With Hegel, dialectic “Stood on its head” and was incorporated in the system of idealistic speculation which took a mystical form. Marx criticised the Hegelian method while examining Hegel's views on bourgeois society, and by “turning it right side up” (man muss sie umstülpen as Marx says) produced a consistently materialistic dialetic which was “its direct opposite”. In this article, the author deals with Marx's Okonomisch-dhilosophische Manuskripte and A note on James Mill, reviewing what Marx aimed at in his theory of alienation of labour was to make clear the theoretical and practical grounds for abolishing the system of «Entfremdung der Arbeit» (“alienated labour”) by disclosing the low of how private property as capital did work. His analysis of “alienated labour” in. Okonomisch-philosophische Manuskripte had been the attempt to prepare the theoretical basis for it, the attempt which had necessarily to lead him to the confirming of what position the private property and the alienated labour had occupied in the preceding history of mankind. On the other hand, the aim of Manuskripte was not confined to the abolishment of the “self-alienation of labour”; the final aim of it was through that abolishment to remove the human self-alienation in its totality. The so-called historical materialism was formed in order to answer theoretically these two problems thus brought forward by Manuskripte. The theory of alienation of labour, therefore, did not liquidate itself by the formation of historical materialism, the latter being in fact the development of an element of the former. And thus the theory of alienation of labour constitutes a theoretical moment of the science of history called historical materialism.
While Merton focuses on a society that is markedly different from that of Durkheim's France, there is a common tendency in their anomie theory to conceive of an “atomistic” and “individualistic” actor. But in modern societies, the industrial bureaucracy, not the small independent business, has increased importance as a source of mobility, and the aspirations to become self-employed has lost some of its meaning with the growth of large-scale organization. Then the stress of recent theories in the anomie tradition is more on the “organization” man, especially modification of views concerning the boy's aspirations in this age is requred. For instance, although Merton forcuses on “pecuniary succes”, in resent theories aspiration level is measured by educational aspiration because educational achievement is the main source of occupational achievement in a bureaucratized industrial society. Yet despite this modification, recent theories of deviant behavior, including Cloward's addition of illegitimate means and opportunity structure, still conceive in terms of the S S & A paradigm and expect that boys who retain high aspirations despite perceptions of opportunities as closed will experience the greatest pressure toward deviance and, therefore, should be the most delinquent. But Short's contradictory findings have suggested that high aspirations may indicate identification with conventional values and institutional norms. To resolve this contradiction, we must recognize that the aspiration of adolescents is not unidimensional. At least it must be taken account of two kinds of distinctions : first, their aspirations have different attributes, such as improvement in material goods or income on the one hand and in an educational achivement or status on the other ; second, two dimensions are differentiated-realistic or condition-bound and ideal or condition-free. These two kinds of distrinctions generate, by cross tabulation, a typology of four logically possible patterns of aspiration ; (1) ideal-material aspiration (2) ideal-status aspiration (3) realistic-material aspiration (4) realistic-status aspiration. Concerning the first type aspiration, S S & A paradigm is supported, but the other types do not fit, in paticular, the fourth type aspiration is the case in which Short's findings are confirmed. In terms of this typology, we shall reconsider the specific nature of success in anomie theory.
E. Singer (“Identity vs. Identification”, in Review of Existential Psychology, 1965, pp. 160173) states that identity is “a personal definition arrived at by attention to and cultivation of individual experience”, whereas identification is “a self-definition by adoption, a self-delineation provided by others”. On the basis of various theories and experimental data, Singer concludes that identity and identification are mutually incompatible. In my opinion, this conclusion is only partially correct and contains some important oversights with respect to the nature of human development. The first oversight pertains to the individual experience which he views as central to identity. In most instances of his discussion, he appears to regard individual experience as intra-individual experience which is separate from human relationships. However, I wish to point out that a human being cannot exist in separation from human relationships. That is to say, a human being has both intra-individual experience and joint experience shared with others. He exists by autonomously combining these two kinds of experience. The individual experience of a human being is precisely this autonomous experience which combines these two kinds of experience as its constituents. A second oversight pertains to the existence of two kinds of identification. The identification referred to by Singer signifies merely the adoption of a self-definition provided by others in joint experience with them. This should be designated as “identification within joint experience”, and it certainly is incompatible with identity. However, this joint experience is not the sole type of experience in human relations. Rather, there is experience wherein all component experiences, including the above joint experience, are mutually accepted and contained. Human identity develops mostly in this experience in which all personal individual experiences are stably contained. This principle is often evident in the processes of child development and counselling. Therein we can find that a parent or counsellor, trusted by the self, may provide the self with a more stable, supportive definition. The self then adopts the stable self-definition provided by the other and thus grows more stabilized. It is then that the self, on the basis of this stability, undertakes to acknowledge and accept all of its own experiences genuinely and thus is able to develop its identity. This process should be designated “identification within over-all inclusive experience”. Far from being incompatible with identity, it actually fosters identity. When the components mutually have this over-all, inclusive experience and identity is possessed, a reconstruction of new joint experience takes place. It is here that a true “I and you” solidarity comes into being.
