Search

This paper is an investigation of attempts at endogenization and indigenization in the history of sociology in Japan. The author begins by presenting a short history of Japanese sociology. While the issues of endogenization and indigenization had been raised in the 1910s, imperialism and the militarization of the Emperor state and society blocked this form of development. Japanese social sciences have thus mainly followed the model of Western social sciences. The issue of indigenization gained attention after World War II and especially after the late 1960s, which was a time of reflection on the extreme influence of American sociology. In this context, this paper investigates the development of Kazuko Tsurumi's sociology, which is one of the best examples of work that deals with the issue of indigenization. Tsurumi analyzes social change from pre‐World War II to post‐World War II Japan by drawing on sociological functionalism. However, Tsurumi suggests that Kunio Yanagita's theory of folklore and ethnology provides a stronger explanatory framework than functionalism, and contends that Kumagusu Minaka has developed an approach rooted in East Asia. Tsurumi advances this indigenous development theory based on the work of Yanagita and Minakata, and at the same time internationalizes this theory. This paper concludes that Tsurumi's theory is an important medium between Western sociology and Eastern sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Abd al‐Rahman Ibn Khaldun (1332‐1406), the founder of the science of society, became known to modern sociologists during the formative period of sociology, that is, the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. There was something of a reception of Ibn Khaldun in Europe at that time by sociologists and other scholars who were not necessarily involved with Islamic or West Asian studies. In fact, the reception of Ibn Khaldun by modern scholars in the West can be differentiated into Eurocentric or Orientalist as opposed to more disciplinary attitudes. While much has been said about the Eurocentric reception of Ibn Khaldun, less is discussed about the disciplinary approach to Ibn Khaldun among thinkers who wrote when the modern science of sociology was emerging in Europe. This special issue on Ibn Khaldun in the Formative Period of Sociology provides English translations of six articles originally written in Italian, French, German, Polish, Spanish and Turkish between 1896 and 1934. Not all of these articles were written by sociologists. Together, they provide some background as to how Ibn Khaldun was conceived of in non‐area studies circles, in the social sciences and humanities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic dependency theory has attracted increasing attention in academia in the last two decades, especially during the last decade. Syed Farid Alatas, a Singapore‐Malaysia based sociologist, has contributed significantly to the popularization of the idea of academic dependency through theorizing and foregrounding the conditions of dependency in Western‐dominated knowledge production and the global division of academic labor. The growing importance of this idea as applied in Asian contexts is however inseparable from the reconfiguration of the world‐systems in which Asia and especially China have achieved great advancement economically and otherwise. In line with this transformation, we have seen an enhanced effort in Asia and the Global South towards decolonization and indigenization in educational and academic domains. We have therefore organized this special issue to engage critically with Alatas's theory and to rethink the status quo of dependency, decolonization and indigenization in Asia, particularly East Asia, in response to a new development in global and local higher education and research. To close our discussion, we call for an action‐based initiative to address and transform the circumstances of dependency and for more genuine global collaborations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since it was framed 20 years ago, Syed Farid Alatas's theory of academic dependence has made a long‐lasting impact within the global social science field, and has elevated the previous discussion on academic dependence. In this essay, we critically examine his theory of academic dependence with an original dataset that contains 22 top sociology institutions in East Asia, including China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. We further engage the data, and theory within the global higher education ranking system, a theme that had not yet emerged when he framed his theory of academic dependence. Our findings suggest that (1) higher rankings do not create job opportunities for locally trained PhDs; (2) emphasis on the number of publications is still prevalent; (3) adopting the standards set up by the ranking agency re‐enforces the existing global division of academic labor. Overall, sociology in these societies after 20 years is now more dependent, rather than autonomous from, the Western academic center. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]