Theory and methods Th6orie et mdthode"s

Johan Galtung

Structure, culture, ond intellectuol style: gollic An essoy comporing soxonic, teutonic, ond nipponic opprooches

l. On intelleclualstylesin general Deor reuder - what you have in front of you is very much an essa.),, It is basecl on impressionsand intuitions, written down on paper and in my memory during many years of travels and stays in various intellectualclimatesaround the world, I myself come fronr a peripherycountry in what is still to a large extentthe centreof the world, ancl I am no doubt marked by that. Having had the opportunity to work both in the fields of the methodology of sciences (Caltung 1967 , 197'7 , 1979)and in substantivesocial science,particularly peaceresearch(1975-80), developmentand future srudies (1980), I have been struck repeatedlyby how little awareness the members of one intellectual community seem to have of the peculiarities of their community. They are often good ai
Thi s paper w i l s prepared for the 6oal s , P roc es s es and Indi c ators of D ev el opmc nt P roj ect, s i l bproj ec ton Tool s ol ' A nal y s i s . l t i s an outc onreof l ec tures ,s emi narsand di scussi ons i n many pl ac es- at U ni v ers i ti S arnsMal ay s i a i n P enang, N { al av s i a;i n Japan; a t the E as t-W es tC enter i n H onol ul u, H aw ai i , U S A ; i n C ermany ; al the Insti tut uni v ers i tai re d' 6tudes du d4v el oppement,Genev a; at the U ni v ers i ti es of Tromso , Os l o and Gothenburg; arrd at the Mai s on des S c i enc es de I' H onme tn P ari s. I anr grateful to the di s c us s ants i n al l pl ac es ,but the res pons i bi l i tyfr-rr tl re c l pl orati ons made i s al l mi ne. l n thi s parti c ul ar c as ethat ri tual i s ti c s entenc c may hc more m eani ngful than i t us ual l y i s . Sociat Scim*: Information (SACFl, I"ondon and Beverly Hills), 20, 6 (l 9U l ), pp. 817-856


8I 8

T'hettrvand metht ttl,t



Thdorie et mdthodts


- thi s essaymay prove o th c l " s ,b u t n o t thcntsel ves c h a ra c te ri z i n g l have tri ed to th a t rul e. On earl i ertl ccasi ons no t to b e a n e x c e p ti o n styl es the i ntel l ectual t o re fl e c to n th i s tra i t i n e ffo rts to cl i aracteri ze e x l i i tri te d b y m a n y s o c i a l s c i enti stsi rt l ..ati n A mcri ca ( 1979, c h a p .5 )r a n d i n C e rm a n y (1 979, chap.8); the prescrl tessayi s b a s r.:d o n b o th e ffo rts b u t e x p a ndsl he rangeof expl orati on.In al l that my remarks are l i mi ted to the c a s e si t s h o u l d b e e n rp h a s i z e d field of social science.Some may also be valid for other sciences but that would be heyond any grasp I rtright possiblyhave of their substance. any one i ntel l ectualstyl e, l et me B e fo re try i n g to c h a ra c te rize W hat i s i t " i tr general . f i rs t s a y s o me th i n ga b o u t " i n tel l ectualstyl e i nto w e i n te l l e c tu a l s try to d o ? N o douht, w e processi mpressi ons - th e l a tte r v e rb al , oral or l vri tl en. For thal l eason e x p re s s i o n s freedom of impressionis as important to us as freedom o{ expression: as we generallydo not believethat we can draw everything artd we haveto be able we have to have impressions, from ourselves to expressthem as a part of our own pleasureand self-realization, i n parti cul arand the a n d f o e n te r i n to th e n e tw o rk sof i ntel l ectual s prodrrcts, for p u b l i c i n g e n e ra l , searchi ng l a u n c h i n go u r i ntel l ectual the cri ti c i s m a s w e s a y - a n d l i k e al l others w e prel ' eri n gerteral v a ri e ty .2 p o s i ti v eto th e n e g a ti v e S o w e are condi (i onedby tl re i mpressions in the current we receiveand by our range of expression; w hal w e are l ryi ng to d o m i n a n t p h i l o s o p l i l 'o f " tru th " (presumabl y acor lessequatedwith the intersubjectively unravel), truth is n"lore colleagues.r ceptablewithin a network of acceptable tsut that is not all there is to it. Today it is probably generally is cottdiinto erpressions of impressions agreedthat the processing problem general it is of level tlre tioned by something.At the most w i l l how condi ti on and that h o w th e h u ma n mi n d i s c o n sti tuted w ork K anta the of and menti on w h a t c o m e so u t i t i s s u ffi c i entto Wittgenstein(1921, 1922).At the individual, pcrsonallevel there is the notion of subjective elements, some of, them to be handled in te rs u b j e c ti v e l y l i k e tl re famous observcrs' equati on for astronomers,some of them in a more qualitative lnanner as when we like to have information about a person's background in order we would like to qualify it to better evaluatewhat he saysbecause i t.s w hy he says a b o u t b y s o mea s s u m p ti o n s What I am interestedin, however, is the level in betweenthe inor it is the r:ivilizational dividual and the univcrsal.Broadly speaking, ln level. words macro-cultural in sub-uivilizational other

anof . her essay t his hasbeenexplor ed( Calt ung, 198l) by cont r , ast ing ( in what is r ef er r edt o as t he cxpansiollllr r ci o ccident al civilizat iein co nt r act ionphasesr espect ively) wit h f {indu, Buddhist , Sinic aud Nipponic civilizat ions in t he O r ient . I n t hat connect iont t ic poiir r is m adr :t hat wher east he clccident al, phascaJr pr oa*h expansionist [o ep ist enr ology seem st o be in t er nls of an at om ist ic conceplinnof re alit y com bined wit h a deduct iveappr oach t o undcr st it nding, in the O r ient t heset wo appr oaches m ix and blend wir h a nt or e holist ic ap pr oach t o r ealit y and a m or e dialect icappr oach t o under st anding. Thus, t he point is m aclet hat in t he O ccident ,in ext . r em is, t he way of obt aining valid knowledgeis by subdividingr e*lit y int o a nu nlbcr of sm all par t s, obt aining insight sabout a low nur nir erof ther r rat a t int e, and t hen linking t heseinsight sr ogcr ir ert o I 'or nr oft en highly inr pr essive, decluct iveByr anr ids.This is t hen cor r trastedwith efl'orts to conceiveof reality as a totality' i,r,,ith built-in co nt r adict ions, evolvingover t im e. 'I'lrepresentessayis ar) attempt to be much more sp*cifiil, slaying at t he leveloi r nacr o- cult ur es, but below t he levelo1'cir , iI izir t ions, in su b- civilizat ions. M or e par t icular ly,t hr eeoccident al ar r cl one or iental sub-civilizationfornr the subject matter of the inqrrirv; srrxomic, teulonic, gallic and nipponic approache.s, as stated in the subtitle. Why't hesest r anget er m s?6 For t he sim pler easont hat lhe! ar e not rneant{o be ident if ied wit h Br it ain, Cer m any, Fr ancc or Japar r thesebeing act or s in t he int er nalionalsyst em ,count r ies,and com po sedof var iouscuhur al st r ainr i. I do, however ,seet lr r :slylest o he characterizedby these ternt$ as rather dominant in {ll* cr:runtries ment ioned,alt hough possiblym or e so in t he past , e! en lsn yf iar s ago, than today because of the high levelof world intr;r'dep*nclenL:e an d int er act ion, ancl subjugat iont o a gener al wor lt l ilt ellect ual st ylc- * t o be descr ibed lat er . I ncidenr ally, it is hoped t lr ar t his t ype of explor at ioncan be ext ended also t o lndic, Sinic and , 4iabic appr oaehes and t o ot her s. O ne r easonf or doing t his is t hat it m ight be int er est in,lo g havea world map of intellectualstyles.On that world map, ilr ordel' now to be nrore specific, Oxbridge in England and key U$ uirivnrsitries on bot h t he east er nand west er nseaboar ds would r onst ililt e ( he centreof the saxonicintellectualstyle; someof the smaller,clarsicill univer sit ies in G er m any ( possiblyM iinst er , M ar bur g, Heidc'lher g, Tr ibingen)m ight be seenas t hc cent r eof t he t eut onic int cllect r r al st ylc; t lier eis no doubt as t o wher e/ f t r cent r eof t he gallic int ellectual style is located; and the nipponic in{.ellectual style would have

a n i n te l l e c tu a p ..ral colonial and neo-colonialerlpires.Obviously. nint ellectual z-.goesbeyond this. there may pcr hapsbe sonr cbody bir l t hey m ay havesucha dir r rviov ol us t hat t heir f indingst o us'* r t t uchlike a tlr ey don't car e t o com r nunicat e linbiologistusuallynot bot her ingabout how he can com nt unicat e But at the levelof dings about bacteriato the bacteriathentselves!).ybecause feutoni c thi nker: o f l ' h e i n fl uenceof a ke. But as a firsi be useful. This w o u l d .I n t he idea of subdividing " int ellect ual act ivit y" int o f our par t s t her e is also an r llem entof we) ^t er at n om izalion . Correspondingly. r 0 is ttre Ilut intellectualactivity. pare with other colleagues.820 Theorv und nrcthods Galtung Galtuttg Theorie et nu)thodes 821 (Tokyo and Kyoto universities) axis as its centre. Then.peri pheri es. t r e . reasonsof parsinrony it secms rea. of course.. it is nrrtablehow the intellectual style changes f'ronr the saxonic to the gallic and back again if one goes by cal along the Gutf of Guinea in Africa: it is in changing from driving on the left to drivnrore than an exercise ing on the right to cross from a former British tr'l a former French dependency. another exampleof what the presentessayis about: all intelleclualsare fascinatedby other intellectualsand in fact devote much of their time to doing researchon what others do. and as f ar as we know t her e is nobodt . not to be taken literally as an empirical descriptiott. liberation from inteller:tualstyle has not one possible evenbeen included in a programme of i n the caseof otl rer aspects of JapaDese crrlture.and translations are somewlierebelween the perfectly perl'ectand the perfectly imperiect. in a certain wity. exactly what t his essayis about . d i re c ti n gi n te l l e rtu a la c ti \/i ti e s The peripherieswould. partl.As they say in South America. including the Soviet Union. B ut othcrwise it is my contention that flastern Europe. approximation il may nevertheless One would then imagine a map with these ilentresas beacons in vast terri tori es.One may say that this is. how shouldone char act er ize t liem ?I r or Having nar n*iJ t he st er in t he essay t o t r y t o look at t hesem at i er s nr or e holist ir : ally. do? I t hink it is f air t o r t r t ert n t heir What is it t hat int ellect uals task as desc'riptiveand explanatorlt.under the influence of 2 centres: potentially benefiting from lhe cross-beaming influence. the gallic infJuence stretches far beyond la cornmunaut€franguise: it coverstire whole Latin range of countries.rlion.cult ur es municated and unclerstood. ws c: an t hey can bc com do t his: t her ear e cont r ast s.incluclenot only the rest acti vi ti es i n the of th e c o u n tri e sm e n ti o n e d .it has no periphery'bevond itself. I shall let that do by way oI introduction. free to develop in any rva-v-i .to o c o n fu s i n g . This type of commentary on other intellectualscan usefully be divided into just developed:describingand explaining the three sub-categories why their activity is the way it of understanding Ihern (in the sense i. of explclr ing t he lim it at ionsof one's or ". Mo s t o f th e w o rl d i s a p eri phery. . ritory. clatapr<land data analysison the one hand. and theory formation on cessing As we know. can be regardedas under the sway of ltre leutonic intellccof generalcultural influencethrough cerr" tual style. And her e is one ver y sir npleli( t le point : it is all tclo easyfor each one of us to seethe subjectivelinritntirinsof wc c:ltt contWe can seethem because any one particular colleague. broadly speaking. w h e l m i n g . however .E However.of leiokinginto the fnttrrclalions what one does. eit herof t hesem ay condit ion lhe nf her . Paris es la capital de la rqza latina. 'tr1'lerc o{ clinrension of paradigm analysis. Bf f or t s will be m acle. It is a centre-periphr:rv world so far equipped with onll' four centres uf very differcnt an i nteresti rtg k i n d s . p a rfl y b e c a u s e K a rl Ma rx " F i n a l l y J a p a n i s i ts ow n centre.b u t al so the i ntel l ectr.t:). e I n t he t ypicalniet hodolcigy t ext i s like and t r ying t o under st and book languageit would be referred to as data collection. elsecont paling us with themselves(as Koestler has remarkecl.sonable to try to cha|acterize a dinrensions although one may thus intrneluce them along the san-re ce r f air rbias f r om t he ver y beginning. reason why liberation from other aspectsof colunialism rnay rrot have been tocl efficient either. macr o. picking up the strong polnts of e l aborate anythi ng rre This calls for a more detailecfanalysis that wi{il be carried uul after the discussion of the four intellectualstylt"rs. under influence the of 3 centres or ntore: possiblv too o\'firw. the Tirdai-Ky-odai Obviously all of this is ideal typical analysisin the Weberian sense. Thus. describing what reality it .under the influence of I cenlre: a cultural pr:riphery of that c*nl e ri p h e ryb ent on i denti fi cati on. the ot her . that a l a rg e extenti ncl ude R omani a. and exploring the paradigmsfor such understanding.B ut i t rai r' es question about a possiblesubdivisionof that periphery: . i n c i d e n ta l l y .no doubt it r ellect son t he at t lhot .I think it ls very difficult f or us 1o cor net o gr ips wit h our lim it at ionsas hunt an beings in a universalsensefor the simple r€asonthat we havc nothing else to com par ewit f r .under the influence of A centrcs: intellectually nrarginalized tr:r.r t u ri e s .

