著者

高山 巖 野添 新一 吉牟 田直

出版者

一般社団法人日本認知・行動療法学会

雑誌

行動療法研究 (ISSN:09106529)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.4, no.1, pp.50-56, 1979-01-31

---

The patient was a 9-year-old boy. Besides suffering from periodic vomiting, he had cerebral palsy showing left-sided hemiparesis, pes equinovarus, slurring of speech and mental retardation. At the age of 4, his vomiting suddenly occurred when he waked from his sleep and was frightened at seeing his father, who had been away from home about 4 months, standing beside him. Since that time his periodic vomiting had persisted. Through behavioral analysis following facts were noticed, 1. His vomiting was considered to be elicited mostly by psychological strain or physical exhaustion. 2. He was brought up under the overprotection of his parents because of his physical and mental handicaps. And consequently, it seemed that his development of social adaptation was extremely disturbed. So, even the simple task in school and home life caused him easily to fall into the state of psychological tension and physical exhaustion which were eliciting stimuli of vomiting. Based on the results of these behavioral analysis, following behavioral techniques were carried out. 1. Through daily practice and encouragement to take care of himself in his home life and to make the circle of his friendship larger and larger in his school life by using operant conditioning techniques, we aimed at that he did not easily yield to psychological strain and physical exhaustion which were eliciting stimuli of vomiting. 2. We instructed the patient's parents to take neutral attitudes toward the symptoms and conplaints of the patient and how to behave toward his desirable bihaviors. Using these and other related procedures, we succeeded in the treatment of this case. And until now, he has been keeping good conditions in his health and school adaptation.

著者

高山 巖

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2010, no.160, pp.160_48-63, 2012-03-25 (Released:2012-06-15)

参考文献数

60

---

It was in his monographic essay titled “Westphalia and All That” that international relations scholar Steven D. krasner criticized the “orthodox” view that the peace of Westphalia of 1648 marks the end of the old medieval world and the beginning of a new era in international relations history. Leo Gross, a prominent internationa law expert, had similarly maintained that Westphalia was the starting point for the development of modern international law and that it was “the majestic portal which leads from the old into the new world”. Krasner rejected both the “orthodox” and Gross' views as “wrong”.Krasner's criticism is based on three propositions; 1) “History is not so neatly compartmentalized”; Westphalia was neither an end nor a beginning; 2) The basic issue at Westphalia was not so much one of building a new international order based on sovereign equality of states as a more reaistic one of how the Holy Roman Empire, which had lost the war, would satisfy France and Sweden, which had won; 3)Contrary to the “orthodox” view, Westphalia was “past-oriented”, in the sense that most of the issues taken up there were those of the feudal period, such as hereditary succession, composition of the Diet, election of the Empperor, etc.The purpose of the present study is to place the “orthodox” and Gross' views against the background of Krasner's criticism in an effort to judge which side can provide more adequate and convincing evidence for a satisfactory interpretation of Westphalia. By employing what we propose to call a “symbolic monument” approach, which “constructs” history by connecting historical evidence with interpretation, we have examined such issues as the role of “world charters”, laicization of international law, the system of collective security, and the policy of prestige and diplomatic formalities, and arrived at the conclusion that the “orthodox” and Gross' views are convincing enough to warrant full recognition, while krasner fails to “construct” his own history to make his criticism meaningful. Criticism for the sake of criticism alone does not lead to a discerning knowledge and evaluation of historical realities. “Construction” of history must accompany criticism.We fully share, however, Krasner's admonition that history is not so neatly compartmentalized, and probably it is through the sharing of this admonition with him that a diaogue will begin between us.

著者

高山 巖

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1992, no.101, pp.10-31,L6, 1992-10-24 (Released:2010-09-01)

参考文献数

110

---

When the new-born modern State, in an attempt to overcome the resistance of the medieval social forces that stood in its way, adopted the concept of Sovereignty as a symbol of its territorial supremacy, it was immediately caught in a heated controversy which revolved round the issue: wherein should this supreme power ultimately reside, that is, in the ruling Monarch or in the People?Out of this polemic emerged two schools of thought which exerted an immense influence on the development of international relations theory. One was the Grotiusian school or model which, leaving untouched the Monarch vs. People polemic, declared instead the State to be sovereign, thus preparing the ground for the concept of State Sovereignty that won wide acceptance in later years. The other school can be linked to Rousseau who, having derived sovereignty fron the General will of the People, went further to identify Nation and People, so that the long dormant role of Nationality was finally transformed into a radically active one in politics. The origin of modern nationalism can rightly be traced to Rousseau. To this must be added the role played by the doctrine of the Reason of State, which was initially developed by Machiavelli and Hobbes, and was later completed by Hegel with his deified concept of “State as an absolute goal in itself”. Such was the historical setting in which the myth of the Nation-State as a sacrosanct entity of unquestionable supremacy was born and nurtured.The crisis of 20th century international relations, however, has evoked an acute awareness of the need for a new paradigm in the conceptual relations of Nation, State, and Man. The World Community model, which takes the global community of mankind as a point of reference, as contrasted with the Grotiusian model of sovereign States, deserves special attention in this regard, although its viability amidst the harsk realities of State-oriented international relations can never be taken for granted. The future of the Nation-State and of State Sovereignty may be said to depend on the extent to which mankind will successfully maintain a dialogue between the old and new models in such a way that the focus of man's national sentiment as a member of the State can eventually be made compatible with his identity as a member of the community of a higher order, known as the Global Human Community.

著者

高山 巖

出版者

埼玉大学教養学部

雑誌

埼玉大学紀要. 教養学部 (ISSN:1349824X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.45, no.1, pp.89-97, 2009 (Released:2009-10-01)