巨大な災害や事故、環境問題、医療、生命倫理など、進歩する科学技術は社会に大きな恩恵をもたらすと同時に深刻な問題を投げかける。これらの問題にアプローチする科学社会学の基本から最前線までがわかる初のテキス ト。.

地球温暖化、海洋汚染、貧困と環境破壊の連鎖―危機を深める地球環境に対して社会学はどう考えるのか、そして持続可能な社会とは。.

原始共同体、古代日本、ヘレニズムとヘブライズム、近代社会―文化と社会の形態によって異なる時間の感覚と観念を比較検討し、近代的自我に特有の時間意識がどのように形成されたかを、自然と人間、共同体と都市、市 場と貨幣等々の関係のなかで解明する。近代世界の自己解放の運動の一環を担う比較社会学の深い洞察に満ちた労作。.

Religious Discourse in Modern Japan explores the transportation of the Western concept of “religion” in in the modern era; the emergence of discourse on Shinto, philosophy, and Buddhism; and the evolution of the academic discipline of religious studies in Japan.

1-kan. Geijutsuteki rōdō no shakaigaku -- 2-kan. Geijutsuteki sōzō no riron.

In this article, I will present a construction of a Nishitanian ethics of sympathy primarily based on passages from Nishitani Keiji’s principal work of his middle period Religion and Nothingness (Shūkyō to ha nani『宗教とは何か』). To establish the normativity of Nishitani’s concept of sympathy I will present his concept of force (chikara 力) as its basis. I will argue that the role of force has been hereto overlooked in the analysis of Nishitani’s concept of circuminsessional relations which has impaired the task (...) of constructing an ethical theory from his thought. I will primarily engage with Brett Davis’s work on circuminsessional relations to demonstrate this point, as I believe he has provided the most robust account of it thus far. After establishing this construction, I aim to elucidate the relative advantages of Nishitanian ethics of sympathy and address potential critiques. First, I will position Nishitanian ethics of sympathy as responding to Nietzsche’s critique of Schopenhauer’s morality of compassion. Nietzsche's critique is strong and that responding to him on Nishitanian grounds will be useful in demonstrating the advantages of my construction. Next, I will respond to a critique given in Peter-Hans Liederbach’s ‘Between the Ontological and the Ontic’ that accuses Nishitani’s philosophy of being unable to offer a basis for ethics. Lastly, I wish to position Nishitanian ethics of sympathy as a starting point for expanding the tradition of sympathy-based morality in East Asian philosophy. I will do this by relating Nishitani’s concept of sympathy to Justin Tiwald’s work on sympathy in Confucianism. (shrink)

