Continued

　It is well known that Herbert Blumer's symbolic interaction theory criticized structural functionalist sociology led by T. Parsons and sociological positivism (manipulationism) led by G. A. Lundberg, and attempted to develop an alternative analytical framework and research method. In particular, with regard to the analytical framework, the view of "dynamic society" proposed by Funatsu has been highly evaluated in Japanese research to date (see Funatsu, 1976; 1989, pp. 211-247; 1993; 1995; 1998b). In other words, such a view of society as a "fluid process" or a "changeable" or "generative and developmental" one, which is formed and reshaped by "active human agents" (Funatsu, Mamoru), has been highly evaluated. For example, Funatsu introduces the argument of Blumer's main book Symbolic Interactionism (Blumer, 1969a) as follows:

According to Blumer, having the self allows humans to "interact with themselves," to indicate objects to themselves, and to interpret them. ・・・・ If we adopt this point of view, they becomes active beings who actively deal with objects, and society becomes a dynamic and processual existence that is constituted, changed, and transformed by them. ・・・・ From this point of view, Blumer criticizes functionalist sociology for making humans a passive organism that simply responds to forces such as social systems and social structures, and for making society fixed and static" (Funatsu, 1998b, p. 517). （http://archive.ph/vwkZq#selection-517.0-517.263）



サブページ (1): さらに続き
コメント