DSpace at My University: 「間人主義の社会日本」にみられる問題点

【Co耐ex伽a1ism Society1Nihom，，

Hitoshi Mabuchi

「間人主義の社会日本」にみられる問題点

馬 渕 仁

Abstract

Hamaglユ。hi Eshun is regarded as one of the most innuential academics who has spoken about Japanese s㏄iety and cu1ture．His most famous pmposition is ka軸n−

shu虫（contextua1ism），which was presented in the1980s． Whi1e his ideas were

evaluated h1gh1y by manX some questlons and doubts have a1昌。 been expressed Th1s paper takes the latter position and criticizes Hamaguchi’s idea舟。m倫ur aspects， which pm洲de a signiicant problem consciousness in the discussion of Japano1ogy，

especia11y as the validity of the so−ca11ed Japanese system is under serious exmami− nation these days．

Key woMs：co11ectivism，inaividua1ism，contextua1ism，Japano1ogy （Received September7．1998）

抄 録

濱口恵俊は、日本文化について、現在最も活発に発言をしている研究者のひとりだが、

彼のキーアイディアは、『間人主義』である。80年代に提出されて以来、多くの論者が、

その概念としての意義を高く評価する一方、同概念に疑念を挟む議論も少なからず展開さ

今なお有効とされる、濱口の概念を4つの角度から批判する。ひいてはそれが、日本型シ

ステムの再考を求められている現在、日本型システムそのものが真に存在したのかという

キーワード：集団主義、個人主義、間人主義、日本文化論

大阪女学院短期大学紀要第28号（1998）

A1though it was written more than a decade ago，Kα械π8んωg｛πo Sんα冶α｛M肋。π

by Hamaguchi Eshun is sti11regarded as one ofthe most innuentia1books among Ja− pano1ogy1iterature．Especia11y the idea that the author revea1ed in his book，contex−

tua1ism，has been used in various papers and books．Recent1X Hamag皿。hi himse1f promoted his idea again to the public（1993．1996）。As he has become a leading

scho1ar in this ie1d，it is very woれhwhi1e to study his origina1concept，Kanjinshugi，

from the perspective of the current socio−cu1tura1studies．Examining his idea shou1d

a1so pro耐de some use血1aspects in comparative s㏄io1ogy．

Before Hamaguchi，Hsu and Kimura took specia1notice of the re1ationship among peop1e in Japanese昌。ciety（1972）．Hamag皿。hi deve1oped their views and

brought the concept of Kα械π，which Iitera11y means between peop1e−He said that peop1e in Westem society be1ieve in individua1ism；in contrast，Japanese peop1e be−

1ieve in Kα〃．加8ん砒g三（contextua1ism in Eng1ish a㏄ording to Hamaguchi）．He de丘ned

his Kanjinshugi as“Japanese peop1e are aware of themse1ves on1y in re1ationship

with others and they regard that re1ationship as a part of themse1ves”（pp．5−6）一He

criticized Nakane，s Uεr此α王5㏄±e妙（1967）and Doi，s Amae（1971），saying that they d1d not gTasp Japanese soc1ety thorough1y He a1so proposed to1ook at Japanese soc1−

ety from his Kanjinsh噂（p．6），which had been ca11ed corporatism by Wagatsuma （1986）．

Hamaguchi compares Kanjinshugi to Individua1ism as fo11ows：a Kanjinshugi so−

c1ety has three attr1butes，they are mutua1dependence，mutua1re11ance，and regard

for interpersoml re1ation as an end in itself In contrast an Individua1ism society

has di価erent attributes；they are se1f re1iance，ego−centeredness，and regard for inter−

persona1re1ations as a means七〇deve1op them（Hamag皿。hi1977）、His idea has been we1comed by various peop1e（Iwata1982，Sengoku1982）、It is a1so said that Hama− guchi’s witings appear more academic than his predecessors for he studied socio−

psycho1ogy，thus he su㏄eeded in presenting a new concept and methodology．He

seemed to pathind the new paradigm ofJapano1o駆一However，is it rea11y so？In this paper，施ur d1stmg’u1shmg character1st1cs of h1s Kanj1nshug1are po1nted out and ex−

amined．

As his methodology，Hamaguchi proposed etic instead of emic（pp．227−229）．It is

rated high1y For instame，Thomae（1979）mentioned“Westem midd1e−c1ass concep− tua11zat1on cannot be app11ed to Japanese soc1ety’’，and Yamaguch1and Brmston

（1980）said“He used psychometric techniques quite we11、，，Hamag皿。hi o此en said that

eti6，which is provided by peop1e who observe the target society仕。m outside，cannot

