency use of other opportunities for post-secondary education and training are tabulated against the college-aspiration types to provide other perspectives on educational aspirations and their meanings. Finally, various aspects of career perspectives are related to the types of college aspirations. The findings are as follows : (1) Japanese boys hold strong aspirations for symbolic or formal schooling. The day-college type indicates a high level of “symbolic” orientations toward education, whereas the non-collage type is much oriented toward “functional” or pragmatic education and training. (2) The boys' perceptions of the market value of college degrees are closely associated with their aspirations for post-secondary schooling or training. The more oriented toward the elitist universities they are, the more they believe in the market value of degrees and the more they commit themselves to them. (3) Each type of post-secondary educational aspiration embodies a relatively narrow perception of education, by which we may explain the Japanese peculiar phenomena “R, onin”, to some extents. (4) Under prevailing conditions, a large proportion of Japanese boys will be frustrated with their educational hopes and also occupational expectations, for there is a slippage between their aspirations and attainments. (5) The patterns of the linkage between the boy's college-aspirations and career perspectives are summarized readily : the day-college type prefers the higher-status positions with big corporations or government and those in the non-college type expresses a preference for medium or small employers with correspondingly modest positions. There seems to be a predominant “realism” along with their own lot among the boys in the non-college category, while those in the day-college type are “ambitious”.
It can hardly be intelligible that most of the current sociologists pay little attention to the time societies have actually passed.. The author has persistently argued on the problem of “social time”, which properly be elucidated further. The “social time” is adequately treated in Sartre's Critique de la raison dialectique, which is an article with remarkable dynamic character and in which he endeavors to synthesize sociology and history. His attempt is, however, seemingly not successful and the article is criticized by Sorokin and Gurvitch as one of historical philosophy. Too much inclined to history though, it is issued by a really gifted one and is worth to be examined circumspectly. The present author makes his best effort to illustrate Sartre's dynamic argument unfolded in the article. In accordance to Sartre, dialectics is the only solution to overcome the deficiencies of the current sociology, i.e., indifference to time and superficial observations. He has developed extravagant dynamic dialectics which insist on dialectic movements being composed of totalization and distotalization. The movements does not, however, result in totality. Only an incompleted totality can be contemplated by Sartre. The dialectics originate in the “human praxis”, which come across the obstacles, i.e., “inertia”, of various sorts. Sartre terms social dimensions as “practical ensembles” which be understood in the dialectics of “practice” and “inertia”. Then, between the former and the latter, four categories are discriminated and arranged in the following order ; “series” “collectif”, “classes”, and “groups”. The “groups” are further divided into “group in fusion”, “oath group”, “organized group” and “institution-group”, each of which also moves between the “practice” and the “inertia”, and increasingly comes closer to the latter. A theory of alienation, which *consists in the alienation of an individual and the restoration of oneself, lies at the basis of Sartre's argument. The priority is here given to the individual and the society is overshadowed by both the individual and history. A society is thought to be a momentary movement (of individuals) towards history. Historical point of view as well as individualistic one can conspicuously be disclosed in his thesis. It is entirely agreeable that sociology be incorporated with history. Sociologists can not, however, go to excess as Sartre does : the former should employ not historical dialectics but social ones. The present author has repeatedly insisted on the significance of the social dialectics.
Originally, the term secondary contact seems to be used in dual ways. Sometimes R.E. Park used the term as an interaction under the “social control” or “consensus”, and sometimes he used the term when he intended to explain the state of STADT LUFT MACHT FREI. It is well known that Park divided interactions into two parts, competition and contacts. Contacts, or interactions under “consensus”, are chiefly composed of conflict, accommodation, and assimilation. Secondary contacts are, according to him, synonimous with “conflict” and “accommodation”, though “assimilation” is a type of interactions that fall into the field of primary contact (Introduction Introduction to the Science of Sociology, p. 50, 286, 737) So long as contacts are interactions under “social control”, and secondary contacts are among the contacts, the logical conclusion is that the secondary contacts must have functions to narrow the freedom of people. He often alluded to the restriction of freedom under the state of “crisis”. (“the City”, III.) On the other hand, under another context, he used the term “secondary contact” relating to the acquisition of freedom by modern citizens. (“the City”, IV.) Above two usages are indeed contradict each other, but both meanings reflect the social conditions of his days. He lived in the age of STADT LUFT, when the “capitalistic million cities” (Okui) were coming to the world ; and also he was able to observe the capitalistic growth of economic monopoly, which might have been regarded and expressed that the American economy had established the social “consensus”. For all the contradiction of his concept, we might estimate the fact that he, by using the term secondary contact, explained the function of deviators for the maintenance of urban freedom, as a byproduct of the description for STADT LUFT MACHT FREI. Park's logic concerning the deviation is simillar to that of the functional analysis of Merton, who regards the rebellion as a conformity to the norms of another reference groups. When Park referred to the function of deviators, he used the term “secondary contacts” to show the state of “the imposition of one primary group upon another, ” (Introduction, p. 50). It seems to me that it might be fruitful for the further development of urban sociology and human ecology, to confirm the secondary contact concept on this context.