Social Ecology, a Study for and against the “Developments”

Abstract

The term “development” has two meanings, that is HATTEN and KAIHATSU, if expressed in Japanese. Human or social ecology stands for the former, but not always for the latter. This is the reason why this paper is titled as “Social Ecology, a Stydy For and Against the Developments”. Japanese terminology is so convenient for the distinction between the two meanings of “development”, that even the English summary of this paper dare to use Japanese words, Hatten and Kaihatsu.Human beings need HATTEN forever. KAIHATSU is also needed, but it is to a certain degrees. Too much Kaihatsu brings about “pollution” problems. Clear distinction is needed between the two.We know that the under-developed areas of the world still want Kaihatsu, even though the situation of recent Japan needs not so much Kaihatsu any more. The author estimates the contribution of “Ljubljana work-shop” held by I.S.A'S Research Committee for Social Ecology. The papers of following participants are here introduced for Japanese sociologists ; H. Teune, Greenfiled, Z. Mlinar, C. Trampuz, A. Ferlingoj, A. Lah, A. R. Kuklinski, D.C.Pitt, B. Ivanovic, P. Sicherl, R. Strassold, N. Mlakar, Econ, D. Vogelnik, E. Pusic, and so on.Why is it that there are so eager world-wide desires for Kaihatsu? We can easily find out economic reasons. The author discusses on this point examining the data offered by the congress, beside the author's own findings of a month's excution all over the S. Republics belonging to Yugoslavia.For all the reasons justifying Kaihatsu, we have to conclude as follows ; It has been the orthodox and traditional way to expect the “social change” on the basis of economic development indeed, but we must pay attention also to the “ecological limits”, on the consideration of eco-system which covers all the surface of the earth.This conclusion might not always be acceptable for the people of “developing” countries, so long as the inhabitants of “developed” countries, including Japan, are adherent to the present standard of living.But, is the ECONOMIC need the exclusive independent variable for the worldwide optimism on Kaihatsu? No. We might be able to distinguish ANOTHER contexts.Here the role of “philosophical back-grounds” cannot escape our notice. Every philosophical back-ground provides every “frame of reference” for every people. It reflects historical formation. It is a valuable inheritance from the ancestors, but is often leads man to prejudice.It is interesting that the most of optimistic views on Kaihatsu are held by men of European concepts. At the same time, too much pessimism might also be prejudicial. Concerning the Oriental pessimism on social changes, a contribution for the “Ljubljana Work-shop” titled as “Oriental Peculiarities of Japanese Ecological Theories” examined its' formation process. This paper points out the possibilities which tends to lead Oriental ecologists, including even the author himself, to a Kind of prejudice.But the aim of that contribution is not only that. The paper suggests for European ecologists the need of self-examination on their own philosophical back-grounds. Exciting the readers' exotic curiosity is far from the aim of the author.The Work-shop consisted of four parts ; theoretical part, Methodological part, part for data analysis, and part for application. But, to our regret, it was unable to find adequate room for the discussion of each participant's philosophical back-grounds.A sociologist without philosophical self-reflection is never different from an under-strapper of Nazi. Jail, who was very eagerly engaging in the scientific investigation for the most effective technology of the murder.