The theme of this article is the constitution of <Cooperation> under the stage of the global capitalism. We define the constitution of <Cooperation> as the practice trying to communicate equally and interactively between< I> and< Others>.
We propose the interactive communication of one's own devices/skills concerning everyday life between I and Others as a practical model of this <Cooperation>. This constitution of <Cooperation> is, we think, the pressing task for our own existence entangled among the web of network power called < Empire>.
In the chapter I, we argue the relation of the practical model of this <Cooperation> to <Empire> described by Hardt and Negri. In this article, we grasp <Empire> as the control-apparatus which subsume and hierarchize infinite differences in our own existence. At this point, the practice of interactive communication of one's own devices/skills concerning everyday life between <I> and <Others>, and that of networking this process of communication aims at bringing out the power of the individual which is cleared away by the hierarchizing function of <Empire>.
In the chapter II, taking <Face> as the key concept. The new process of <Cooperation> is an interactive process responding to the appeal of <the Other>. There is <Desire of the Other> (Lacan) at the core of this process. Our own desire is produced by this <Desire of the Other>. Hence, we explore this process of <Cooperation> in consideration of the insight of <Transference> through which our own desire is produced.
In the chapter III, we introduce some cases of practice towards a program constituting the new <Cooperation>.
Conclusion: The task of the constitution of <Cooperation> becomes actual through
the process which includes the experience of one's own <Determination> in an encounter with the Other.

View full abstract

This comment on Nagasawa's article points out some difficulties in it. First, it tends to use jargons without enough explanation. He needs to clarify those concepts that he uses and needs to show the necessity to use them. Second, the (Japanese) title and the abstract of his article suggest that the main purpose is to rearrange the concepts of the three thinkers, but the third part of the article is saying much about his concern about evaluation of care work. This inconsistency needs to be rectified.
Then, the reviewer reformulates the author's main concept of Cooperation and defines it as an interactive provocation and communication of individuals' devices/skills in life through communal practice. However, author does not validate his conception. Selection of previous studies might be inadequate. Negri and Hardt is certainly to be discussed, but it is not clear why the author selected them. When he refers to them, he does not mention any problem with them. Thus he fails to keep a critical distance to them. And these difficulties may lead to an elitistic and authoritarian utilization of their thought.
The reviewer confirms the content of the concept of Empire and its paradoxical relationship with the concept of Cooperation, then points out that the authors knows this relationship but he ended the article with a one-sided assessment of Cooperation.
The reviewer also points out an ethical problem of citation of students' papers as such. Finally, the reviewer emphasizes the necessity of minimum procedure of proper argument to gain readers' understanding, even if we give an importance on interdisciplinarity and originality of the contributed article.

View full abstract

The progress of “Empire” is unbalanced, and regional differences exist in its strength. The critic takes up the concrete cases in his article to verify the suitability of the application of “Empire” theory of Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri.
In conclusion, it is hard to say that Mr. Nagasawa's analysis of the contemporary Japanese society by application of “Empire” theory was successful. However, if “Empire” theory is left and unconsidered, it can be estimated that the examples which Mr. Nagasawa gave shows the one directivity of dealing with the problems which contemporary society has.

View full abstract

Nagasawa argues the composition of “Cooperation” under the stage of global capitalism based on the ideas of Antonio Negri and Micael Hardt. He utilizes the concept of “Empire,” “Multitude” referring to Negri and Hardt, in order to examine the constitution of “Cooperation”. However, the conceptual construct remains unclear.
Nagasawa regards “Empire” as 'the apparatus that contains various differences and converts into an endless hierarchical order.' He maintains that this apparatus functions divisively at the individual level.
His theme is to explore the possibility of 'Cooperation' in the “Empire.” He claims 'that the composition of Cooperation is an urgent problem for our lives facing the global capitalization.'
The analytical framework is complicated and includes many aspects; nevertheless, the practices and cases are easy-to-understand.
The illustrated cases seem to relate to the welfare state; however, Nagasawa makes no connection to the welfare state theory of Negri and Hardt. The evaluation of this paper by the reviewer who is twined into the labyrinth of the logic is +1.

View full abstract

A new method of concept analysis of Rorschach tests is presented and its basic theory and clinical applications are explored. Generally, most clinicians using the Rorschach test for psychodiagnosis depend on what can be described as the counting method, which is based on a division of operations (data gathering, cording, and scoring) involved in quantitative analysis. The problem with this method is that the 'here and now' of a clinical situations is diluted because the Rorschach testing situation is not considered as a field of interaction, but rather as a data gathering method. In the counting method, key interpretations of the responses begin after quantifying the psychological data. As a result individual verbalizations, or responses, have no interpretative meanings. In contrast, the concept analysis that is based on ideas developed by Wittgenstein's late philosophy, gives prominence to clinical intuition from the stage of Rorschach administration. The most remarkable features of this method are, not adhering to the cording-category-system of the Rorschach system, and understand the background conditions that constitute individual responses as figure, as well as adjusting to the response process in which moment to moment formation and annihilation of a response co-occur. Moreover, the author advocates a 'nested loop model' of interconnecting immediate interpretation on the Rorschach situation and ex-post interpretive activity. The nested loop model is characterized by temporality and indeterminacy of the interpretation.

View full abstract

The main purpose of this article is to base the methodology of “Concept-analysis” described here on the <Concept-system>. As a consequence, the article is graded to be 0. Because the purpose of this article is restricted as above mentioned, it was impossible to do full consideration of the consistency concerning the relationship of the methodology of “Concept-analysis” and described in Tazawa's article. For full consideration, I think, first of all it would be necessary to make clear the notion of <Concept-system> on which Tazawa's article depends. I found out that <The basic level> could not be consistent with Wittgenstein's concept of a Language Game in Tazawa's<Concept-system>. I think that Mr.Tazawa should not take any methodological reference other than Wittgenstein's concept of a Language Game in strict sense.

View full abstract

By a Rorschach test ,when a doctor gets a data of what an examinee compares an ink stain to,he can know the character of the examinee.
In an architecture , we can recognize the inner space, comparing the sorid geometrical space to some concrete images. It has something in common with the Rorschach test.
So, I think that Rorschach test is some similar to semiology in architecture.

View full abstract

The paper has basically a excellent value for the philosophical, logical and methodological considerations argued minutely on Rorschach Test, based on the Concept Analysis by Wittgenstein and many philosophers, logicians and researchers of Rorschach Test.
The essence of the paper is thought as a phenomenological interpretation of the Rorschach test on the just time applying the Test to the subject. In the sense, the paper could be recognized the importance of the participant observation on process of applying the Rorschach Test. The case study shows it concretely and vividly. Moreover, I feel the phenomenological interpretation must be important on any clinically psychological situations including Rorschach Test.
I think the phenomenological interpretation would be deepened by integrating the quantitative analysis and sequence analysis after administration with the intuitive interpretation here and now on applying the Test. The thought of nested loop by Mr.Tazawa might be consist with my comment.
Anyway, I think the paper can be fully appreciated as a treatise for discussing a method and one of principles of phenomenological interpretation of Rorschach Test.

View full abstract