Internationalization of sociology in Japan and in Korea and Post-Western Theory
- Descartes Campus
© (c) ENS de Lyon
14h-14h30 : Introduction
Professor Laurence Roulleau-Berger, Research Director at CNRS, Triangle, French Director of the LIA CNRS-ENS Lyon/ Chinese Academy of Social Sciences : Post-Western Sociology in Asia
14h30-15h30 : Professor Shujiro Yasawa, Seijo University, Vice- President of International Federation of Social Sciences, President of East Asian Sociological Association : Space and Social Theory
From Meiji Restoration to early 20th century, sociologists in Japan tried to nationalize Western sociologies. It was for building of strong nation state without being colonized by strong Western powers. Sociology took a part of keeping social order. The goal and a role of sociology built invisible barriers within which sociology was better to be national.. Since then, militarization of Japanese society and formation of total mobilization system for the wars strengthen invisible barriers to be ultra-national. After World War II, sociology played a leading role of democratization of Japanese society. But above-mentioned barriers were not broken down. It is globalization that has broken barriers down. I am working on a project which selects key texts from East Asia for sociologists in the world. Among 5 papers from Japan, I selected 3 papers written by sociologists of the first generation after the war. They are Keiichi SAKUTA’s, Tamito YOSHIDA’s and Munesuke MITA’s paper. Younger generation sociologists are trying to translate their main works into English. Younger generation sociologist’s global sociologies in environmental sociology, social stratification and mathematical sociology are also valuable for sociology in the world.
15h30-16h30 : Professor Han Sang-Jin, Professor Emeritus at Seoul National University (SNU) and taught at Peking University long as Visiting Professor : Internationalization of Social Science in South Korea
This communication attempts to explore the status of internationalization of social science in Korea and discuss new challenges from internationalization of social science in Korea. In the following part, we discuss historical background of social science in Korea, mostly focusing on sociology. We show that social science research in Korea has been heavily influenced by political development and globalization. In the next part, we address the nature of internationalization of social science in Korea. Analyzing topics and research methods in sociological research, we examine the three stages of internationalization of social science. In the fourth part, we discuss a problem of episteme raised by internationalization of social science. Why do we need internationalization of social science ? For what purpose do we have to pursue internationalization of social science ? We suggest that globalization nullifies traditional social science based on nation state and we need public social science to overcome limitations of conventional sociology in the age of internationalization of social science.
16h30-16h45 : break
16h45-17h45 : Professor Young-Hee Shim, Chair and sociologist at the Law School, Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea : Dual Individualization in East Asia
The primary purpose of this paper is to conceptually sort out different types of individualization in East Asia and demonstrate their salient characteristics based on survey data collected from three cities of Seoul, Beijing, and Tokyo. I want to show that individualization in East Asia is a Janus-faced, dual individualization, involving a tendency of individualization of the West on the one hand and characteristics of “community-oriented individualization” (Shim and Han 2013) on the other. I also want to reveal that different types of individualization we develop are linked to different styles of liberalism in the context of East Asian development. It starts by noting two aspects of individualization. One is individualization from the perspective of social change, or individualization in society in general. The other is individualization in the context of the family. The reason why I divide these two aspects of individualization is because in East Asia it is questionable to define individualization exclusively in terms of self-interests. In contrast, collective interests can be a strong motive of individualization. For instance, individualization in the context of the family might be different from individualization in society in general. This study attempts to reveal the individualization in society in general and individualization in the context of the family in three cities, utilizing a typology of individualization, focusing on “community-oriented type” of individualization
17h45-18h30 : discussion