an intellectual style becomes a question of profile. Bu t th i s s i m p l ee x erci se us very far. empirical reatrltyas well as potential other words it is not a characteristic one from the other. They may be interestedin action basedon their intellectualactivity. Saxonic Paradi gma nal y s i s Descriptions: Propos i ti onp roduc ti on Explanations: T heory fornrati on Comnentary on other intelle<-t uals: * paradi gms . and which dimension is weak.intellectuals ofteu clu ulore than this.f eeding on it selfin all societies. It is the distinct quality.'lrrernpirical reality.Moreover. However.A nd that i s the subj ect s i o n . However. imagesof how thesestylesare conceivedof will ernerfl. and this may be as good a point a$ any to enter the' suhject. it is my experiencethat this aspectis presentor absentamong intellectuals of distinguishing all four styles.s of the next section.rrO n em i ght say that al l of thi s adds a cri ti cal and pragmatic aspectto intellectualactivity. Rather. of which dimension is strong. In that case. A pragmatic dimensionoften entersat this point.carried out in the four styles? Br oadly speaking. in other words as something to be avoided or to be pursued.As I have assumed that all four dimensionswill have to be presentto someextentin all cultures for the activity to be intellectual. In duin6 so it is my hope that. Irr other words.822 Theorv and methods Galtung Oaltung 'thdorie et methade. potential reality is seen as worse or bctter th.e.y 823 TABLII I A guide lo intelleclual slyles Of course. one for each intellectualstyle. one shili'eilby th e saxonicand nipJr onic st yles.*c:ourse. how is intellectualcommentary * this rather incestnous and delightful activity -. "they may be interested in communicating witlt others than their colleagues. as a working hypothesis. Many intelh:cluals receive a$ their major impressinns what other intellectualsdo and which casethey engagein pedagogyand popularization.theori es Teutonic strc)ng Gal l i c strong N i pponi c weak weak vely w eak w eak s frung stronS weaK v ery s trong v ery s trong w c ak srrOilg s trong v ef\ rilr{ rll!l 2. all fnur stylesappeal to have one strong 1:nilrfin comnlon: they are atrlrather good at commenting on othrr intellectu als. it is our cont ent ion t hat t he saxonic st yle fosters and encourag*t debate and di.and one by t he t eut onicanc{gallic styles.A condition for casethe research the latter is probably that their conceptualizationof reality goes beyond empirical reality to potential reality. the tenor given to the dimenw i th i n a n i n te l l e c tu as l ty l ethat counts. That is the reality to which they react. and one is hardly an intellectualstyle at all since it is weak on ail doesnot take i n combi natori cs dimensions. in which has an elernent of action research. In short. Saxonic. theory formation would not only reproduce empirical reality lrnt also state the circumstances under which potential reality nright beconteempirical reality. anql in the negativesenseas their commentary will often be critical. at the end nf f ht section. and this is w h e rea c ti o n e n te rs .four intellectualstyles. I shall try lo procr*d by contrast. trl'we stick to that simple weak/strong split we get. all of this has to be spelt out and that will now be done in a more circular manner. The gelleral spirit is . I n st at ing t his sim ple point is m ade: t he int ellect unl cnm "l m unit y is t o sor neext snta closedcom nr unit y. In the table therc are actually only two profiles. b y elucidat inga poinl about one st yle wit h a point per t ainir r g to another style.propos i ti ons . gallir and nipponic styles: An effort at characterization ln Table I the reader will find summarized in a highly synoptic form what I am trying to say. including not only what is. this section will not be divided into four suLr-sections. sixteendifferent stylesout of which one is "ideal" in the senseof having all four dimensionswell developed. of course. but also what might be. l}rt having said this one should also note that (hereare lots of dil'l-erenr. teutonic. This leavesus with four dimensionsalong which to characterize.

g o s tra i g h tfr:r i t and bri ng i t forth: " I real l ythi nk y o u h a d a p o i n t th e re !" F l i s U K col l eague w oul d be somew hatl ess ge n e ro u s H .As to the latter point the Japanese are like their saxorric r:olleagues. not ot) rhe di s c u s s a n l .rltimately which is more than the surn of the parts. d rni ri nghi s masteryof the factsof the in g to M r X ' s p re s e n ta ti o na c a s ea s w e l l a s h i s w a y o f m a rshal l i ng the facts together. l'hese are of {wo tvpes.ogetherness preserved. and lor dissection. but more l i kel y than not therew i l l poi nt at tl i e end. facessomewhatstiff . smof .the respectl'or verticality. nuhoc{r.:.. intellectualdebate?T'hisis a So.fl . the "but" clausewill tend to be severaltirneslonger than the complirrentary introductory clause.s. . Not so in teutonic and gallic intellectualdiscurisions.among other reasonsbecauseof a senseof collettive or der not t o be vict ir nizedhe might prefer to play it safe. so as to leaveno doubt. no attempt will be made to mop up the blood and put woirndedegostogether. essenlially of t he same kind. everything is v aluable. a n d th a t th e b u rd e n of proof restson hi m. and whatever happens it should be possible for us to end up in t he eveningon t he t at am i. might produce a credible shine. by paying o bedience t o aut hor it ies and st r at agem s of t hat kind. Th e " b u t" c l a u s ema y th c n b ecomequi te cxtcn. Probably most ol' the debate will be devoted to such aspects.there will llc no cornpliment a ry i n l ro d u c ti o n e v e na m o n g f ri ends. w i th l ots of c u tti n g e d g e sa n d b i ti n g p o i n ts .that there is a gcntlemen'sagreen:rent to the effect lhat " w e s h o u l d s ti c k to g e th e ra n c lconti nueour cl ebal e i n spi teof our di ffe re n c e s " . o n g ra tul atory Here one should perhapsmention the differencebetweenthe UK an d th e U S v e rs i o n so f th e s a xoni cstyl e. the audienceto be more homogeneous. be a c o n rp l i me n ta ry c . that l .but he w oul d make i t very clear that the person presentingsomething is a d* rat l i trl e el ernent of go h ope on which t u i. will go out of hi s o r h e r w a y to try to fi n c l th a t l i ttl e nuggct. r 2Thal weakestpoint will be f ished o ut of t he pond of r vor ds. w hen pol i shed.But t hen it should also be m enfioned that there is a price l'or audacity: anything goes. n o t p u t d o w n . and thus there will be lessdiscrepancyto handle.rvhateverhappensthe first rule v. t elling st or ies ahout sim ilar m eet ings in of her places. the general idea ir. wc ar e all one. of l'er sonrc-pieremptory phrases designed to deflect h ost ile at t ent ion by ut t er ing t he cor r ect m agic wor ve.The U S professorat a graduateserninilrwould do his very hesllto find even in t h e mo s t d i s m a l p e rfo rrn a n c e th at l i ttl e nuggetw hi ch. t he discussant will s s t r aight f or t he weakestpoint . the differencesaside. He will tend to brush aside all t h e o th e r th i n g s . but without the samedelight and talent for shilrp inteilectu al discour se. one does not r eally have t o t hink t hr ough one's ideas s incet her ewill be a syr npat het ic ear at t he ot her end.dr inking Sappor oh*el or Sunt or y whisky. Gattung Gultung Theorie et mdthodes 825 ( h a t i n te l l e c tu a l s shoul clbe c o n s ti tu t{ :a {ra. hi gherthan the v a l u e sa tta c h e dto th e i n d i v i d u al l y or col l ecti vel y hel d systerns of peopl e of di fl erent be ti e f.g:rzcs sonrewhat cold. stick to the line frorn the beginning. p a rti c u l a rl yas one movcs w est.hich is d*ne with considerableagility and talent. Se n ri n a rsw i l l l e n d to bri ng togetherr f e a th e r.t hey ar e not r eally t r ained in t hat ar {3 direction.?. t he Japanese not ver y skilf ul at debat ing. Thc r:ther person should be b u i l t u p .qipons ibilit y as m em ber sof an "int ellect ualpr of ession". and r. In rny experi ence.m at .s T.As opposedto the sa:rrunic exercise wouk"lbe in humour and back-slapping on such an occasion.on t he con( r ar y. in t h e d o c k . I n t he nipponic set t ingall of t his is dif f er ent . whereas the opposite rnight be th e c a s ei n th e U S . But again. eagert o help *. that very different convictions should be brought together in a a t p l u ra l i s n ri s a n overri di ngval ue.u. h e U S p e r$ o nw i tl feel that he has the task of bri ngi ng ab o u t s o n l e th i n gp o s i ti v e .br ought inlo t he clear esfsunlight f 'or wherever hc is . g iving def endant wonld exper ience t he sit uat ion as a vict inr " Hut s ince he knows t his in advance.a n c ll h e fi rst di scussant l vi l l opcn hi s/her speech w i th th c u s u a lc o mme n tto th e e ffect that: " l greatl yenj oyedl i sten.and certi l l rrl y not i f there i s the slightestdiscrepancy of opinion.24 T'heur_y and cagey.rn The paperanclderisionnright enrergefrom the cornersof the ey'cs. uild . Third. and tliere will be few if any sooll. Second. t he US player spcr hapsnr or e a udaciously t hau t he ot her s. f r ir st .th e p e rs o n " i n th c c h ai r" w i l l hani l l c l he cl ebate i n a pars i m o n i o u sn ra n n e r.ring comment$towards the end to put the deferrdanttogether as a human being. i n the UK. Second. " . for the ffri.i n l l r i tai n the opposi ten)ay be the case. and a slight elernr*nt of'scc. T'henet r esult might cer t ainly not be int ellect ually t r ivial but wouicl have an eler vit hin t he saxonicset t ing ment of subser vience" The count er par t s might go m or e quickly t o t he point .but. the dispersionor diversity of opinion in one singlcdebateis likely tcl be conperhapsproducesomething fronted with eachother.And then thereis the sense nf coll ect ivi. e w o u l d n o t b ru s h asi deal l hopes. or ganic solidar it y. . what happensduring a Japancse .rr Ttrere is the generalrespectfor airthority. First.ttuld he not to harm pre-established social relatiolr.

