著者

濱野 靖一郎

出版者

法政大学国際日本学研究所

雑誌

国際日本学 = INTERNATIONAL JAPANESE STUDIES (ISSN:18838596)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.8, pp.345-363, 2010-08-10

---

Carl Shmitt defined sovereignty as the subject of decision making in exceptional situations, and hence set forth decisionism. That, in Japan, was set forth by Rai Sanyo in the Edo Period, as the decision making ken, which is the very condition for the monarch to function as a ruler.This essay focuses on the idea of ken as the premise of decision making, and how it was developed throughout the Edo Period. In Japan, the idea of ken has been debated in relation to the interpretation of the 29th article in chapter 9 of Lunyu.If we follow Zhū Xī’s interpretation, ken would obtain a double meaning: the actual judgment, and the validity of its outcome. This essay tracks what changed since in the interpretation of ken in Japan, in the context of analyzing Lunyu, which was carried out by numerous figures from Kumazawa Banzan to Ogyu Sorai.That change, in short, reaches the point where ken is established as judgment. The process of decision making was divided into that of decision and judgment, and while decision was being rejected, judgment substantiated its prevail. While politics came to shun the idea of judgment by an individual, Sorai established judgment on the sphere of personal life. Sorai then clarified the double meaning embedded by Zhū Xī with two analogies: one is the deed of saints, which is always right; another is the judgment of ordinary people, which no positive consequence is guaranteed.Using the explanation above, Sanyo presents the idea of ken to the world of politics. Here, ken is something that allows political decision making but does not guarantee the outcome, because a monarch is not a saint but merely an ordinary person.