著者

金山 浩司

出版者

九州大学

雑誌

基盤研究(B)

巻号頁・発行日

2021-04-01

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

青土社

雑誌

現代思想

巻号頁・発行日

vol.44, no.12, pp.160-171, 2016-06

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

東京大学教養学部哲学・科学史部会

雑誌

哲学・科学史論叢 (ISSN:13446185)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.9, pp.65-89, 2007-01-31

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

東京大学教養学部哲学・科学史部会

雑誌

哲学・科学史論叢 (ISSN:13446185)

巻号頁・発行日

no.9, pp.65-89, 2007

被引用文献数

1

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.54, no.273, pp.17, 2015 (Released:2020-12-14)

---

AIKAWA Haruki, one of the prominent theorists of technology study in Japan in the prewar period, put forward fresh philosophical understandings of technology in the first days of the 1940s. He saw the unification of the subjective humanity and objective material in the dynamic process of production and regarded technology as a medium of such unification. By investigating his books published in the period of the Konoe's New Order, present paper seeks to reveal how Aikawa acquired his own idea on technology. It also aims to put the improvement of his thought in the sociopolitical context of wartime Japan. In the first half of the 1930s, Aikawa had a materialistic view: that is, he observed that the nature of technology was represented in the means of labor in itself. Although Aikawa's idea was accepted among members of the Society for the Study of Materialism as one of the possible Marxist understandings of technology, it was also criticized for ignoring the importance of the subjective labor force in the process of production. After his arrest as a suspected communist sympathizer in 1936, Aikawa abandoned his previous standpoint and came to be a spokesman of the war policy of Imperial Japan. We should not regard this alternating process as a simple conversion under the suppression of the Japanese militarists, however. Aikawa certainly made a compromise, but at the same time, he intended to develop his idea on technology by accepting criticism by materialists. In such a process Aikawa succeeded in making his thought a more balanced one.

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究. 第II期 (ISSN:00227692)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.46, no.241, pp.25-29, 2007-03-27

被引用文献数

1

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究. 第II期 (ISSN:00227692)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.45, no.239, pp.145-156, 2006-09-26

被引用文献数

2

---

In this paper, I examine the reason for the subsidence of Soviet dispute over philosophical legitimation of modern physics in the late 1930s. The battle of scientists against party ideologues or their sympathizers was politically adventurous in the period of the Great Terror. In fact, established scientists such as Nikolai Vavilov were severely accused by opponents and were led even to be imprisoned. However, in spite of the heated attack to some leading physicists in the dispute over modern physics in philosophical journals, the worst tragedy was avoided in general. I maintain that Sergei Vavilov, one of the most influential physicists of this period, acted as a crucial negotiator in this process. By learning the Marxist terminology or a politically correct attitude in the discourse, Vavilov succeeded in soothing the party ideologues and at the same time guarding modern physics or physicists. In some respect he made a compromise, but it was a very valuable one.

著者

Vavilov Sergei I. 金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学技術史学会

雑誌

科学技術史 (ISSN:13439766)

巻号頁・発行日

no.8, pp.133-150, 2005-12

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.53, no.272, pp.481, 2015 (Released:2020-12-14)

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.49, no.256, pp.193-205, 2010 (Released:2021-07-22)

---

The present study seeks to reveal the unknown political factor of the philosophical-ideological disputes over physics in the pre-war Soviet Russia. Previous studies on this issue assumed conflicts between the two definite fractions to have a basic framework: courageous leading physicists on one hand, and foolish communists or old-generation scientists on the other. Such a distinct dichotomy, however, may have to be reconsidered after studying archival material. That is to say, the relationship between A.A. Maksimov, one of the representatives of communist ideology, and V.F. Mitkevich, a prominent specialist of the electrical technology, was more ambivalent than it seems to be. These two men apparently had a common aggressive character: both of them charged leading physicists, such as Ya. I. Frenkel' and A.F. Ioffe, of having an idealistic view. Yet, the correspondences exchanged between these 'opponents' clearly show that they severely disagreed (until 1937) on issues such as ontological views on mathematical notions or terminologies to be used in the dispute. Occasionally, the communist even criticized the electric engineer for overemphasizing the dangers of modern physical theories to materialism, an official Soviet philosophical system. Hence, until the mid 1930's, Mitkevich and Maksimov did not become confident allies of each other. This awkwardness might be regarded as one of the reasons why the dispute over the interpretation of modern physics did not result in a clear break between the professional physicists and the 'opponents'.