The debateis a socisl act rather than an intellectualone. It i s rnuch mo re a q u e s ti o no f c l a s s i fi c a t i on: w hi ch schooldo you bel ong to? where did you get rt from? who said it first? One mighr even say t h a t i t i s th e e n c y c l o p a e d i a /di cti onary approach to i ntel l ectual c o mme n ta ry . The price the US pays for br:rcoming ot her cult ur *s ilr e nlor e is per hapsa cer t ainblandness. r r ot debat e docs of t ir r r e. The British pr:nchant ra is pr over bial.l'intellectual territory. theories divide.The question is whether the person acceptsthe label.t o have put all t he dat a together.vnuld b* rnadeto bring ilb{. ecum enical ptecisely excc:p{ national character less distinct have a and sectarian t hat of sect ar ianisf lt .}ut a sense of at t hij cncl. There are clear.fhis is by no means easy.pockets. . The question is how these differencesare handled. l i o w do the tw o hang together? l s w hat you said on subject matter X in any way relatedto what IvIr B said o n Y? It is a mapping o.itlular faiths and beliefsenter into it to a lesserextcilt fhan characteristic: into other intellectualpursuits. In fa c t. as a superiot form of human intercottrse dato. Perhaps one might go one step further arlc{lilnply say: data unile. o f s o c i a li n tro d u c ti o n :tw o J a panese both dressed very w e l l i n c o n s e rv a ti v e w e s te rnc l o thes(bl ack sui ts.826 'I-heory und methcsd. utter w o rd s o f g re e ti n gu n ti l b o th h ave achi eved appropri ateangl esbetw e e n th e b a c k s a n d th e l e g s. one may like or dislike a fact. but al. It i s not so ntrrcha questi on of exp l o ri n g p a ra d i g m s . for X insert any social sciencediscipline)is a very thick all'air embracing the whole profession. i n the U S styl e. and more altempt r.i emoto. the correspondingcanonsin connectionwith theoriesarr rnore vague. however. o r i n J a p a n e s ew . or would be consideredhopeless pr im ilir es.) journals. it is a craft. an exploration of border lines.Few things would so improve the gentlemen'sdehate.or som et hingcloset o it . a w a re n e s s o f re l a ti v es ta tu s i s obtai ned after the exchange and a quick glanceat the cardshave taken place. to also applitls debates u'hat said about And has been barbarians.and the generalheadingover this exercise would be one word: s c h o o l . but t her e would be t his dif f er ence:t he debat e is seenas a dist ancein t hc specsour ceof delight .To f or docunr ent at ion have t hor oughly scr ut inizedall sour ces. One can be for or agains[a thuory. Saxt 'r t r ic am r ight ."l ar e in no sense t heir sand opir t ions you colar e wr ong" .thing. and reviews:possiblythis is the reasolllvhy in the US l/re professionalreview (usually calledAmerican X Review. Fle cer t ainly wor r ld not in t eut onic and gallic cult ur es: t her e ar e dif f er encesof opinion. bow .ast s a i d th i s . n o w y o u s a y fh a t.on thi s or that' l L.I t is sint lil'.It i s v e ry rri u chl i ke the ubi qui tor" rs Japanese ri tual gentl ernen.tny l urther comment mi ght destroy so c i a lre l a ti o n s . Nothing I have said should be taken to mean that there are no differences of opinion within the four intellectual cultures. t hat t hc si. but one cannot be for or agailrs{it in the same way. differenceswouki lend to he glossedovcr ulore than in the UK. th e p h i l o l o g i c a lw ay of comi ng to gri ps w i th such m a tte rs :th e s o c i a la n d p e rs o n albi ography. A personwilling to emit signalsto the el"fEct some he has changerd opinion in the courseof the debatewill receive laur els f or t his.concealingnothing. magazines. i th a parti cul ar connotati on. so love t r um . b l a c k s h o e s)approach each ofhcr. cven acr ossa consider able gauls not wit lr : r nt . The classificationinto schoolspreempts the debateand makes for lessdisruption ol social relations. But as a craft it has a par{. q u e s ti o n i ng data bases and scruti ni zi ng the adeq u a c y o f th e i n fe re n c e s ma d e i n the theory formati on.w hi te shi rts.s Galtung G allung Thictrie et mdthq(les 827 question not easily answereclancl particularly nol by a guijin (frtreigner or stranger) becausewhen a gai"iin is present the atm t> s p h e re d e fi n i te l yc h a n g e sThe . w hereupon thei r hands grasp the v i s i ti n g -c a rd s pul l thenr oui and shared i n th e i r b re a s t. relativclY q:x{rlicit what constitutesa valid fact and whut does canonsfor establishing not. basi cpoi nl i s thar the i ntel l ectual c o rn n e n ta ryta k e sa n o th e rfo rm. Teut onsand point in a debatethen view engage to of too far from their orvn ft waste an act of condescension. . m at ur e peopl* llave of equalst anding.hailed as in the saxonicexcrcise. l t goes without sayingthat anv particulerr school rright arousestrong e mo ti o n s . ( ) u'n opit heir of m ight have a som ewhatsim ilar opinion leagues nion.'I her e will be jubilat ion if any kind <il ''t : onconsensus that vergence"occurs.dark t i e s .A l so i rnportantw oul d b e a n e x p l o ra ti o no I th e p e ri m eterol ' the person' $i ntel l ectual att a c h m e n ts : year you w h a t w o u l d b e y o u r vi ei r. In the saxonic app ro a c h th e y c o m eo u t i n th e o p e n. therei s a debi rte. is a key criterion of scholarsltilt. t xr : nic style is very ritrong in this particular regard.or ( O ne wit h sem ihum ans. seTaking all of t his ns a point of depar t ur elet m e m ove t o t r h# in t he of r ealit yhanclh: d cond r ow of Table l: how is t he descr ipt ion f our st yles?'f he basic cont ent ion is. b u t th o s e e m o ti o n s are general l ycorceal ecl duri ng the labelling exercise. And l'ew things would help as much to produce strortg divi- .whereasin other intellectnaluultures it is a more modesl. d a rk s o c k s . lgonist s debat e. of cour is t he US love of st it t ir it ics. and once that has been established there is no need for any I ' u rth e r c o m m e n t.

at leastin "q is t r ue".or more significantlyas not really pertinentto the theory. but if it is 100percentone may even suspectthat the hypothesisis a tautology. 'Ihe teutons are masters at building suclr trlyramids^ Mathematicsis basedon this.i t i s a l l p a rt of the generalcul ture. I' he hi stori an s i mp l y k n o w s th a t h e i s a g a i nst ' .8:tl Theor. Dat a m ay conf ir m a hypot hesis only up to a cerlain point.they are not really saxonic.people with firm commitrnents . and not that strong on paradigm awareness.Probing into the matler will not bring out very interestinganswers.sic to all this is the logical relation of implication: p+q.In a sensethey belong more to another craft aparr from it. t hen q" and in addit ion one says"p is lr ue. The function of data would be to illustrate rather than to dcnronstrate.rrder enrerges from reality itself or is sornethingthat onc imposes . for grand perspectives. r T .theoriesof the middle-range":r5a set of srnallpyramids gathcrecl in the landscape with no super-pyramidoverarchingthem exceptthe basic tenetsof s a x o n i ci n te l l e c tu ac l u l tu re i n its i deographi c (U K ) anclnomotheti c ( U S) v a ri e ti e s .nr at hem at icr econom rl ics be. . in particular. But somehow it is not so obvious that they relate directly to the scien_ tific enterprise.rrked on this common trait one must clearly point to the trenrendcius differences existing betweenthem as to how they proceed. It is guided by the basic irlea of Cedankennotwendigkeit: if one has acceptedthe premisesand certain rules of inference. This is not to say that Britain.Ba.a fact readily admitted. and is highly unam biguous. exceptthe idea that p (preiliset) could be false and at the same tirne q (conclusion)could be true" When one says"if p. A discrepancy betweentheory and data w<luldbe hanclled at the expenseol the data: they may either be seenas atvpical or wholly er_ roneous. It can probably be nraintainedthat teutonic theory-forrnarionis above all purely deductive. by modus ponens the conclusioncanot lail lo be t heor y.then the conclusion follows" The goal is to arrive fr<lm a small number of prernises at a high numbcr o1'conclusionscoveringas vast an areaof inquiry as possible. .f or m at ionis basedon t his. One could even surrnise that an averagesaxon researcher would fall prey to vertigo if a theoretical pyramid rose five ccntimeters above the grouncl. fhe lrighesthe would venture would be to Merton's proverbial ..r6 How can all this be justi!'ied'? There can be no referenceto par_ t i c u l a r s o u rc e s . for having projected the type of ligtrt that makes vast areaslook bright but at the expenseof all the nuances. realize that he is somewhatshort on documentationtcl back up what he is saying.the shadowsin the crevices and the canyons of doubt and so on.s 829 sions -. on the side. which pernrltsall kinds of relationsbetweenp and q. Not so with the implication relation nnd hence with theory formation: onceone has accepted the plemisers one cannot but accept the conclusions.yand methods Caltung Galtung Th{orie et rndthode. In other words.also be that in this respect. Theor iesr r l'er t o t hat r ealit y. If one wants a conceptualization ofthe univcrs* or a part of it as fundanientally orderly.sw eepi nggeneral i zati ons" .so does the anthropologist. One might now complete the picture of the silxonic intellectual style by emphasizing its weak points: not very iitrilng on theory for_ mation.siranthropologists are known and respected for their tremendou.s skill anit energy in producing an astounding variety of detail. one becoruesa prisonerof premises and of the deductiveframework in which they are enrbedded. .To him intellectualactivity has at its very centretheory-fbrmation. British historians ancl Briti. But the answermigh{. so mathematizationmay L\rnd to bias I8 t he int ellect ual t owar dst he t eut onicst yle.rg a casein point. To this it can be objectedthat few peopleare in f act so st r ong in m at hem at ical econom ics as UK and US economists . In other words. whether one thinks that that c. there is rr:om for a certain ambiguity. Why this excursion into elementarylogic? Simply to shorv one fhing: theory formation is basedon strong and stricf dichotonries. And here the distinction between ernpirical ancl porential reality comes in: to the teutonic and gallic intellectual. They are certainly not known for sweepingtheories. Deduct ive principle. has not produced (as opposedto imported) philosophers of science of the highest quality. t hat is what my reseaich has shown me {whether empirical or nonempirical)" then. ler haps ir.Because of this kincl clf' unawareness the teutonic or gallic intellectual might not lhetsriesin the teutonic and gallic intellectualapproaches. usually not very explicit relatiortship to realityas known by peoplcin general t he dat a t o f it t his r ealit y. potential reality may be not so much the reality to be even ruorc avoideclor even more pursued than the enrpiricalone but rather a rnore reul reality. realitv free fronr the noise and impurities of empini':nl realiry. But having renr.and ar e select ing Thcr:ry-tbrmation is the stringing-together-of-words. Few rvould dispute tlrn{ teutonic and gallic:intellectuals can be mastersat this.They are in flrct addressingthemselves to a potential reality which has sorne. of data of all kinds _ some of which is extremely hard to get at. with occasional anchoring in a clata base.

one has to dance around it and view it from many angles until in the end it rests belweenthe two poles. I would even venture the hypothesisthat it is more difficult to build rigorously a solid teutonic pyramid or balance artistically a well-suspencled gallic hammock than to mobilize all the craftsmanshipnecessary to document a proposition within the saxonic style.:on between the first and last word on the printed patl*" I'he aesthetic aspect. tions and various types of semanticand even typographicaltricks. quality that gallic social-science is ticularly when spokenand written hy its true master$. B ut i t may be that thi s pow er than to a crlrtainartistic of conviction is due lessto logical $t. More particularly. then dedmctive n nuisance.20 suspended Both the teutonic and the gallic exercises in theory formation require a verbal ability masteredr:nly by the few. can enjoy trltlly the delight very is as follows: simply third. Similarly. a balance rat her t han a sent r e.matt. '[fre first is the There are at leastthree responses gallic within style. hy labour controlling capital in a mature socialistsociety. If I should g.Persuasion Behind the What I am trliflg to say is that there may be sonre underlying figure of thought that is directing rnuch of the theory-forming exercise. evenwith a basic 'ncontradiction" on top. the secondthe inlallectual approach taken the intellectual wilhin nippunis rryle. Thus. And the the approach taken you pul. hardened.830 Theory and methotls Galtung Galtung Th6orie et mdthndes 8l I upon reality (or both) there is rru objection to this approach.rHcture parprose very often possesses. some of them highly d r am at ic. The name of that game is formal logic. Certainly this relatesto fhe circumstancethat both the USA and Japan are countries of mass . double enteltdres.T"he are more saxonic. and the nipponic exercises tolerant. From one basic principle very many conclusions were drawn. I think the gallic approach is cerdeductivebut not necessarily tainly a stringing-together-of-words. the nlost important As is well known branch of the tree of formal logic is mathenratics. more democratic. with a tension. and able to dictate the terms for the next struggle. and the rest is a game. puts strait It reality in a even a dangerousone. US nrore than UK.but also the use of bons mots. as t he pyr am id m et aphnr f or the teutonic style indicates. of the deductive exercisewithout in any senseassilntingthat the "truth" of propositions in the pyrarnidal network is also an empirical truth. The words connole something. perhapsthe steeperthe betler. the poverty of philosophy will become the philosophy of poverty tuwards the end of an essay. at a corNot so in the gallic intellectualstyle.ucss respondingurrderlyingfigure of thought it would be n hammock: The body two pylons and betweenthem the hammock suspend*cl" is suspended comes to rest when the stringing-together-of-words between two opposed poles. to this problem. but a balanced tension. It may simply be a postulatedtruth. perspectives. ly.The teutonic and gallic types of intellectualintercnurse are highly Darwinian struggles where only the fittest survive. perhaps.balance. And this tallies well with what was said above about the styles of intellectual discourse.maybe "courrterpoised'o would be a betterexpression. there are superb rnathematicians within all fmur intellectual cultures.It has to be hinted at. But if one at a deeperlevel one is attracted by ambiguitieseither because prisoner because of one's own thotlghls or does not want to be a theoryone feels the universe itself is ambiguous. It has been indicated above many times that for the teutorlic intellectualstyle this is thepyramid.they carry convictir:n. betweenId and Super-ego Freud and betweenAryans and Jews for Hitler were such key prinaxioms from which an enormous number of ciples. €l€ganceis not only the mastery of good style as opposed to the dryness of Cernlan social-scienceprose. the contradictions for betweenlabour and capital for Marx. and logic may become formation basedon Aristotelian jar:ket.As a matter of fact they may carry even nore conviction tltan a teutonic p y ra m i d o f ti g h tl y i n te rl o c k i n guni ts.and a sum m it . and by the Aryans overcoming the Jews. by expellingand exterminatingthem. lessby implicatiorr than by tlldganc:tt.symmetry . lesselitist. The reversalof sentences is one of these: if an article startswith the assumptionthat the egg is the way in which a hen producesanother that the hen it must end with the assumption (not conseqilence!) hen is the way in which an egg producesanother Super-egoand Id producing an Ego in balancedcommand of either. Opposedis not the sanreas opposite. But the totality cannol be shown through rigorous deduction.ers. conclusions were more or less rigorously deduced. 'fhe basic postulate for all three was that the contradiction had to be overcome for the systemto "mature". The argument to be developednow is that the gallic (and later on the nipponic) approach to theory lbrrnation is verv clifferent from the teutonic. There is a totality to things.Typographicallythis cnn becomeeven respondence more clear by seeingto it that there is some kind of r. often hordering on alliteradrabness.

