If we consider sociolgy as a science feasible to be sudject to empirical research, empirical social research plays an important role. At the same time, it is important to consider the philosophical aspects of the methodology adopted by the researcher, i. e., why and how a certain methodology is adopted. Moreover, this problem has a special importance whenever empirical social research by itself is a sociological topic.
　This relationship between philosophical and empirical aspecsts has been studied under the denomination of: “critical social theory” (Kritische Gesellschaftsttheorie).
　In Japan only the philosophical aspect of this theory has been given attention. This is in spite of the attention given to the empirical aspect by early proponets of this theory (i, e., Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno).
　Jürgen Habermas, who is the most important theorist belonging to the so-called “Frankfurt School”, has transformed the original “critical social theory” into a theory of “communicative action”.
　This new theory has strongly influenced empirical social research. Its greater influence may be noticed in the studies of moral development. For example, in WestGermany Piagean researches are being conducted adopting Haberman's theory.
　In this article we inquire the reasons why the above-mentioned researches have adopted Haberma's viewpoint. Emphasis will be put on L. Kohlberg's theory because his theory may contribute to the feasibility of applying Haberman's theory in the conduction of empirical social researches.

抄録全体を表示

　Captives of institutionalized perspectives, our view of reality is badly distorted. Our attitudes toward children are no different; we are predisposed to see that problems involving children are problems of the child himself.
　In the past decade discussion about “the third wave of a formidable increase in juvenile delinquency,” and “problem children” have steadily increased in Japanese society. If we examine many of the institutions involved with children - the schools, police, juvenile court, probation office, mass media and parents, that the problems of children were in fact problems of the adults themselves; the cause of the many of the problems was not so much the children but over-response by the adults.
　This paper will identify that the correlation between the following factors have produced the phenomena of “problems of children.”
　1 ) The discrepencies between image the reality and that between children's ideal behavior and their portrayal in the mass media.This has caused a sense of fear and uncertainty in many adults.
　2 ) A tendency to depend on law to alleviate that uncertainty.This trnasfers responsibility for these children to the institutions of law and authority.
　3 ) On a symbolic level the selection of “sacrifices” from among the children.This transfers the oppression under which the adults suffer onto the backs of children.

抄録全体を表示

　Natrually the early writings of Talcott Parsons show us well the conceptualisationprocess of his own sociology. There we can distinguish two main lines of social scientific thought, to which Parsons owes many things. The one is the positivistic tradition of social science staring from the utilitarianism, and the other is the historical one.
　Between these two trends, Parsons finds an important common element, that is, an ethical element in social action. In this way, he has widend the concept of normative element in action scheme, getting over the exclusively rational type of noam.
　On the other hand, considering the Hobbesian problem of order, Parsons thought it indispensadle that the normative ethical element should be common to all the members of society. Through this process criticizing the utilitarian economical thought, he could not, however, help leaving an interesting point of view taken up from Weber and Somdart. The mobern society as an objectified autonomous machine.
　We expect that we could have made clear the reason of this Parsons' omission in his early wrtings.

抄録全体を表示

　First, I will make a brief survey of resource mobilization theory as it relates to the formation of social movements. Second I will discuss its main problematic point: because it tends to portray social movements as rational and non-emotional, resource mobilization theory reduces social movements to a form of collective action in which people act together organically in pursuit of their common interests. In my mind there is little doubt that social movements encompass larger and more dynamic concepts than those contained in collective action.
　Based on the work of the Italian sociologist, F. Alberoni, I introduce another theory of social movements. He defines a movement as a historical process which starts with the nacent state and ends with the re-establishment of the everyday institutionalized order within which social movements exist as the opposite of institutions. For Alberoni, movements can exist only as a temporary state.
　As a theory of social movements his opinion might be regaded as almost heretical. But I believe that his theory offers useful suggestions to supplement the theoretical weaknesses of the resource mobilization theory I described above.
　In short, by incorporating some parts of Alberoni's theory, this paper tries to develop resource mobilization theory and the theory of social movements in a wider perspective.

抄録全体を表示

　In this article I try to explain the relationship between anonymity and unconventionality. By anonymity I mean the situation in which actors have to interact without prior knowledge of each other's social background. However, when strangers first meet, some visually apparent information about each other is obtainable. Using whatever information derived this way, urbanites interact with each other.
　In such a situation deviant behavior has its highest likelihood of occurrence. There are two reasons for this: 1) the “public order” (eg. Goffman's “civil inattention”) is so obscure that the actor is likely to invade unitentionally the “privacy” of others. 2) The actor can operate under the assumption that since no one knows him personally, even if someone witnesses his deviant behavior, he can not identify him; his behavior is not attributable to himself as an individual.
　In an anonymous situation because the course of interaction is short, the actor's “remedial work” cannot have much of an effect. Moreover, since the audiences have no information about him, the probability that the actor is regarded as improper is quite high. Taking advantage of the lack of information in such a situation, the actor can fool the others by taking the role of a ficitional character. The object of the actor's action taken against strangers in public is a protest against the convetional norms.
　The necessary condition of these "unconventional" behavior is “anonymity.” But this is only an optimistic assumption on the part of the actor; there may very well be someone who will recognize him. If he is discovered, he can not return to the “conventional” world. He must recognize the risks concommitant with the unreliability of the assumption and learn to control his behavior in anonymous settings as he does in the acquaintance-setting.

抄録全体を表示