The Problem In this paper, I intended to collect data about socialization of political interest (an aspect of political socialization) and try to discover a small number of generalized propositions that are valid in several diverse contexts. The Procedure There are some agents of political socialization such as family, school and occupational groups. I assume that socialization mechanisms are not so different in each agent group but they are quite similar. So, I try to discover generalized propositions which are common to all agents groups refering some theories of social psychology. These theories are group dynamics, learning theory, Freudian theory and Neo-Freudian theory. The Results I can't afford to summarize all propositions here. So, I will state about only the fourth proposition exactly. (IV) the generalized proposition IV When human relations in small groups are authoritative, the group members are also authoritative in politics and they are low in sense of political efficacy. (IV) - (1) In family, when parents are authoritative, the children will become submittive and they will be low in sense of political efficacy. (IV) - (2) In school, when teachers are authoritative, the pupils will become authoritative in politics and they will be low in sense of political efficacy. (IV) - (3) In occupational group, when administrations or leaders are authoritative, the followers become authoritative in politics and they will be low in sense of political efficacy.
The purpose of this paper is to make clear the social meaning of the size and distribution of outcaste communities in the feudatory of the Kaga clan by means of mapping method. The size and distribution of outcaste (so-called “buraku”) will be significant for the macroscopic analysis of the “buraku” provided that the “buraku” can be said to be a phenomenon that stems from the problem of the social structure of power. A major premise of this analysis is that if outcaste communities had not had their own social functions and privileges, it would not happen that they have kept on being discriminated and segregated so long for the reason that they have been minorities against feudal authorities. That is, they had their own social functions and privileges peculiar to them. The functions and privileges were not the same for each community, because these functions and privileges were associated with the maintenance of the feudal order which had a very complex system in itself. Since the provinces of Kaga, Ecchu, and Noto had not been integrated before the Kaga clan was organized, total society had not existed before then. Each of these provinces had the principle of the social organization of its own. In the integrating process of the Kaga clan, the feudal lord (daimyo) could not help taking these principles into consideration. Consequently, most of the people who had been subordinated to manors (shoen), shrines, temples or villages were treated as the outcaste called Kawata or Tonai, while private servants who were subordinated to patriarchal families were not treated in the same way. The social change of the Kaga clan followed three stages : first, a militaristic society controlled by the samurai ; second, an agricultiral society consisted of uniform village communities, “mura”, and maintained by the recurrence of the same social production ; and third, an ascribed society maintained by an ascribed status system. The Kaga clan invited several people called Kawata to the castle towns, Kanazawa and Takaoka for processing leather that was necessary for arms in 1609. In the first stage of the Kaga clan, the control over building a military system was the moss important problem to establish the total society. In the second stage, the command of land tax was a pressing necessity for putting the finances of the feudal clan on a firm basis. For this reason, the Kaga clan enforced the low of Kaisaku which aimed at exploiting all the surplus labor of the peasants, and on the other hand, encouraged them to develop newly cultivated rice fields. As the result, some of the peasants deserted their villages and flowed into towns. However, as there were limits to finding employment in town, the number of beggers (Hinin) increased gradually since 1651. In 1670, Hiningoya (a hut for Hinin to live in) were set up at Kanazawa. And, since 1671, the Kaga clan appropriated people who were interned into Hiningoya for developing newly cultivated rice fields. However, there were limits to developing newly cultivated rice fields, too. Since 1677, as the third stage, the Kaga clan could not help emphasizing the maintenance of status system, which was based on the political system of the time. Consequently, in 1961, the police tasks were assigned to Tonai. In 1800, landownership of Tonai and Eta (Kawata) was prohibited. As mentioned above, Kawata (Eta), Tonai and Hinin had their own social functions which corresponded to the change of feudal society : first, military functions, second, developemental functions for newly cultivated rice fields, and third, political functions. At the first and second stages, discrimination was nothing but a extension of that of the Middle ages ; feudal discrimination and segregation began at the third stage.