Buddhist and Daoist approaches.t f'ocus on a very moving dialectic. a highly un-Japanes*: titude.ssuch a l. Galtung anc. then.rr In b o th th e te u to l ti ca n d g a ll i c cascs i t i s a que.sti on not onl y of nof piltting one's foot wfoltg. du/BuddhistlDaoist varieties(not so much Confucian or Shinto) t hat m ight sound qt r aint . they not only biguit y.rtexpound it would be immodestyrvrit large.g. tlre ^Iapane. To say "this is my f"heory" and then go ahead l.llrlir. clialectical These ar e inf or m ed by ancient wisdom o{ t he [ {ir r app r oaches.not an abstracttheory. T h e s ta n d ta k e n h e re i s .perhapsplacing it on the intellectualmap withotll.heory" and then describeit as somebodyelse's. What one might do would be to proceedto intellectual(ilmmentary. and whatever remains outside lhe franiework is easily seenas in_ v n l i d (n o te th e d o u b l e me a n i n gof thi s w ord). they prefer vaguenesseven about trivial nratters (they would rather not say: "the train is leaving at twelve o'clot:k") have a ring of immodesty. of course.25 posit e and not necessar ily lbr any linguist ic r eason. T h e s e n s e o f w h a t i s correctw i thi n each i ntel l ectual .These e. but t hat is not eye br r l like ver biage. so that he can confronl. Take for instancethe Hindu insistence on the insepurability of basic elements(you cannot realize -. 19 8 I ) w h i c h a re e mi n e n tl yc o mpati bl ew i th these el enrcnts of Fni ndu an c l * ri e n ta l th i n k i n g b u t n ru ch l ess compati bl e w i rh decl n* :ti ve scholar feelsuneasywith theory follnation. necessarily adding any confessioncertificate. teutonic ancl nippr:nic intelfec{uals master and in uddition be an artist: thus a structure for f h e i n te l l e c tu a lc o m rn u n i ty i s c reatedw hi ch i s i somorphi c to rhe $t ru c tu reo f th e F re n c hc i v i l s e rvi ce!12 Where. or not nr u c h m o re th a n i s fo u n d i n saxoni c thi nki rarely pronounce absolute. Theori es take a stand.a poirrtwith which one might readily agree). and st r ives t o obt ain im ages the oriental mind strives for th* upthat are contradiction free.ayrhat certain rhings are like this rather than [ h a t. saying "there i. but it calls for more holistic. th e y c h a i n to g e th e r a l o t o f thi ngsi n a framew orkof the val i d. However. c rl ra p sa t the expense of ri gour i rr fhe l eutoni c se n s e .2a and the Daoii. First.832 Theory and methorJs Caltun. rigidity of the western exercises in general ancj the reuronlc one ln particular. The l ack ol anrhi gui t y .o . br r t silr r ply because the underlyirrgcosmologycontainsvery differenl visionsof This doesnot at all m eant hat t heoly how r eal r ealit y is const it ut ed" formation is impossible. Just as the occidentalrnind seemsto have a fear of inconsi st ency. Many strands come together :rt this point.^tual (or conversediscoursr: ly. also seemsclear is tttat $o far no ticulariy occidental a synthesiso1' "nroderil" has truly able to bring about one been forms of understanding. in the gallic casetlre go a l i s e l e g a n c e p . but als(}of seekingto $tep into new t erri tu ry . Tlre occidental protagonist of the theory may be surprised becaucesuch arguments sinrply do llrl hold water and he will be unable to understandthe real source of' the objections.*litncl for that reasonhave lo ad_ mit nrore people to the arena of inlell*.that nei theri s ri ght nor w ro n g .styl e ha s t' b e v e ry s h a rp i n d e e d . categorical statements in ctrailydiscourse. th e c l a ri ty o f th e te u to n i c a l l y shapecl theoryi s i nconrpati hi e w i th basic Hindu. .lertiary lcr'.. But at a deeperlevel I t hink t he f ear of unam biguit yis m or e ir nportant.the discourseproduced cfurcs not sound like theory formation to the occidentallytrained ear or dubbed "wisdom ". incluclingcomprchenci one element without realizing or comprehencling the others).par and ar e hencecouchedin expr essions What to ears. One must also take into accr:rmnt the countless ambiguities in Japanese(cf. that the premisesand/or conclusionsare sinrply not stripirically tenable. if a Japanese an elegantwesterntheory he mav not be able to identify the sour*e and may try to attack the theory on its urvn of his uneasiness grounds. of being juttrgeclear statements because ments of reality. cont r adict ion. doesthe nipponic approachto theory formation fit in to th i s ? A t fi rs t g l n n c eo n e mi ght say that perhapsthere i s not much theory formation in the nipponic intellectual style.but to tflo {:xtent that the resultsare still fentative.fhe person. for instance.2r the B u d d h i s t i n s i s te n c e o n th e c i rc u l ari tyof reasoni ng (a sentence and rts converse together conrprise a nruch bctter approach to truth t ha n n n e o f th e s e n te n c e a s l o n e : " l cl ri vethe car" counterpoi sed wi l h " T h e c a r d ri v e sm e " g i v e sa truer pi ctureof the si tuati on * .himura. if necessary l't the expense of elegance. bercause they adrnit more peopletlrey can becornecounlrieswittt rn.rsfor rigorrr.''lhe insights and scientific "traditional" searchis perhapsgoing on (seee. l n the l eutoni c case one ai n. 1979).I t m ay Lr e necessarily a positive epithet.rss r:ducationeven flt the tertiary level). Mushakoji.rsternapproachesall militate againstthe atonrisrnand the deductivc.This will sound very unsatisl'actory to the occidentalrnind that wants to kn0w whether the per son is a pr ot agonistor an ant agonist .and what t he st and taken is. d o f th e trv o th e gal l i c i s probabl yrhe more 6l i ti st:rl re true mailre has to nlasler what saxonic. th e y a re s i m p l y tw tr d i l ' ferentapproaches to the i ntcl l ectual en te rp ri s eAn .g Goltung Thd<trieel mithodes 833 edur:lltioneven a[ thc..

I heorie e! nteth(wles i5. or nttscenrJi.l n w ay as one re l a ti o n si n fi ra n c e i n l l te s a ntt: peolt ic nr ay be pr oud of ' being disciplcs. scc coul d one have about G a l tu n g . lct cr ist ir : individualism possiblybccause t r ait s such as ver t icalit y i s e l'enm or e pr or r r ) unced. 'er ybody of hinr selfaisa r nast er . A scient if iccor r r nrunit y of nr ast cls. but f undr ir r r cnt ally wr ong. Bu t I d o u b t for can Oermany' . t.nt hesis of M ar u ilnd Fr eud will be wr it t en.rpti ons t h e s tru c tu reo f th e s c i e n ti ifc c < l nrmuni ty? In Ccrmany the structure seems by and large to be very' pyrarnidal.s 8-14 7'heor.half the out side st nr ct ur e calls f or ail even higher level of uom pct it iveness. . havir r gsulf isuccur nbing. but as a consequence it looks .ri e v e l opnrent i n d e e dn * g l i g i b l e . Fre nch.w i th al l ki tl i l s of excuses (b ) s o rn e th i n g a theory bci ng l l ut fori l ' ard.i rrcl udi ng such atl tl future studi es'i s sttrdi es f i e l d s i . i n to th e n i n e te e n th It i s ccrtai nl y6l i ti st Bu t i s F ra n c en o t th e s a m etype of country' ? cl i te i n Frenchsoci ei s an corrtmuni ty s c i e rrl i fi c th a t th e i n th e s e n s e i l bout master-di sci pl e one can tal k v e ry th a t tn u c h ty .a. 1 9 7 7 . w h o d i rty th e i r h a n d sw i th enrpi ri cal r e s e a rc h bel ri ncl as l aggi ng o n e n l a y p e rh a p ss e eth e u n i versi tycontl nuni ty' changesthat have after all takcn place in Ciermalry. a n c lt hereai so hasto be someki nd of corth e s c i e n ti fi c communi ty ancl th e s tru ctureof the sci enti fi c b e tw e e n re s p o n d e n c e th e s tru c tu re o f th e s c i e n ti l ' i cproduct. r I h avealnr ostnevcr hear dt his in lir . {E r{l . l cfc r r ed t o and r ct '*ricl t her nselves. rconare at being bogger lr t r own num ber ol't 'or nr s in or clert o conr plywit h bur eaucr ut itcx.above or alor r gside t he old one .r and o r o n l r' \' e ry c a u ti o u s l ye l a b o ratcd.r uclrver y of t en r vcr r king by t he kind of inst it ut e t o r vhi<: h t he G er nr an pr of essr ir sar r alnr ost as i'r i"r st r at ed at nol. r si d er able i ge ncies.{ H e n c e . .b a s e dfi to rc o l i someconcepti ons w i th. if som ebody challenges it hc takes upon hinr sclt 't he whole bur r "ien of pr oof of ' est ablishing hi m self as a new r nast er .ht be working in sonrebody's depaltrtrt'rrtrt insu}t t u lht : Iai r or at or y. d i l e n ri n .* a hcr .{tnd tnethqd. 2t int er suhir : uf ivit v I n Fr anceI dot . r h{ t hat t her e is m or e hor izq: nt al . the but real. l ci i v iclualist st ic yle.2 o L e t u l th e n a p p ro ti u hth * probl ent of theory forntarti onfrottl of soci alstruclurfl a n o th e r a n g l e . l n ol thi s al l matters. but lha{ is a t em por ar l' ancl necessar y Af t er t hat t lt e l'inal hun ian r r iindand r iignit y.t. v as t he ( lsr r nail nlast er s assist ance ci e nt scient if icor adm inisir alive by adnr inist r at ive dut ies. One nrig. ( and aut hor it ar ian and a cer t ain aut hor it ar ian suhnr issiveness dist r ibut edhet lveen t hc cl o nr inance of ot her s)ar e not syr nm et r ically I clo not know.and.i*ltung tialtung.tsp e a c es tu d i e s . n ry c o n c l u s l o n i s tftat therni pponi c approach to l l l i s w i l l re s u l ti n : (a ) l i ttl e ()f no theoly at nl I bei ngdevel opccl . J a p a rre s e i n Japan. in Cer m any ir r t er is obt ainedwit liin subject ivit y pyr anr idal r elat iona s chool of t hought .t hey m ay bc C e r r nar r y' fs ollower sol'M eisler s( i ilr xso. ul t iur at el.l nt}t s easi l yrcconci l edw i th l trc' ( e x p re s s e ciln ) n o n -o c c i c l e i l tal o c c i d e n tu l a s p e c tso t J a p a rt cs*i ntel l ecl uali tcti t' i ty.t r st lr is a saxonicpr ejudice'l M or e concr et ely.particularly in Germany under socialdemocracy. Why is it t hat ( ier m an inst it r r t c: seem l t o be bigger t ir an t t r . possiblvbecause as a basicclr nr .soon t o he over com e.) W h at assun.'ci. t sif t he tw o count r ies. highly ir r at honr e. cor r r scier r t if iciclca of t r ut h as t hat which is int er subject ively due rnt r nicable aud r c'ploducible needst o be m odif ied consider abiy to cult ur al diif e r enccs. l . from the feudal days lasting well a n d e v e n the tw enti ethcentury. sl . each wit h lr is own inim it able. ancl (c) l i tt: ' Therel l re mi n d tu rn i n g n to re and more to matl rE tttati cs. ince:t her e.' Il te f ry o f a s s i s ta n ts l vcl l o f th e s c i e n ti fi cc o ntmuni ty structure corresponds s te e p n e s s professor is w i th th e s te e p n e so sf th e th e o r y pyranri d:the l ri gherthe pri nci pl es ott l o c a te df h e d e e p e ro r mo re a b stractthe I' undamental w h i c h h e i s w o rk i n g . but c l o s cr' tro apolopius. . but stl i ar the Japanese ma n y fi rs t-ra tem a th e l tta ti c i a ns c c l n tri b u ti o n to s o c i a l s c i e n ceti teory-l ' ormati on. and his reliltionshipto the lesrier respectwas not pretertded a n d s tu d e n tsw as that of master to di sci pl e. {For a [urther expl orati on.. 'cs or a m ASt crit t t ! ulu i f' cr . What t his m eans is esser r t ially t hat t he disciplesar r ive af under st anding t he m ast erand in so cloingaccepthis t heor y wit lt out fundam ent ally challengingit . t he t heor et ical const r uct ions ar e incom par able and t heir adh er ent s celebr at e t heir incom par abilit y by issuing solir l cer ti ficat est o each ot her t o t he ef f ect t hat t he ot her one is t r ot only w rong. . that i s the mi xture nl ' producti on/theoryi ormati on/comp a ra d i g ma n a l y s i s /p ro p o s i ti orl m e n ta ry u l ti ma te l y p ro d u c e d. The basi c w c are concernecl i n th e fo u r ty p e s o f s o c i e ti es h y p o th e s i s i s v e ry s i rn p l e : th cre has to be srl me ki nd of corand the structure ot' betweenlleilerfilsocial sjtructures responclence c o m m u n i l y . .it soundsr at lr cl as con. culean t ask" int er subject ivit ybet weent wo pyr am ids is nr it asi.uncnculnt t cr ct .f illing it t i. . O r .c h a p . wit hin a m aslcr .t hat t he lat t r er t end 1o divide and subdivideunt il t hey conper sonswor king at hom e? Possiblybecnuse si st of one. .1. th e l o w er l re i s l ocatedthe l ow er the l evel ol " sol di er"ot' s the ft-rot p ro p o s i ti o n su n ti l o n e c o m e sd ow n to students. There was a tremendousrespectfor the Professor. cr l for.disciple ship.

