This paper discusses the present special issue on “Communication Viewed from Hearers' Behaviors,” focusing on Erving Goffman's participation framework and gestural phenomena observed in conversation. In particular, it points out the possibility to conceive of speaker as a) a hearer, b) a receiver of the information, as well as c) an addressee. It also points out that grand gesture and simultaneous gestural matching can be loci of analysis in understanding how social-interactional plain and cognitive plain interact in investigatory conversation between the suspect and the policemen and⁄or prosecutory officials, and in psychological counseling.

抄録全体を表示

Now "the judicial reform" has become a big subject for discussion among lawyers.
Participation of the ordinary people in the judicial process is inevitable for the reform, and that will put life into the reform.
Here I'm taking up the mixed court system in criminal justice as one of the ways to achieve the lay people's participation in the judicial process.
Paticularly I have examined German mixed court system by comparing it with the criminal jury trials in England and America, and by pointing out merits and demerits of each style. By doing so, I hope to come up with the most suitable and possible form of judicial participation by the people in Japan.

抄録全体を表示

Some cases of "brain death"-heart transplantetion in Japan have been performed in 1999 after a long- period of time following the Wada scandal of 1967. The problems of whether "brain death" is the termination of human life or not have not been solved medically, socially or ethically, even though the new organ transplantation law, including the description-a brain-dead body, was enforced during a brief discussion in 1997. The main reason was that the authorized Takeuchi criteria of the Ministry and Welfare in 1985, and 1997 together, stated that brain death is not a concept on death, but a clinical concept on statistical study on brain-death cases of our country. So, the "brain-dead" person in transplantation is the weaker patient compared with the recipient patient. In 1996, Professor Abe was arrested for the accidental homocide of a hemophilia patient injected with non-heated blood. The patient later died of AIDS after the injections. Professor Abe routinely carried out these types of injections till the middle of 1985 through a subordinate doctor of Teikyo University. I think that Professor Abe is the weakest person compared with the AIDS patient, who was supported by patients groups, lawyers, public prosecuters and the mass media. Being a specialist on blood medicine, he could know the risk of blood from the USA possibly comtaminated with AIDS, reading the some new English articles 10 years ago, but he never discontinued the use of the blood therapy. The reason was that at that time, there was no consensus on the non-heated blood for hemophilia as the origin of "AIDS", medically (no strong arguments on the blood were done for the origin of the AIDS in the blood group meeting, and so strong debate was done on the strict relation between the serological findings and fatal signs of AIDS patient in the infection group meeting), socially, and legally. And secondly blood therapy was the only routine method to treat the bleeding of hemophilia. Thirdly this legal and fanatic investigation against Prof. Abe was performed 10 years after the injection based on long years of medical data. He is the victim of irrationalism and fascism in the medical society including both doctors and patients of our country, because in Europe and American countries where the more strict discussions on the relation between the blood use and AIDS signs have been continued these 10 years medically, socially and legally, no arrest of the clinical doctors has been found in the investigation till now.