○舐er a good standard to examine that society；but that emic，which come from na− tives ofthe socie城。an present good criterion with which peop1e compare one society

to北he others（p．228）．However，is emic the best and on1y too1as he said？In contrast

to Thomae above，Mouer and Sugimoto（1986）pointed out that‘‘What Hamaguchi

and others are upho1ding in their exc1usion of Westem ana1沸ic concepts is their right to be themse1ves as they would1ike to be seen．”Even Hamaguchi himse1f said

that emic contain persona1experiences（Sugimoto and Mouer1987．p．32）．0ne ofthe

pmb1ems is that with sticking with emic，Non−Westem peop1e cannot use many so− cio1ogical concepts，肪r they most1y deve1oped in Westem countries，and peop1e1ose

the way to express their indings to peop1e in other societies because trans1ation de−

pends on etic rather than emic．It must be recognized that emic and etic both have 七heir meritsεmd limitationsl As Befu（1987）said，the important thing is to use both

ofthem proper1y and critica11y．

The second cbaracter of Hamaguchi’s theo町is that his comparison is a1most al−

ways between Japanese s㏄1ety and Westem soc1ety［Somet1mes Hamaguch1com−

pares Westem society to Eastem Asian s㏄iety，and in this case the country1ike

China is in the same category as Westem s㏄iety（1985）．1Kashima and Triandis （1986）suppoれed Hamaguch1and sa1d‘‘Th1s character1zat1on of the Japanese− Amer1can contrast has much convlnc1ng ev1dence”We，however，must be carefu1

when Hamaguchi genera1ized a11phenomena too simp1y，for examp1e，said that West− em society is the society ofrugged individua1ism whi1e Japanese is contextua1Kan−

jin s㏄iety（P．8）．Maruyama（1984）said that many Westemers practice contextua1

re1ations，and it is mt an entire1y a1ien concept for Westemers．Uem（1987）c1aims that we cannot put au Westem coun士ries in one category，and Mouer（1987）said that

how much societies are individua1and contextua1is a matter of de餌ee；in other

words we can see both of them in any society．In addition，there is a question whether the Japanese can observe Westem society just as we11as the Japanese do

their own s㏄iety．IfHamaguchi be1ieves this is possib1e，then it is a contradiction be− cause ofwhat he said about emic and e七ic．

The next point is that Hamaguchi regards Japanese peop1e as a who1e in his

book．This is not a㏄eptab1e．Be血（1987）wamed it is dangerous to assume the Japa−

nese are just homogeneous and Sugimoto and Mouer（1982）c1aim the existence of

various c1asses in Japanese societyl Intaratai（1987）said to what extent we can ap−

p1y the Kanjinshu鎮mode1in Japanese society should be di価erent among Japanese

historica1periods，and Neustupny（1987）pointed out the necessity to see that Japa−

nese society is not stationary but changing．Strange1y，even Hamaguchi sometimes

admitted that nowadays the youth in Japan are di脆rent from o1der peop1e（p−113）

and that we cou1d find some individua1ism in Japanθse society，a1though he ca11ed it

大阪女学院短期大学紀要第28号（1998）

Fim11y，HamagIユ。hi seems to praise the superiority of K巳njinshugi against the

individua1ism−He criticized Benedict’s8加α〃8んαm concept（1967）and rated h1ghly Bendasan’s‘‘N1honkyo＝Japan1sm or peopllsm’’（1971）0f course，we could

correct Benedict’s theoW，but when Hamaguchi said that Japan does not need West−

emizati㎝any more（p．123）and that Japan must export the spirit of“wa＝har−

mony，，（p−56）；I cannot heIp fee1ing the danger of the impact of what he says espe−

cia11y when so−ca11ed Japanese neo−nationalists are provoking the peop1e in Asian

countries the wong way Hamaguchi a1so assumes that individualism worked to

speed the progress of the disease of civi1ization，and that Japanese companies suc− ceeded in the USA and UK because of their距。upism（p．129）一As there are a1ot of comp1ete1y opposite facts and phenomena repo此ed，I am a血aid that Hamag■ユ。hi stiu cミmnot avoid episodeism altogether

The idea of Kmjinshugi was examined血。m four aspects：its methodology，its target nations in his comparison，its ho1istic view toward Japanese s㏄iety，and its

episodeism．As mentioned at the beginning of the paper，Hamaguchi sti11active1y

speaks and wdtes on Japano1ogy（1995．1997）．It seems that he has tried to respond

to those criticism abovel To see whether he su㏄essive1y defends his previous ideas or

he smaれ1y a1ters them wou1d be our next task，which requires a more sophisticated ana1ysls based on the current soc1a1theor1es of not on1y the stud1es of Japano1ogy