1' l l hel p you today. The French professor nright prefer an oral clialogueto see whether the candidat has come to the levelof. t xot t icti cular ly US int ellect ualcult ur e. Bu t th i s d o e sn o t me a n fh a l therei s not some ki rrdol i ntersubj ectivity at a higher level. if for n o o th e r re a s o nth a n th a t e a c hmasterhashi s ow n l nnguage. will the intellectual style follow suit? Will sonrethingless similar to the saxonicstyle emerge? I mention this becauseit may yietd a more civilizat. l.i s t} r af not a fundanrentnl l v verti cal . howevermuch they share.lf:sent from in the teutonic and gallic exercises.tl35 'fheor. ivisr n". and irl (ielrnran j ur ispr udence. " w e a re a l l 6 l i te s i n th c B ri ri sh soci ety. often well concealed. evenif one thinks what he tries to c o mmu n i c a tei s p u re n o n s ense. And i t i s al so i ncompari bl e w i th the fragmented French relation llhere so many peoJrie scemto preiend that they are irrelevanttc)ench other.and can be relativelydetachedfrom too stlong confrontatiutrswit.Brrl {here will never [re full conlmuniuation. .rnipresent ari lhey are mostly.l b o u t . It could very well be a diulogue de sourds as it does not s e rv e th e p u rp o s c lo l ' c o rn mu ni cati on as much fl s l he purpose of ' l ' hc. There i s acl mi rati on for the power of conviction. w i l l n i e ti c u l o u sl yscruti ni zethe pyranri d secti on the disciple has presented as his thesisfor possiblelrojesin the rea."f unct ionalisr n". image giverr for the German setting? ble rvith the master-disciple be It cer t ainlyis.. 837 to s u b s ti tu tefo r th e l a c k o f a vsrti calone. In that sett i n g p e o p l e a t th e to p m a y even become total l v i naccessi bl e to challenge and debate for fear of /ise maje. an d a cor r espondingat t ack on "pu...r ponicint ellect ual par real sit uat ion) :. sa xonic ( par t icular ly US) 2eand nipponic int ellect uaiact ivit ) '.less political interpretationto what happenedin Cermany at the end of of Marxist thinking. . I n this.ional. .lapanese been forced into proposition production rather than theory formation ." B ut i t i s i nconrpati bl e w i th the vertical Cerman relationship whcre the mil$tef h. cer t ainly not least ir t t he social This would seemopposedt cl t he t r adit ionaliit t ur csInf t he sciences. There may be a sharing of the gallic intelleclual style as such.ste" B u t w h a { .yuttt:tmethods Gollunlg { " iul{ung T-lttiorie et ntdlhotl't'. by sonrebody€lse to try to cornmunicale lrar:k that he has receivedthe message will be firmlv rejectedas au inf'ringementon t h e p e rs o n a li n te g ri tyo f f h e master:" you have nol understood me c o rre c tl y . being able to fenclfor trinrself. has. Therecoui d be noddi ngapproval.verbal nnalysis. A German professorout to see whether he can give a "certificate" to one ol'his tiisciplesfor some h i g h e r ti tl e . Wit hir r t hose pyr am ids t heor y f or m at ion cor . t her e is also no doubt anot her key t o t he explanalionof t lt e *r e neart he st yleof t oday ( iI m y obser vat iont ni . Ancl t hat brings us to a point in need of much more elaboration: if "[apanis gradually liberating itself from US tutelage and cluminailce in military and political affairs. As presented in strengthin paradigm analysisgoestol{fltherwith strength in theory for r nat ion.col le c :ti v i s ti c s u u i e ty ?Is n o t th e Japanesesoci al atnnr the human wit h a leader . and one would im aginet hat in . in Confucian studies (rnore trasedon imprr*srivctheory .ver y com pat igro up.rxoniassumpri c on. built ar or ut dor ganicsoliciar it y. t t l. There was a tremendousrflsilrgence the 1960s. pr oblem at ic: wor ld u'ar t he all. 'fable I. i deaof an i n* t e l l e c tu a ls e m i n a ra s a s e lti n g for mutual ai d ' .hentpirical reality. E fforts to demonstrate rcproduci bi l i ty w i l l b e p u t d o w n a s a tte mp tsat pl agi ari sm.the sameintellectualstyle.} a p a n . v m any of t he sr nalier clclwn ser vedt o level tha t t hey have produce all Japanese a certain iernoto and have thus ccrme to perhatrls only be general collectivism could Japanese flatness. " .certi {' i ed craftsmen w i th some differences in skill bilt not so much tlrmt we cannot relate re l a ti v e l yh o ri z o n ta l l yto e a u llother. verbal display. Some words abaw paradigm analysis. as l ack oi ' ori gi nal i tyon b o th s i d e s .28 A in hor izonvcr t icalit y.for the many reasonsmentionedabove. as p ro v e nb y th e fa c t th a t th e y d o n' t do i t. of the conviction that this is the way to build a theory and that lesserhunrau beings will never be abie to do it.heyderive frorn the samebasicabilities. lapant her e r voulcl st ylenot so dif f er ent lior n ma ny sm all pyr am idsnf an int ellect ual the t eut onic one.also highly deduct ivein it s const r uct iilt x. But it is t his lat t er point relat ionswit hout m ight be unnecessar y. t e s ti n gth e p a tte rno l ' v e rb a lb ehavi ouri n gencral .is a sclling between e q u a l si n a c o mmu n i ty "' fh i s re fl ectsthe basi cs. lapan is locat edin t he per ipher yof s. clear light cnianating fronr tlre lunrinaries. t t hink t her e is som et hingt o t his: one is r eiit let lt o t he other. and lht r obt ainedby sacr if icingsom e of t he perhaps. intellectual activity tality that has errsued.s to pretend t h a t h e h a s n o th i n g to l e a rn . A n effort.for the fact that Monsieur so-and-so has arrived at the appropriatestyle.J..I d i d n o f s a y .soning. as she llas already donc in economic affairs. Paradigm analysisand theorizingare as nn. maybe yr:u'll help trle to[lo[ro1y" .lapanese formation or "stringing-together-of-ll'ords"). lapar l since t he second tha t is ltave becomeso itnportant Y X and science for science associations pr obabl. ld social r elat ionswit hin would becom est r ongerand sO cial ern er ge.or precisefybecouse they share.

w ay nf" l -abl e2: The figuresshould certainly not be taken too seriously. Jrerhaps. Second./'rangais? (i s i t possi bl e to sa). t he dialect ical becom e in what m ight dat a t oget her vague at chaining at t em pt s the rvheel: the Buddhist based on the nipponic style an emerging in t he or der in which t he st yles qu adr ant s of t he t able ar e pr esent ed rnay be useful irr reminding I The figurcs in Table above.ster?) Non-diulectrcal Dialectical Pntposilionoriented Theor. I am not thinkirlg" . sinrplistictype r.thi s i n French?) donatano monka dsuka? (w h o i s your ma.etme try to summarizewhat I have said by putting down in the shcrfest possibleform the typical question put in the four intellectual styleswhen sonrebodyis faced with a proposition: -* saxonic style: hov' do -you operationalize il? (US version) h o w do you dautmtnt i t? (U K versi on) wie kcinnen Sie clas ryrilckJ'ilhren .rf ment et oi est la fin.r0 Could this also have been a teutonic wave of protest against the saxonic penetrfttionbrought about particularly by US social science?Waves of' F-ulbright scholars in both directions. c o u n tl e s s e x c h a n g e s .was it not inevitable that this should lead to some type of resistance? Could it be. of somc one developedas much as they deserve.. this q.!'oilent(d - teutonic style: - g a l l i c s ty l e : nipponic stvle: An o th e r w a y o { ' s u m m a ri z ing tni gtrtbe Lr1. Theorie el mithodes 2 Iour styles.":ls Caltung Goltung .* ableiten? (how can you trace this track * deduceit fro m basi cpri nci pl es?) peul-on dire cela en bon . a s a mo v e n re n lo f i n dependence. e . learning from the great mastersof gallic style.TABLf.ould he a step to speakand write it ilot only correctly but elegantly. witys Cerman schoolswould be more orientedtowards men'rorizing of t hinking and Fr ench schools t owar ds m ast er y of t he Fr ench language.g .rl 'I'hus. as the intellectualculture underlyingan emerginglvr:rld civilization with a world government and so on. For others who view the world differently it might be seenin a different v e i n . Correspondingly.838 T'heory and melhw. About the gallic style one can say what is sometintes on llfl sait pas oir est le commencesaid about l:rench pre$entation: the vulgar. saxonic and nipponic intellqclual styles would be factoriented which would mean that the educationsystemshould place a great deal of eniphasison collection of facts. [.Ilut they do contrast the very small saxonic pyrarnids. that a part of the Marxist resurgence was German nationalism?And if that is tlre casewoulcl it not merit support not only or necessarily becauseof its political connotations but also because its implication was a higher levelof diversity in intellectual styles?For those who seethe saxonicstyle as 1heworld style.four figuresof lhought 839 arrclalso on empiricism in the social sciences in general(exceptthe type of empirical studies that were expectedto give unambiguous support to the theses of the type of Marxist thinking that enrerged). U S empi ri cal soci al -sci encetechni ques penetrating far into the Cerman heartland -.the teutonic style is the only one that has a clear centre or sumnrit. the gigantic teutonic pyramidal constructionscovering so and t ensionin t he gallic f or m of pr e$cnf at ion mu ch. built on solid empirical ground. appeared points but which are perhaps not mentioned above.