The term Zongjiao [宗教] originally referring to the teachings of Buddhism and Chinese ancestral worship was not considered the equivalent for the English term ‘religion’ until the late 19th century when Japanese translated religion as shūkyō [宗教]. The later introduction of the concept of Zongjiao into China via Japan triggered a deep exploration of the differences between religion and Jiao among Chinese intellectuals like Liang Qichao, Kang Youwei and Peng Guangyu, representing Chinese scholars’ conceptualisation and reflections of Chinese traditional religious (...) belief, practices and phenomena within the context of Western religious culture. Rather than a simple lexical selection, the translation of ‘religion’ essentially was a process of making the notion of ‘religion’ in China, which had provided valuable insight into the nature of Chinese Confucianism culture and was closely related to the understanding of the state–church relationship in China. With continuous cultural exchanges and integration, reflecting on this translation process will provide a more inclusive perspective on the complexity and diversity of religions and facilitate mutual learning.Contribution: This article briefly reviews the process of accepting Zongjiao [宗教] as the equivalent for the Western term ‘religion’ in China, in order to shed light on how such translation has influenced people’s understanding of religion and the inclusiveness contained in the study of religion. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Race, Buddhism, and the Formation of Oriental (Tōyō) Philosophy in Meiji JapanYijiang ZhongIntroduction: Why Race for Philosophy?This paper examines the discursive efforts by Inoue Tetsujirō井上哲次郎, the foremost figure in the establishment of philosophical study in Meiji Japan, to de-Westernize Buddhism for the purpose of redefining the Orient (Tōyō 東洋) and constructing Oriental philosophy in contribution to nation-state building in Japan1. Born in 1855 to a doctor’s family in Kyushu, (...) Inoue studied Confucian classics as well as English and Western thought at a young age before being selected to study at the newly established Tokyo University (Tokyo daigaku 東京大学), which was renamed Imperial University (Teikoku daigaku 帝国大学) in 1886 and then Tokyo Imperial University (Tokyo teikoku daigaku 東京帝国大学) in 1897. Upon graduation, Inoue taught philosophy at the university and co-published the first dictionary of philosophy, Tetsugaku jii (字彙) in 1881. In 1884, Inoue was sent to study philosophy in Europe, and upon returning to Japan in 1890, he became a professor of philosophy at (Tokyo) Imperial University, a position he held until retirement in 1923. Regarded as “the representative philosopher of the Meiji period,”2 Inoue played a major role in adopting and reconfiguring both Western and indigenous discourses and categories in the formulation of Oriental philosophy (Tōyō tetsugaku 東洋哲学), and shaped this new form of philosophical knowledge in the service of a “national morality” (kokumin dōtoku 国民道徳), i.e., the ideological foundation of modern Japanese nation-state building. Key to Inoue’s philosophical thought was the eclectic idea of “phenomenon as essence” (genshō soku jitsuzai ron), or the unity of appearance and substance, which Inoue developed by integrating the Kantian distinction of noumena (thing-in-itself) [End Page 53] and phenomenon, and the Buddhist distinction of discrimination (sabetsu) and equality (byōdō).3In October 1890, Inoue Tetsujirō returned to Japan after six years of study in Germany and took up a professorship of philosophy in the Department of Literature of Tokyo Imperial University, where he lectured from 1891 to 1898 on Indian philosophy and history of Buddhism under the title of “Comparative Religion and Oriental Philosophy.”4 On June 30, 1897, he published a small (123-page) book entitled On the Race of Shakyamuni (Shaka shuzoku ron 釋迦種族論), which included a lecture “What Race was Buddha Shakyamuni?” (Shaka ha ikanaru shuzoku nanoka 釋迦は如何なる種族なのか) given at the Tokyo Academy (Gakushi kaiin 学士会院) on July 7, 1895, and a much longer essay defending his theory of the Buddha’s race developed from the lecture as an attack on Naka Michiyo 那珂通世, who was a professor at Tokyo Higher Normal School engaged in a public debate with Inoue on the issue. In 1902, Inoue went on to publish a biography of the Buddha, Shakyamuni-den 釈迦牟尼伝, demonstrating his persistent interest in the life and identity of the founder of Buddhism. Curiously, while the title “What Race Was the Buddha” appeared in the table of contents of the biography, the essay itself was not included in the book. Then in April 1911, a new version of the biography was published after Inoue and his student Hori Kentoku 堀謙徳 expanded the content and appended seven annotations and bibliographical essays, including one on the racial identity of the Buddha. The revised biography has 465 pages, greatly expanding the 1902 version of 286 pages. This time, not only was the essay “What Race Was the Buddha” not included, but its title did not appear in the table of contents either.Why did Inoue need to talk about race and determine the racial identity of the Buddha when he was lecturing on Oriental philosophy, religion, and national morality? What do the emergence and disappearance of the issue of the Buddha’s racial origin in Inoue’s lectures and publications mean? How did these changes speak of Buddhism, Oriental philosophy, and Japanese philosophy Inoue was constructing? So far, scholars have not raised the question of race, although a growing amount of literature on Inoue from the perspectives of philosophy, intellectual history, and political ideology is surfacing.5 The only study that touched upon Inoue’s essay on the racial identity of the Buddha is Isomae Junichi 磯前順一’s Kindai Nihon no shūkyō gensetsu to sono keifu 近代日本の宗教言説とその系譜 [End Page 54... (shrink)