抄録全体を表示

私立学校の自由と権利がどこまで保証されるのか、そして私立学校が教育制度全体の中で如何なる位置と役割を果たすことになるかは、その国の教育の在り方の根幹と通底する問題である。とりわけ、私立学校の自由と国家による学校統治との結節点を成す私立学校法(Privatschulgesetz)に関する研究は、その国の教育の特質と構造解明の点で重要な意味を持つ。本稿は、ドイツ連邦共和国(旧西ドイツ、以下単にドイツという)成立直後の南西地域(バーデン州およびバーデン・ヴュルテンベルク州)における私立学校法の制定経緯を検証し、そこでの私立学校の自由の法的保障獲得とその過程で導き出された新しい教育認識が、同時に1960年代中頃以降のドイツの公立学校の民主化運動を支える一つの基盤ともなっていたことを明らかにしようとするものである。従来のドイツ私立学校に関する研究では、田園教育舎やシュタイナー学校といった改革教育運動系列の学校における教育実践の特質や創始者の教育思想の研究が大半を占め、かかる優れた私立学校の教育が如何なる教育法制の下で展開されてきたのか、つまり私立学校法制への関心は極めて希薄であった。だが、例えば、国家の学習指導要領に従わず、教科書も使用しない教育を実践するシュタイナー学校が、ドイツ国内で170校近くにまで増加できた背景の一つとして、私立学校の自由と権利が各州の教育法(多くは私立学校法)によって保障されている事実に注目することが必要であろう。ドイツの私立学校法制史上、こうした私立学校の自由保障の嚆矢となったのは、1950年の南バーデン州私立学校法であり、同法はさらに1956年のバーデン・ヴュルテンベルク州私立学校法に継承・発展されていった。しかも注目すべきことは、この南西ドイツにおける私立学校法の制定過程に関与した人物たち、特にゲオルク・ピヒト(1913-1882)、ヘルムート・ベッカー(1913-1993)が同時に1960年代以降の公立学校の民主的改革においても、その中心的役割を果たしている事実である。だが、こうした興味深い事実も、従来の戦後ドイツ教育政策史研究においては等閑視されてきたのであった。以上のような課題意識および先行研究の問題点を踏まえ、本稿は以下の三つの論点を分析することを目的とする。1)ドイツの伝統的な学校統治体制および教育法理論の中で私立学校は如何に位置づけられてきたのか？2)南バーデン州私立学校法(1950年)およびバーデン・ヴュルテンベルク州私立学校法は如何なる経緯で制定されたのか？3)南西ドイツにおける私立学校法の制定はドイツ教育の歴史展開において如何なる教育史的意義を有していたのか？

抄録全体を表示

In the past the Hiranuma Cabinet has been often referred to in connection with the Japan-Germany-Italy mutual Defense Pact of 1937. This paper puts a new perspective on the well-known 'Complex and bizarre communique' and criticizes the previous trend in treating the Hiranuma Cabinet as incompetent. This paper, through a close examination of both American and British diplomatic data, throws light on Hiranuma's manoeuverings with respect to the U.S. and clarifies the following three statements. First, Hiranuma wished to conclude the Chino-Japanese War immediately and pursue possible ways for peace negotiations with the Chiang Chieh-shih Government. The idea of a peace treaty suggested by American and Britain had been thoroughly discussed by the Hiranuma Cabinet as to whether Japan and China should accept it or not. This discussion led to the disolution of the first Konoe-Communique and inevitably forced Japan to change its attitude. Since their failure in the Trautmann Peace Move they had repeatedly refused peace negotiations conducted through a third party. Secondly, Hiranuma, having predicted that both America enforce economic sanctions against Japan, tried to approach the U.S. positively. At the end of May, 1939, Hiranuma sent a message to President Roosevelt through Ambassador Grew, and held a meeting with Secretary Dooman of the American embassy concerning the possibility of holding an international meeting to discuss methods of resolving the crisis in Europe. There was, however, one condition, that America would call Britain to the meeting and Japan would call Germany and Italy. Hiranuma wished to add to the topics at the meeting truce conditions for the Chino-Japanese War. Thirdly, on the night prior to the start of the European War only Japan and America held the key to the solution of the Far East Problem. Hiranuma's successfully improved relations with America confused Britain, who thereby did not have a chance to impose economic sanctions on Japan. Hiranuma's diplomacy had been supported by his right hand men and he had never hesitated in approaching the American and the British embassies. His approach was decisive and straight to the point. Hiranuma made himself a reputation by suppressing the Communist Movement at the beginning of the Showa Era and by such manoeuvrings as the Anti-Minobe strategy in the Kokutai-meicho-Movement. The times, however, changed drastically during the following decade. Hiranuma was to be stultified by political moderates, but never the less was able form a cabinet which was in line with them. He continued to make his best effort to fulfill their expectations. Considering only the results of his diplomatic manoeuvres, one can observe that there were fewer reactions from America than were expected, although much effect was exercised on Britain and China. However, results are not wholly indicative of history. While the people and the media were thinking only of the alliance with Germany and Italy, Japanese diplomatic policies were moving calmly towards the Pacific.

抄録全体を表示