rum.the arms are cl i vi ci e d i n to (l ) th e ri g h t a n rr. but in som ekind of m ixt ur e of saxdeduct ive cl e ar . no anal cl gy. becauseit m ight br ing out a way of explor ing ot her int ellect ual .1. There i s so rnuch at stake! Itr' s o me th i rrg s h ri u k l b e s h u w n to be i nval i d . Diversity in inlellectualslyles: some conditions and consequencts some elementsin the points l r:re i s n o maj or catastroph\. readerswill have recognizecl plored above. t eut onic. it is unilinear . and st r uct ur alphenom ena intellectualstylesabove. r t a cascm ay be because i rrt ellect ual m ay pr ef er a good lunch. An d thus endsthe story: the teuroni ci n- tr:llcctualniav brc()me an extremistto the left or to the right as the he gallic he t akes his own t heor y ser iously. wit h beaut if ully eir nam ent ed to a splendidFrench rneal. I m ent ion t his onl1. nocidedinwardly in agreerncnt with some of them. I think the gallic intellecruitl would be ntore prone to considerhis model as a metaphor. 1981) . i n l he other three styles.o rtfr y of certi fi cate" v()tre presental i on m a g i s tra l e " a t th e e n d .E.' ' bul eaucrati c k.The saxonicintellectualwill only have.a can be turned around very many ways and still sentence -lapanese retain some of its meaningsalthough ncw nuancesmay come out each tirne. one pyrarnicl destrol'cdand can staft constructingone ntore litrle pyranrid oul of th e d e b ri i .n o d o u b l e e n te n cl re can hi de the di sast* rthar can hi t a t e u to n i c p y ra mi d . Maybe they r:ould be looked at once more to seewhether still some insightscan be gleanedfrom 1he same way as the logical consequences followed frorn his rigorous logical deductions.both in tel nrs cf inscientific languagesonrewhere f or t he out siderand unam biguit yf or t he insider . b u t n e v c rth e l e s s l l .(b) l egs. or been strongly opshakenby the superficialityand lack of evidence. compr ehensibilit y can be ln another connectionI have tried to explorehow languages carriersof a certain social cosmology(seeCaltung and Nishimura. w i th i t ma y fal l a l i l ' eti me< l f i ntel l ectrral i nvcstm e n t. unidir ect ional.gallicand nipponicappr oaches am trying to explore. but always with thc idea of trying to p ro v e h i s p y ra rrri dri g h t). it is r.a propori i ti onbei ng f a l s i fi e d . s u f' i p* rl l apssl i ghtl ypomf c i e n tl yanrbi guous. (2 ) the l efr arnr.certainly not in any into a web of conditions and consequences f r am ewor k. somethinghis gallic counterpart would nev'errea.cut I t o t he phenom enon onic. For that reasoneverybodyshuuld look w i th scept icism at what I am now t r ying t o do: t o r nake t he whole descriptionsmore tightly imagemore plausibleby spinning the 1'our .T h e n i p p o n i ci rrte l l ectual has.mathematics being perhaps at the extreme of the artificial end * with various levels ol' technical jargon lucating a in-between. the German sentrnilecertainl y h as a beginning and an end. Maybe English and French are somewherein-between. n o e u p h o n y .ual sirnply believes what hq says.Thus.ruuched conlanguages thei c is a natural language. i f' anythi ngat al l . in a Intellectualactivity is primarily verbal activity.:{cutuni crryl e: rhc tre m e n d o u si n te l l e c tu a l i s k ta ken.and t her e seem s t o be lit t le doubt t hat t he G er m an language is as well fitted for the teutonic inlellectual style as th* Japanese languagefor the rripponicstyle. posedto some points made.Eur opeanlanguagef anily'. buf not the styl eof i ntel l ect u a l s . behi ndone mor€ e l e g a n tl b rmu l a ti o n . conversationas an actcompaniment . H e n c e . Il u t the pure reutoni ci nrE l l ecrual i s not i n t h a t s i tu a ti o n :h e m a y ri s k s e ei nghi s w hol e pyrarni rlfal l to pi eces. certainly closer to Cerman as they are closely related languages w i thin t he I ndo. N o anccdcl l c.' l Bu t th a t b ri rrg su p i l l r i m p o rtant poi nI i n tl ' ' . a hi ghl y' f' l e x i b l ew h e e l . The gal l i c l nte l l e c tu a w l i l l u s u a l l yb e a b l e to hi de the cl i ffi cul tr. at fflost. The teutonic intellectualmight evencome 10 the point where he believes th a t h i s p y ra m i d i s a good model of enrpi ri calreal i ty and act accordingly: he nray believe that empirical consequerrces will follow as readily rvhenthe key truth of the syster"xr is changed. w h i c h tu rn s th rcugh vari ous facts.r' t l n a d d i ti o rrto th i s c l i ffe re n c e betw eenthe teul oni c and the gal l i c intellectualcornesa final clifference not explicitly nrentionecl abovet it is nry contention that the teutonic intellect. tal p e rh a p sl h e ta l k o f tl r* i n te l l i gel ttsi a." t' har ki nd of tal k i r w h a t I w .0 Theorv and rnethods Galtung Galtung 't'hiorie el rnelh(rdes 841 o l ' p re $ c n ta ti o nth a t i s o l ' te n r eferrnrd l o as " l ogi cal " and " C arte s i a n " : " th e h u rn a nb r:tl yh a s ( a) arnrs.o u l dra th e r r* fe r to a s admi ni strati ve. a s e n te n c e h o w e v e r arri ved ar bei ng rrnaccel rl abl e for w h a te v c rre a s o n s . p o u s . To st ar t at som e point : I have m ent ioneda num ber ui"cult ur al ttre condit ioning.Betweel and artificial tinr. and then on the sidr: engagein rather saxonicand very hard empirical rvork (the teutonic colleaguemay also do that.. i t i s n o w o n d e r th a t h e approaches the w ork w i th a certai n in n e r n e rv o u s n e se sx p re s $ ea ds rnuscul ar tensi cl rr and w i th no vi si bl e re s e rv e o f h u mo u r i n h i s c o u ntenance.lly do. sheclding some light on reality but not to be taken too seriously.if not unam biguously.

or il s s o me th i n gfl e e ti n g . rvhat i s cr:rnpl i cated is r n a i n l y th e s p e l l i n g ).'r that the latter is 1oo flexihle. b u t a tr ove al l a l anguage much ri cher i n v o c a b u l a rya n d n u a n c e s . tual culture more dialeclic when Germany played a much lrlore modestr ole in t he wor ld? .. st at usquo count r iest o t t lt der also dog countriesyearning for change. buI a]so try the.the class c"haracter o.s personrr:{ l ri ng n ra n e n ta l th o u g hd i ffi c u l l t" oa p pr. as t hey r ange f r om t op. lf one appliest his t hinking t cr hypot hesis t hat t heir concount r iesit would lead t o t he int er est ing cept ualizat ionof t r ut h would change wit h t heir posit ior ir r t he w or ld.r[] Theory und methods Galtuny. ti visnr / indiv'idualism should ti fi c com m unit y t hat is ver t ical.l l i ry i tsel f i s l l ceti ng and {'loating. the peopl e tend to I ' o l l o w s u i t.l rttl ysi s.part. Il u t th e n th e re i s a l s o a n o tl l cr w ay ol ' a1:proachi ng l hi s: the distinc{ion betrveerr dlite t' ..polar izccl fi nally if t he st r uct ur eis ver t ical. are bei l (r sui tecl to the I' i r.rJrposed to ad j u s t a s re a l i ty c h a rrg c s h a p eand substance. o n to ln whoseint er estis it t o havc a r igid mo r e st r uct ur alper spect l a ti n gi n c l i cs ty l eto Hi ndi . Gallunq Theorieet methldes 843 s l y l e s . but I 'ind t he quest ions di a lect ic? ask ing. upper-cl ass French s p e a ka n ru c h n tc i re a rti $ ti ca n d el egantFrrrrchrsl ' l ected i n thei r i nte l l e c tu a l s ty l e . h e re a sth e l b rm e r concei rti s compati bl e\c' i ththent. if it is t nor e horizontal [rut individualist and polarized it should con]e out st yle. but no undue empha$ison the contentictus through theorieswith sharp erJges. witlr tlre kel' pyranlid srliool. th a t u p p e r-c l a s s J a p a n ese speak arr even more anrbi guous.rr.e askeclnor only L ry u n i v e rs i ty tra i n e d i n te l l e ctual s. d i a l e c ti c a lfo rms o f u n d e rstandi rrg frettersui tedtn the l atter.f the intellectualstlle. m eaningless? ti m e t hat t he quest ionbecom es ( like t he ot t e we cult ur e m or e deduct ive w as t he Fr er r chint ellect ual attemptedto ridicule above) when France was more at lhe peftk of i ts g loir e? What about Japan? As t he r ising sun conlinuest o r ise will the Japaneseintellectualsdevelop more of a sense<ll' grand theor ies f r eezing a pleasant r ealit y and be less concer nedwit h fleeting images of a floating reality? As the British continne otr nt or e their way "down t he dr ain".t he int ellect ual polarized then sornethingmore similar to the teutonic stylc i:ottld emerge:each school producing its deductivr: lryramid.r:xi nratr.collect ivist one should expect the nipponic style to emerge:duc the Japanese respectfor authority. a scienand polar izat ion/ int egr at ion. will t heir wor ld views becot r ie wor t h I do not know t he answer s. even and pertrapii vestedin the rnasterof the to the . Ir. the latter concepl of truth u'ould deny there a c l a s sd i f' fe rc n c c in language th at al so ctl rresponds ro tl rs cl asscl i f{ -e re n cie n i n te l l e c tu as l ty l eo f p rcsental i ofr? h4aytrc' therc rs: i n rhaL u p p e r-c l a s s C e rm a n s p e a k a r uuch ni ore rl gorousand conl pl i catec C l e rn ra nre l -l e c te d i n th c i r i ntel l ectualstyl e. l trabi r-' styl to e A rabi c ancjsi ni c sty l e to C h i n e s e* * a t l e a s ta s a poi nt of rl eparture.r.s ti n c ti o n h c re i s w h e thcr trutl i l s secl l .n ru ch nrore r:apabl e of captLrri ng detai l a n d .rn i n the s tre e { " i n th e fo u r c u l tu re s . the l atter i s sr. however .fl o a ti n g bccausc rc. f lexibleview of socialr ealit y( we ar e dealingwit h socialscicnces her e) 'l The m ost sim plist ic answer would be t hat t he dont inant socialt r ut h is oue t hat w ould pr el'crt r ut h t o be st alllcas t he pr esent pl eases t henr .B ut e v e n i f th i s i s th e c a s eo n e s h o ul cJ not rrncl eresti mate thu sw ay that f l i te s h a v e o v e r p e o p l e . Funktionsbegriff. h < .y e t Ih e rc rrra ybe a si nri l ari tyamong pcopl es. sci ous Japanese.i l aybe t h e k e y d i . vs. sect ionof t hr ee var iables Much has been m ade in t he pr eceding ver t icalit y/ hor izont alit y.e n ti ght ai sn Iurn [o cl ass. T h e fo u r q u e s l i o nsaskedat the enclof' the prececl i ng sectionin an efforl to epiloniizc the dil'l'ercnces i. This is not a quesrion of .rn.the intellectualstyle shottlcl The quest ionm ay be asked: wast eut onicint ellecunder gor : hanges. and hou.1 5 D e e p e rth a n th i s i s th e c u l tu ral l ydel ' i rt* rl nori on ol " trurl t. facilitate regulated participatory discussion among equ* type of t ru th . to reveal . issues brought into the discourse and com m unit y is ver t c \. u .collect ivist If. And likc and non. d e d u c ti v efra mc w orks. Ob v i o u s l y .unctional in v a ri a n c e s w .suhstanzbegrifl vs. T h e fo rme r p u ts rc a l i ty i n a s t rarijfacket.rp e r-c l a s s Rri ti sh speak rnore cot.alolleccha r act er izingsocial st r uct Llr es: Thus.if it is hor izont l l arl yw hen tl rc pyranti ci s are huge and 1'orthat reasondif'ficult to de-construct becalrse of tlte in te l l e c tu a il n v e s tm e n t i n th e m.individualistand polar izecl produce iin int ellect ualst ylc like t he t eut onic one. llrli:rsists At th i s p o i n t. All rhe diversity pointed to in the prececling se c ti o nma y b e re a l a m o n g i n te l l ectual 6l i tesor thcl se desi gnated as r n te l l e c tu ae l l i te s .h o rv they trai n tl re peopl e i n aci rrri ri ng the sty l e th e y th e rn s e l v ea s rc m a s tersof.r' cctl y (but l :n g l i s h g ra mn ta l i s n o t rh a t conrpl i cated.or doesone have t o go so f ar back in What about nir nnce. co n rp l i c a te d a n c l s o c i a l l yc ' o n . Il ' tl re forrri r:ri s too rigid the danger alwa*.individualist nror elike t he gallic int cllect ual like the saxonicculture would bc but much lesspolarizedsornething act ivit yt hat would enr phasizing t he aspect s ol int ellect ual exp ect ed.. A nd thar poi nts to something not suffici*ntly mentioned above -.l o unravel .B. t he dom inat cd would pr ef er it t o be f lexible as only tha t would give hope f or t he lut ur e.

