犯罪研究の社会病理学的立場 : 方法としての社会病理学の確立をめざして (<特集>II 犯罪と社会病理)

概要

論文の詳細を見る
More than 80 years have passed since Paul von Lilienfeld, a Russian sociologist, published "La Pathologie Sociale" in 1896. He defined social Pathology as a science where "We study social abnormality inductively." His definition has traditionally been the key point of view of the Social Pathology. Social Pathology had flourished in America, not in Europe, and had to a great degree been conducive to the studies of social problems, such as crime and delinquency, suicide, divorce, etc. But the term Social Pathology was replaced by the term Deviant Behavior in American sociology, because of its etymology that Social Pathology was based on outdated Social Organism, the ambiguity of the concept, the theoretical weakness, etc. I do not admit any positive meaning in that change of the term. In Japan, it seems to me that Social Pathology has got firm status both in the academic world and in the journalism, and has been expected to contribute to the explanations of a variety of social problem, especially in modern societies. But it is not enough for Social Pathology to be based only on the view point of social abnormality (or deviance). Social abnormality is almost always connected with social dysfunction which is more essential to social problems. Therefore, we have to study social problems from both points of view - social abnormality and social dysfunction. That is why I bring forward "Social Pathology as a Means."
日本犯罪社会学会の論文