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.47, no.248, pp.193-205, 2008 (Released:2021-08-04)

---

In this study, I analysed the discourse of a philosophical dispute about the idea or theory of physics, which occurred in the first half of 1930-s in the Soviet Union. I examined the internal contents of the dispute between leading physicists and communist philosophers or old-generated technicians. This analysis has shown that against leading physicists such as Ia. I. Frenkel' or I.E. Tamm, their opponents such as V.E. Egorshin (communist philosopher) or V.F. Mitkevich (old-generation electrical engineer) insisted on the importance of materialistic/realistic interpretation of field proposed by Frenkel', which allowed the action in distance. Egorshin, based on Engels' philosophy, maintained the importance of the idea of energy as the reflection of the motion of real matters. Despite the ignorance (as pointed out by Soviet physicists) or bitterness of their discourse, the argument of the opponents is also understandable from their "anti-formalistic" tendency. This tendency has continued to form a base of the dispute about the philosophy of physics in the Soviet Union.

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.46, no.241, pp.25-29, 2007 (Released:2021-08-11)

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.45, no.239, pp.145-156, 2006 (Released:2021-08-11)

---

In this paper, I examine the reason for the subsidence of Soviet dispute over philosophical legitimation of modern physics in the late 1930s. The battle of scientists against party ideologues or their sympathizers was politically adventurous in the period of the Great Terror. In fact, established scientists such as Nikolai Vavilov were severely accused by opponents and were led even to be imprisoned. However, in spite of the heated attack to some leading physicists in the dispute over modern physics in philosophical journals, the worst tragedy was avoided in general. I maintain that Sergei Vavilov, one of the most influential physicists of this period, acted as a crucial negotiator in this process. By learning the Marxist terminology or a politically correct attitude in the discourse, Vavilov succeeded in soothing the party ideologues and at the same time guarding modern physics or physicists. In some respect he made a compromise, but it was a very valuable one.

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究. [第Ⅲ期] = Journal of history of science, Japan. 日本科学史学会 編 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

no.272, pp.481-488, 2015-01

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

東京工業大学

雑誌

特別研究員奨励費

巻号頁・発行日

2010

---

1940年代日本における技術論--技術とはどういう性格をもつものかという論点をめぐる--論争を、従来は知られていなかった当時の論者の論考を渉猟・精読しつつ、再構成する作業を行った。1930年代に日本の技術論論争はマルクス主義に傾倒していた論者たちの間でマルクス主義の概念装置を用いて行われており、戦後もこの傾向が引き継がれていたが、言論弾圧が苛烈化した1930年代後半から終戦までの時期の技術論論争史はよく調べられてこなかった。代表的論者の一人である相川春喜に着目することで、かつてマルクス主義に傾倒し「転向」した知識人の一部が、戦時下の日本でもてはやされた反機械論、全体論の観点--これはマルクス主義の基本的観点と相反するものではない--を技術論の中に持ち込むことで、従来の論争を換骨奪胎しつつ、また当時の状況下で要請されるような理論的装置を用いつつ、高度な言論活動を維持しようとしていたことが明らかになった。また、当時の相川の議論は高名な物理学者である武谷三男との討論を通じて一面においては鍛えられたものでもあり、これを精読することは戦後の武谷の技術論を再検討するうえでも役立つものである。こうした成果は2月、東京工業大学において開かれたセミナーの席上で口頭発表され、現在学会報告・論文化の準備を進めている。また、ソ連と日本との科学哲学分野における知的交流についても若干の調査を行った。日本の物理学者坂田昌一が、最晩年(1960年代末)にソ連の科学哲学者オメリャノフスキーの慫憩に応じて素粒子論の哲学的問題に関する論考を執筆していたことが明らかになった。ロシア語で発表された同論考を訳とともに日本人読者に紹介する準備を進めている。ソ連における物理学をめぐる哲学論争についてロシア史研究会年会において発表し、この内容を英語の論考にまとめ科学史の学術雑誌に投稿した。現在、査読結果に応じた修正を行ってしいる。

著者

金山 浩司

出版者

東京大学総合文化研究科広域科学専攻

巻号頁・発行日

2010-03-24

---

報告番号: 甲25469 ; 学位授与年月日: 2010-03-24 ; 学位の種別: 課程博士 ; 学位の種類: 博士(学術) ; 学位記番号: 博総合第950号 ; 研究科・専攻: 総合文化研究科広域科学専攻