sultirig in a unif'itttltheor-tt\.rxorri c and ni pponi c appro a c h e s . but ttrat rvord has never c a u g h t o n a s l { i tl e r w u s l te v e rregardedas an i ntc. unexpo s e d to a n y c o mp e ti ti o n a s it covers the w hoi e w orl cl . are all t he r esult sol"r elat ively s " i n tr r r est t heur y. O ne m ay bc s{nr i. Whelher .wit h upper classes on lop of int ellect uals and. collect sdat a and t r ies t o give r leanir r gt o t heor ies and t licr .What a r epr essivc r cgim ewould be af r aid of woulaibr :t he pel son who docs bolh. st etllucled to in the l'rrll secthcrn Europe: the idr:aof tlre cross. m or e ol't ent han not r at her t hin in docum ent at ion. ir T Dat a inspir e t heor y. w hat ki nrJof i rrl el l ectual would repressive r6gimesbe afraid of? Wouicl they be rnore af'raicl of th e p ro p o s i ti o ng a th e re ro r of the theoreti ci an." T h u s .v e ry p y ra mi d a l th r :ory-fornrati on w oul cl probabl y b* L l u t. : nt cr ei l hcr pr oposit ion.r r : or ll ylc am ong lhe Viking descendant ir bal ancein int eller : t lr .a s i t s e e m s s o o n e ro r l a te r tu l ead to preci sel y that type r:f cl i vi si o n o f l a b o u r. second.epr essive ar r d hence develop inlellcct t r ul bct weenpr oposit ion pr odr l( ii\ ) xl sty leswit h a m or e even hillr unce anclt heor y f or nr at ion.r :rmany.84'1 Theorj'andmethods 0aItung (iult u ny. r t i* ty. T h e p e rs o rrw h o j u st col l ectsrl ata rvi thout i ni bui ns j t w i th t oo r r r ucirnr r nliing becom eslike a st ar r r p collect or . r f . but nr-rt nercessarily antagonistic ol-lcs . nol lr ying t r i keep t t r e t wo apar t 'l l n sayingso.t his sylir alling prc'rcess is presentedand unfoklecl I'on lhe reader who c*n the:n and test for himself. : v hi bit s a good balanccbct 'ul'een t he t wr : . and ihc {n1r ducedby US socialscient ist s. i ndi vi dual i stand non-pol ari zecl : t lre te u to n i cs ty l ew ri t l a rg ec o veri l " rg the rvhol crvorl d! trnteresti ngl y en o u g h th i s n i g h tma re i s i n fa ct w hat i s w ri tren i nto the hi cl den nt e th o d o l i :g y o f n to s t me rh o c lol ogy books: i ndi vi cl ualbri l l i ancci n f ierce r.'rrrrrpetition ultinrately re.s u c h a s Marxi srrr. m or e t lr eor y. r ver s y nleagr e pr oducedby t lle cr it icr s heavyt heor ies of G er m anand Fr enchsr .ly lower levelo{ r cpr essicn societ ies. If th e s ec o rn n l u m i ti ew s ere pol ari z_ed they w oul d procl uce disparate images. thc pol ari zcd a n d n ri rr-p o l a ri z e d v e rs i o n s ?I' hi s w oul ci l rave to fre some ki nd ol h i g h l y 'l ro ri z o n ta ls c i e n ti fi r-: c o mmLl ne rathcr than j usl a conl ntuni ty e n g a g c di n s c i e n ti fi cp l o d u c ti o n. r t a. '.pr oduces the nrin t lr c light o1'som e thc nr by nr eansol' som e cl. ti h i n g n ro re i n tl i e d i r ecti on of s.som e kind of balancebet weeninducr nor r : ti orr ancl deduct it r r . llt cv ar e descr ipt ionof Tablc I all show inr por t at t t inr balances: none of t hr . ilr r pr list ic conclusions..i .a dif ler ent appr oachwit hin t he f r anr ewor ko1 w hat has been said her e il'one want s t o under st andt he r *l. if t ll*ir count r ies. critical analysesof US socicty p'i'r. I nr n of cnur set hinlcingof t he Nor dic cor iiilr ies. ir r r : r . re p re s s i o n ? P u t d ifferentl y.lesshar r r t r l*r cd sonlet hing t o t his. This luaves u s w i th th rc e more possi bi l i ti es that mi ght gi ve some in s i g h tr. whicl.Freudi ani sm (one mi g.they c o u t' Cs i rn p l y b e m u tu a l l y i rre l evantto each < l ther. however . .r in t heor y. refl ecti ngdi l f e re n tc o g n i ti v ec u l tu re s . 1.: k pr ev: r lence aucl hypcr t hct icaldeduct ive st yles in r csciu"r : 1r the cif sci ent if icinquir y in gener pot ent iallv at least iessr .rcti on ral her than thcory fornra ti o n . t heor y inspir u. lt r ollcclion.. I heorie el nrttthor{es 84-5 mo re e x p l i c i tl y s o th a l r i l r a l s o h a v e ta l k e d a b o u t H i tl eri arni snt. Mo re l i k e l y t hai n not i t w nul d l rroduce i rrsi ghts c o u c h e di n te rm s o f p rc l p o s i ti on prodr.busily at And a per sonwho collect sr t t *aning w or k wit h his dat i. Ther e is. with the heavily docun'rentecl. the personw hcr c o l l e c tsd a ta w i th o u t tl re o ry o l the person w ho procl uces theory wi th o u t d a ta ? O n e h y p ti th e s i s nri ght be as l ' ol l orvs: they are afrai d of n e i th e r. t he int cllcciualcult ur esdef inedin t ht : r . t his is ilt leasthighly conr pat iblcwt t lr in t hese I I c( int r asis the r elat ivc.or ient ecl or t heor y. Lr edue t o t he cir cuinst anccs t hat all oI t hese t anr i. w h a t a b o u t th e tl vo versi onscorrrbi ni ng hori zcrnt a l i s m i ru rl c o l l e c ti v i s n irri th e sci enti fi ccurnnrutri ty.or ient ed. par t iclllar lyNor way.rr a ibllow it step by step and clLeck condit ion or a conseiquence. Sweclen t iv and Finland. l l t her eis som et hing it leadst o t wo int ur '*lt ing t o t hat hypot hesis Fir st .rl c th a t school sof though{ are nanl ecl after t h e i r tc u to n i c fo u n d e rs . t ht . Could t hat be becausc And coLr lcl r epr essive societ ies? t llnt .I n te l i ecl ual zerlrnonasl l eri es nei gl bouri i ng r : n e a c l ro th e r h u r w i th a l o w l evel of i nteracti < l n? A n d th e n th e re i s th e v e rti cal . w i th r lut r elat ing i1 1o concr et e f 'act sbecr : nics som et hingcclually i nni: cent . On the other hand" i t i s al so d i ffi c u i t to b e a t te u to rri c c u l tu rc aI thi s: after al l i t i s an i l ' r)portanr a s p e c l{ )l ' te u to n i cc u l tr. An d th i s l e a d ss tra i g h ti o a type of anal ysi s fri ntecl ar but not expi o re d a b o v e : h o w d o th e s ed i fferent styl esrei ate to protrl emsol f re e d c i n r v s .trl ectual !). r t innsof t [s cl om inance bot h at lr om e ar r clabr oad? And. r ir ilr tel lect ualst ylesar e t he pr oduct so{' count r ieswit h im pcr iul lnadi' ( a nr ilit ar y ti on s? .in r lur n inspir cs cl at acollect ir in. zorlanded ar ist ocr acy/ bur eaucr acy m aint aining r el.beary . uni ver s a l i s m ! O n e mi g h t p u t i t th i s w ay: the tsLl toni cstyl e i s tol erabl e whenit is encased i n a p l u ra l i s t i csetti ng. In order to reni ai n hori zontal i t w o u l d h a v e to re fra i n fl ri rn d i vi si on of l abour b' r'havi ngsomepeop i e w o rk i n g h i g tre ru p a n d o th e rsw orki ng l ow er dow n i rr deduct j rr p y ra n ri c l s .l ake aw ay that setti ngancl it b e c o rn e s i n to l e ra b l e .. could it bc t hat snr aller lle by irnperial*traciitions and by intertralclasscontradictionsr:tulr.

not to ntention what a good gallic intellectual can do in his exercise ou the .ed mode of intellectual production. The centre-peripherygradient is an institutionalization of that phenomenon. and has produced attempts to put the tw{} together into a viable methodology. f or t lr e per ipher yof t he per ipher yt he sit uat ionis not so dark.r Rome. those who ottll' sendout and never t'ecleive anything and those who only receiveand never send oLl{ an)/thing. libraries. What one tries to do is to make data and theory hang togetherin a respectably forged chain of words. w oul d be the gencral hypothesi sfor periphery intellectual cultures. As in linguistic systems. From Brussels to Genevaand down tc. By the time a polyglot Dutch sr:cialscientisthas come to grips with the literature of all three (rememberingthat the saxonicstandsboth f o r th e U K a n d th e U S v a ri a n ts!)w hateverori gi ual i ncl i nati orrhe might have had has probnbly been effectively killed. being up-to-date.Insights of real value can be expressed in no lessa tongue than French. T h e s ec o u n tri e s h a v eb e enunder both saxoni cand teutoni ci nfluence.or al. I feel I havc often observedmore creativity al periphery of periphery countriesin an intellectualculinre lhan at universities provincialuniver sit ies in t he cent r ecount r y it self . expensivegatherings and meetings. However .holes only radiates.Nordic social scientistsdo . A n d th e s a m e .Of the gallic style there is very little: no one could possiblyaccuseNordic social scientists of levels of elegance approximatirrgthe most brilliant of the French! On lhq contrary. receives. unlesst her e is except ionalpower and init iat ive and char ism abehind llr cm . They may escapefront the stufof finessand stolid behaviour that are the perennialconsecnuences If such imitation inlo some truly innovative behavir:rur. excessive t ie up wit h each ot her in hor ii'ont al net i ntellect ual com nr unit ies works and a pluralistic spirit of mutual toleranceand coexistence to somethingvery creativecould probably come out of it. or at univer sit ies periphery country. a nod of acceptancefrnm the centre would be tlre key siglt of approval to bring home. cessing and analysisby impressive of this surrounded by "think tanks". Madrid and Lisbr:n and acrossthe Atlarrtic to many of the South American countries. But th*n the French do not expect to be read by people in general. least entertain the liope. The relation betweencc:ntreand periphery cult ur e becom es like t he r elat ion belweena w i th in one int ellect ual t alk about : lhe f or m er ast r ollom er s bri lliant st ar and t he sink. At that point o n e w o u l d p ro b a b l y h a v eto e i therseekrefugei n one of the cul tures alone. and this may huve led to both a respectfor saxonicdatu gathering and documentation and for teutonic speculation and theory formation.rch things will generallynot be ntentionedin ve rb a l d i s c o u rs eb u t k e p t i n t he background. Bu t w h y s h o u l d th i s n o t a lso be the caseol ' the N etherl ands? Here our contention would be that the Dutch are exposednot orrly to saxonicand teutonic illfluencesbut also to gallic. so far computers have not been able to reproduce what a good teutonic intellectualcan do by way of pyranrid construction. The reason is uimple. a master of intellectual commentary. o f c o u rs e . undergoing a processof self-colonizationor else become a bibliographer. t he have t im e or consider at ion periphery may look in other directions and not feel under"any obligation to imitate an imitation. and that to be under the crossfire of three intellectualsrylesis simplv too much.There are peoplewho are like that. as something against which to check one's own approach. Nor are lhe Nordic social scientists so concernedwith intellectnalcontrnentary: what they read about sr. Their major rroncern would be talented imitation. emil$. social scientistswill sleep with their h e a d s p o i n ti n g to w a rd s P a r i s.and so [t woutd almost be a miracle if crcativesocial science florrrishedunder such c o n d i ti o n s . changes in intclleutual cultureswill probably have to take place in the centre or very near the centre to beconrcreal. If they take place at the periphcry they will not be considered as "innovations" but be pnt clolvn as " mist akes". Nordic authors write a legible journalistic prose and in this genre they nright easilyoutdo their lirench colleagues. having the latest news about what happensin the centre.Thei r annual or bi -annual pilgrimagewill be the vital way of rechargingthe batteries.. the in the capital of the to last two categoriesare too busy imitating and being un'r-to^ciilte per iplr er y of t he f or anyt hing else. There is little doubt that lhis rnodeof production is particularly compatible with the saxonicstyle.. In conclusionit should only be added that the last generationhas given a formidable tool of dominance tc) the centre ol' intellcctual stylesfocusing on proposition production: and this ri *r highly industrializ.846 Theuryand methods Galtung {-ialtung Theorie et mdthodes 847 t i o n . i n the memory. and its proall but also expensive conrpttlers. Needless say this would be resentedby the centre of the centr* out to get proselytes and wrongly thinking that the peripheryof the periphery will fall as soon as the periphery itself is conquered.. the latter only absorbs.a0 I am thinking of massivedata collection by big and well-funded teams.

