Since the later half of 1960's, in the sociology of Japan the theory of life structure or life system has been developed. Using this theory, I will make the frame of analysis for the influences of the increasing informations on life structure and study some facts of those influences. I. I will mention the information behaviors between individuals such as conversations, keeping household accounts, writing the diary, taking photographs and fixing them in the album, making the movie, making the schedule and the last will and the testament, and conversations by telephone. II. I will study the information behaviors between the individuals and enterprises. The information coefficient is the rate of the expense for informations in the total household expense. As the income of household becomes higher, it's information coefficient grows higher. Recently the informations for life offered in the catalogue style tend to increase, and people tend to want the full explanation from profession. These two tendencies are observed in using the data bank. The customers list is made from the informations offered by customers to enterprises. III. I will deal with the information behaviors between the individuals and the nation. In the family policies such as the family register policy, the resident registration policy and the final income tax return policy, people provide a great many informations about their lives for central and local governments. The governments accumulate those informations. There is the possibility that the governments use those to administrate the people effectively in their own covinience. The nation sends many informations for people, too. But, they tend to be negative to accumulate and to use these informations.
Both 'the postulate of adequacy' (A. Schutz) and 'double hermeneutic' (A. Giddens) can be considered as critiques of positivism. I think positivism has two main components, the 'unity of science' and the 'rationality of science'. The 'rationality of science' is my coinage. It refers to the belief that scientific knowledge is rational and objective and much better than any other forms of knowledge epistimologically. Traditionally some social theorists have critisized solely the idea of the “unity of science”. That has depended on the dichotomy of 'Geisteswissenschaften' and 'Naturwissenschaften'. Schutz and Giddens refute the “unity of science”, too. Their views can be seen as up-to-date styles of criticism on positivism. But I argue that their critiques do not necessarily succeed. So I will suggest that to gain the post-positivistic self-understanding of sociology, sociologists must criticize not only the 'unity of science' but also the 'rationality of science' by reference to Feuerabend.