but a1so the postmodemism，and g1oba1ization．

References

BEFU，Hammi．（1987）“砒ic gainen to Emic gainen”，Kψ．加Kα械πW肋。械π，edited by MOUER

Ro畠s ana SUGIMOTO Yoshio，Gakuyoshobo，pp．256−281

BENDASAN，Isai出一（1971）州ん。η一加fo Yあdαツ勿加，Kodanshashoten

BENEDICT，Ruth（1967）Tκe Cんリ8α〃加m砒mαπd肋e8ωord，Houghton M1釧m Co，Boston，

（Japanese translation，“Kiku to Katana”，．by HASEGAWA Matsuji，1967，Kodansha）

BRINTON，MaW C．（1980）昌ee YAMAGISHI To畠hi0 DOI，Takeol（1971）Amαεπo K020，Kobundo

HAMAGUCHI，Eshun一（1977）州ん。〃αs肋8απo8α沈α肋eπ，Nihon Keizai Shinbunsha，p177

HAMAGUCHI，111日hun。（1980）“Gaisetsu，Nihonjin ni totte no Shudanshugi”，Geπdαjπo亙舳一

ρ〃’，No．168，pp．14■21

HAMAGUCHI，1≡】shun一（1985）“The Japanese Di畠ease or the Japanization？”，Jαραπ亙。ん。，Vol．8，

No．2，p−47

HAMAGUCHI，Eshun。（1985）“A Contextua1Model of the Japanese，Toward a Methodologica1 Innovation in Japanese Studies’’，Jo〃ηα王。戸Jαραηε8θ8ωd…es，Vo1．11，No．2，p．298

HAMAGUCHI，Eshun。（1987）“Zadankai：Kojin，Kanjin，Nihonjin，，，KψI加Kα械π，州ん。〃一加，p−32 HAMAGUCHI，111shun一（1993）Mん。πgα他Modεr砒ぬωαNαπ挽α，Shin’yosha

HAMAGUCHI，Eshun一（1995）‘‘Nihon Ishit昌umn to Nihongata Shi昌u加mu”，K2’zα肋π，pp．49−53

HAMAGUCHI，Eshun。（1997）州ん。πKεπ伽〃G2πro〃，Yuhikaku

INTARATAI，Kunton。（1987）“Zadankai：Kojin，Kanjin，Nihonjin’’，K④一助Kα〃一加，M尻。〃．加，p，32 IWATA，Ryushi・（1982）“Amerik幻in to Nih㎝｛in m Ningen Kankei”，Gεηdα…ηo亙sψ〃i，ed−

1加d by HAMAGUCHI Eshun，N0178，pp38■52

KASHIMA，Yoshihisa。（1986）“The Selトse耐ing Bias in Attribution as a Coping Strategy，A

Cmss−CulturaI Study”，Jo“用α’oブCro08−C“κ〃α王P8ツ。ん。Jogy，Vo1．17，No．1，P．85 KIMURA，Bin．（1982）H此わH批。 ioπoんdα，Kobund0

MARUWMA，Magoroh．（1984）“Aesthetics and the Envimnment in Outer Spa㏄，Sub拓rranean

and UnaeIwa拓r Communities”，〃切燗，Vo1116，No．2，p．154

MOUER，Ross一（1982）M尻。功ηωαM肋。枇e伽冶α，Toyokeizai shinposha

MOUER，Ross一（1986）∫mαge oμαραπ撒S㏄j吻，London：Kegan−Paul Intemati㎜al，p．30

MOUER，Ross．（1987）“Zadankai，Konjin Kanjin Nihonjin”，Kψ一切Kα〃．jπM尻。η．加，p．18 NAKANE，Chie一（1987）％施8んα尾αゴηo jV加8eηKαπ尾e｛，Kodansha

NEUSTUPNY，J V（1987）“N1honshaka1no Ta1poro口1”，KψπKαψ肌州ん。〃m，pp312’313 SENGOKU，Tamotsu（1982）“丁舳s㎞皿to T㎜msh㎜aユ，’，Gεπぬ一㎜厄sψ砒π，N0178，PP84−92

SUGIMOTO，Yoshio．（1982）see MOU】≡lR Ross

SUGIMOT0，Yoshio．（1986）see MOUER Ross SUGIMOTO，Yoshio．（1987）see MOU】11R Ross

THOMAE，Hans．（1979）“Persona1ity Deve1opment in Two Cu1tures，A Selective Re㎞ew on Re−

search Aims and Issues”，HωmαπDωθJoρme械，Vo1．22，p．305

TR1ANDIS，Hany C（1986）see KASHIMAYosh1h1sa

UEN0，Chizuko。（1987）“Zadankai，Kojin Kanjin Nihonjin’’，Kψ．加Kα〃’加M肋。ψ．加，p．31

WAGATSUMA，Hiroshi．（1986）“Some Cu1tura1A畠sumptions among the Japanese”，Jαραπ Q〃αrた〃ツ，vol．31，p．374

YAMAGISHI，Toshio．（1980）“S㏄io1ogy in Japan and Shakai Ishikiron”，肋εAm2rたαπ8㏄jo！o− 8…就，Vo1−15（November），p．200