including t he [ ie m r r r . T h e re a re . r iclr in docuur ent at ion and ver y m eagr ein t heor lyr . and the w ay i n w hi ch the s a x o n i c i n te l l e c tu a ls ty l e fi ts the exi gences of thc U ni ted N ati ons and nons y s te rl irn p a rti c u l a ra n d th e s ystemof i ntergovernmental governrnentalorgarrizations corporatic. A s cl asses an y th i n ga t a l l to th e re a s o n i n g g o u p a n c ld o w n . w hat t hey want .\s a corrsequerrce dataori e n te d s u b -c u l tu re si ' . I'hdorie et mithodes 849 b o rd e rl i n eb e tw c e na rt a rrd rc i r:ncc.i ecti ve t h e c o n i b i n e de ffe c t o f th e trv o . pic[ .t his m at er ial. l w o p l renonl cnathat neverthel ess mi ght m a k e o n e th i n k i n te rn rso f a worl d i ntel l ectual styl e: tl rc l i nkage be tw e e ns a x o n i c i n te l l e c tu a ls t yl e arrd the i ndustri al mode of i nt e l l e c tu a lp ro d u c ti o n o n th e o n e hand. Sonr cnf thenr will learn fronr thc others what they do not mastflr them selves.' l ' hel atter tw o are nrore compa ti b l ew i th a n a rti s a n a I producti on.Alt hough t hey m ay behavelike t eut onic and/ or gallic int ellect uals.t. te u to n i c a n d g a l l i c s ty l e sr vi l l nol be ti ed to parti cul argroups in . s a x o n i ci n te l l e c tu a s l ty l c rv i l i l e nd to crop up w here the computers pe n e tra te .The saxonicint cllecluiil style pr oduces such a basis.t he poinr is t hai t he r r r ganizat ions ns t r r cli pat t er ns shor .rvhatare here cal l edthe saxon i c .' i l l e m crge. rich in forrlal language and poor in clegance should [:rc the l anguage t he of t he secr et ar ial$ of t he UN ancl t he UN agencics: me m berst at es ar c equal. Bot h of t hem will be gr asping f r . r per spect ives and l'or nr sof under st anding t hat will put sonr ef lr clr r i nt o t he unt idy saxoniclanclscape of st ubbor nf act s. .rns and transrralional on the ot h e r (s e eR i ttb e rg e ra n rJC a l l u ng. h o w e v e r.singthose ternis rather than national labels. ancl there is en o u g h d i v e rs i ty i n s tru c tu ra l posi ti ons both anrong ancl w i thi n c o u n l ri e s to e n s u re d i ft' e re n ces i rr i ntel l ectual styl c i f there i s i n the precedi ng secti ons.rrl i v i n g-roorn. T h e rei s e n o u g hcul turalvari etyi n the w orl d. so too w i l l tl rei ri rrtel i ectual styl es an d c o u n tri e s u' i th l a g s a n d l e a d s .b u t i t n ra y be a saxoni c' froj arr horse.' [' hus. ll and t he gove A ssenr bly on t he ot her . some of it carried by languagesof very different kinds. Conclusion: are we hcading for a world intellectualstvle? I d o n ' t th i n k s o . . And t hat is all t o t he good: it would bedr eadf ul if t he ent ir c hunr an int ellect ualer r t er lr r ise wer e t o be guided by t he r anie intcllect ualst yle. saxonicst yle. com ir r gin on t op ol. Under neat ht he slvles w i ll live on: t he t eut onswill cont inuet o be ir r it at edwhen t lr e 1l*t "r ls become too lyrical. tnost ol i t to c u l tu reb ro u g h t a b o u t b y th e i r n ew ob. 4.ferrtoni a and w i l l fi n d th e i r pl aceand generate C a l l i a c o rn p u te rs rnyri ads of data in s e a rc ho f mo re i n te rp re ta ti oi lthan tl ' retheory cl asses of these c o u n tri e sw o u l d e v e r b e a b l e to l troducc..doi ng the n ro c l e o l i ntcl l ecfual r vn rk a t h t.leavinga t hin t r ail of dat a behind.:articular countriesbut can lrr seenas sornethingon the move. t he gauls will cont inue t . It i s easyto secw hy the B ut all t hat is on t he sur f aceof t he wor ld. c o n d i ti c l nedby' ci l cumstanccs.rn re The i n o fl e ' so $ .in polar izat ions the wor ld syst em . probabl y as detached frcl m lh e o ry fo rm a ti o n a s th c tl i c o re ti ci ans are fronr proposi l i onprodLrcg i v i n g li o n . S ome of thi s r v i l l b e d u e to th e i r s tru c l u ra lp osi ti e n re a n so l ' p ro d u cti on 1cla l arge extent condi ti oni ng t l re m o d e o f p ro d u c ti o i l . 198I).84tl 'l'heoryund mtthoris Galturtl4 Gahutr.t h$r '*is a needif not f or consensus at leasl for a basison which gent luur r n can ar gue. someol i t to the changes in posi ti by bcl oks. At t he sam e t im e it r einf or cesllr * di slinct ionbet weent he pr olessionals of t hc secr et ar iat and t hc t t u( si deconsult ant s on t he onq hand deliver ing t he r aw m at er ial lor {[ l* de bat e r ning bodies. [:v e n i n the l reartl andol . l n d s o ci alposi ti onas hi story moveson. but by and lar gc what is t he vir t ue of one will cont inue to be the vice of the other. Obviously there are strongerforcesttriln met hodologyt exi books wilh t heir claim s t o univer salvalidit y at w or k.r ld not have t hese behaviour al bLr iltint o t he secr et r iat ul . iiu1.W h a t comes()u1of thi s i n the l ong ternt r e m a i n sto b e s e e n .or at leastso it seem s. to th e en l i re i ntel l ectual systenl a somew hat s r:h i z -o p h re nc ic h a ra c te r.and t hr saxuns w i ll cont inue t o get r est less when t he t eut onsand t he gauls speed off int o out er space. one c h a n g i n gg e o g ra p h i c aa more reason for u. f'or instancewhen they change one lvord for anot her wit h t he sam e nr eaningin or der t o obt ain sonr e slvlist ic variat ion or euphonic ef {'er ctand . o be bor ed by t eut onic pedant r v. put t ing it ir r t o t heir var ioust hought syst er ns r i'it ir pr uducedby t he shar p cont r adict ionl r : f ' the buih.

a fondnes sfor i nv ers i onli l purs ui t of the mul ti pl i c i ty of hunran ex pc ri e nc e. l he hy pothes i sw oul d be l hz l t mathernati c alec ri notri c si n a pre dorni nantl y s ' ax oni c c ul ture w i l l be rnore l i k e an i s l honour s o hi gh that co ur{ es ybec omesl es s than nec es s ary .Thus Ogura K i nnos uk e.B ut that nl eansthat the materi al a n d so cia lco n d itio n s u n d e r u ' h iclr th is w ork i s donr-beconrea rnaj or factor i n con' d itio n in g th e o u tp u t. B othof thenrareenrpi ri c al approac hes . p a p e r p r e p a r e d fo r th e CPID p r o je ct ( C al tung. On e r e a so nfo r th is. an ac ul r s ens e of paradox and ambi gui ty . Itr tua l l y no rel ati on to dai l y l i fe. 4 .tl ogy ideal<tgy. N ordi c c ountri es . In other w ords . P c rs pc -c ti v cfront hi gher al ti tudes are us ual l y i nrported. u n il' e r si ti e. T o yn b e e u se ssu ch te r m s. to a vo id to o str o n g id e n ti fi cati on w i th cotrrrtri cs. thr' l )S approac h as s enrbl e w oul d be more ex tc ns i v e. w e process. 19 6 5 . l 'he reason i s . i n the teutoni cs ty l e "S i e haben ni c ht erw ai hnt. a s sta te d . betw eenthe i ntel l ectualessenri al l y d u str ia l m o d e s o f in te lle cr u a l w orki ng a lo n e a n d in te lle ctu a ls wo r kin g to gerheri n "factori es" u'i th (usual l y)sharp di vi "l 'hi sthr:rnei s dcvel opedi n a s i o n o f la b o u r . a n d n e ( lto d s. 2 . Il est know n as a peace r e se a r ch cr . w i th Marx i s t l eani ngs . A Spanish version was published in Revis/a Latino Ameri<'onu de Sociolt:giz l(l). It wo u ld h a ve b e e n u se fu l if Kant had expl ored more hi s ow n l i nri tati ons i n e xp lo r in g th e lin ita tio n s o f th c:h u m a n rni nd * nol "hi s" i n a personalsense. acadami es. In sh < lr t. l i nri (ed arc asof i nqui rl . 17.i lstructureand the cri teri a oi l r u th se e "So cia l str u ctu r c a n cl sci ence structure". a ci vi l i zati on r'f w hat not. 14. I' h u s. l l . 13.lJ50 'l-heoryand ntr:tltods Caltung Galtung fh6orie el mdtkodes 851 ir a r prcsenr P roj ect C oordi nator at r}}e l nsti rur Jo h a n Ga ltu n g { b o r n 1 9 . 9 .U S s oc i ol ogy. Paris. i n the w av e of bri l l i ant perhapsus ual l y w i th a teul oni c bent. Thes e t$' o l y pes nray be l i nk ed l o (l onfuc i ani s nr and mahay ana l l uddhi s nr respecitv el y . 7 2 . pp. c ri ti c al .1 0 ) u n ive r sita ir e d ' e tu d e s d u d fvclo p penrenl i n Gencva.ful l of adnri rati on * to one of the gallic masters. secS . This paper appeared in Social St'ience InJormation 5 (3J.) E s s enti al l yi t i s the ol d di s ti nc ti on bet$een i deographi cand nomotheti c approac hes . c ons rruc l i v eand pra gnrati cas pec ts ol s c i orrti fi c ac ti v i tv . eri rbedded Insti tuti onal l y i t nri ght al s o be i s ol atedi n pl anni ng s ec ti ons as i n the i n a pol i ti c al c ul turc w ' i tha more teutoni c bent . in th e e xp lo r a tio n o f co smol ogi es(Gal tung. 19. Thus. May tenc l * i t c r-rul d al s o be a ganre i n i 1s ow n ri ght. 8 . There are ac tual l y al mos t no fheori esof any thi ng bey ond the nri ddl e rangei n. Thus the r:pc ni ngphras ei n thr' gal l i c s ty l e di s c us s i on v er) w el l hc "j e ne nraJ / su i spas d' ac c orc l ".str u n lcnt of l i berati on. but abl e to adapt to the Ioc al Je w i s h refugees . 10.butrv hereas the:tJ K approac hw oul tl a w eai th of i ns i ght on s el ec ted. taken from a review of Michel Foucault's Surveiller et punir (Gallimard. d istr u st o f we s ternanfhropol ogi sts). pp.i n hi s "A ri thrneti c i n a C l as s S oc i ety " (1974) s ay s : "C hurc hl y ari tl rrrreti cbas ed on B oethi us ' theory of nunrbersdi c l not i nc l ude methods of c al c ul ati c i n. 3 " F o r a n e xp lo r a tio n o f th e r e la tion betw eensoci . Thi s i s a B ri ti s h (S ax oni c ?)reac ti on ." Thus nruc h w ork w as dev otedto the l heory of perfec t numbers . [6. 7 . I5. Thi s i s dev el opedfurther i n "S oc i al s truc tureand s c i enc e s truc ture. i nc l udi ng i ntel l ec trral l v ay be thal c an onl y w oul d us ual l y nol be eas i l ynrai ntai nedco rnpartmental i z ati on oc c ur i n a c l as s .e. al least for sorne time. 18. T'hqtor.a remark abl e us e of i nrages . is that those w ho ha\'$ struggl edi n thei r earl y. and s tres s ed us co ntras tto thi s thc al i thmeti c of the bourgeoi s i e c ons i s l ed mai nl y 0l c al c ul ati ons i ng Indi an s y rnbol s . o f co u r se is th e r e a so n why j ournal i snr. On thtl other hanc l . thougfr s uc h pert' ec l as pc c tsof hunran ac ti v i ty . b u l I am not tryi ng to l ti cl ebel ri nd hi nr.h e h a s a lso n r r d e n u n rercl us contri buti ons i n thc fi el ds of devel orrm e n t slu d ie s a n d fu tu r e stu r licsin addi ri on to hi s w ork ol l soci ol ogi caltheor'). c hapterr3. ". B ul thal wa s n o t a n a g e o f co m p a r a tivestu d te ll!' ctu a ls < Jt> wctr k. S ui sse.rt' ns tr i l el i v i s nr: 1'h rc er and as pec tsof s c i enti ti c ac ti v rty ". 1975) in the Times Literary Supplement 26 September 1975: "T hi s book di s pl ay s onc e agai n al l the di s ti nc ti v eFouc aul t trai ts -.i . for i ns tanc e. s ee "Irnrpi ri c i s nr. A uthor's uttd r e ss.U s i ng Indi an s y ml rol s . i s ol al ed from othel ' ac ti v i ty .. Il . i ntel l ec tualc ul ture) and al s o frorn Lati n A nreri c a (dependenc i a theory ). 5 . 6 .bccause of the author's i gn o r a n se ( a n d . my trtiok. C raci arena(1965) i n the samej ournal . T h is. Cu r r e n tll' 1 r t' is e n g agedi n a study of cosnrol ogi es.i t s houl d be poi ntc d out that i n both s ty l esnrc rel yto be found w ortl ry ofbei ng l i s tc nedto and ev en c onrmentedupon i s al roftdys omethi ng.eneve. On e e xa n r p lewo ul d be the di l l erence betw eenarti sanaland i np r o d u cti on. Notes l." c hapter 1 iu Papers on nethodologt.s.1966.ev en a c as tes oc i ety .and s tres s ed c ommerc i al appl i c ati ons . i s ol ated i ntel l ec tual l y approac h. Afr ica r r a n d Paci l i c ci vi l i zati ons.African language.handl e more uni ts of anal y s i sw i th l es s(but c oml rarerbl e) i nfornrati on on as many of them as pos s i bl e. 1980). frorn E urope (e. 6 = | + 2 + 3) bec aus c(hey "w i tnes s edto the w i s dom of the C reator of the uni v ers c " (p. 7-33.(' thi s di s ti nc ti on i s ex pl ored i n Theory anrl methods of s o< ' i alres earc h. T h is is d e ve lo p e din m o r e d e ta il i n my "l n det'ense of cpi stemol ogi cal ecl ect icism " ( 1 9 8 0 a ) . . c ri ti ei s nr. H .p p . a cla ss.g.pi tl i ng one ci vi l i zati orragai nstthe other i n a s ym m e tr ic wa y. chopter I. B ut i nrel l ectualstyl e i s l ocared a t a le ve l d e e p e r th a n la n g u a g e :it m ay survi ve the tral tsi ti ol t from w orki ng i n a European language to working in an .but " h is" a s a p a r t o f a n a tio n .' ln stitu t u n ive r sita ir cd ' { ' tu d esdu d6vel oppement. C . A l atas (1977) f or a su ccin cta n a lysiso f th e si{ u a tio nof i rrtel l ectual is n many cl evel opi ng coun(ri ei i . s uc h c ompel l i rrgl uc i di tv relentl es s . l ro m c ommerc i alc ol l eges and bus i nes s s c hool sw i th a nrore data-ori ented ofnti ni s (ri es . f o r m a tive ye a r sto a cq u ir ca n in te lle ctualstyl e so as l o be acceptedas a member of a c o m m u n ity wo u ld n o t e a silyg ive ( h a t up * and certai nl ynot tend to seei t as an i nrp e d im e n t r a th e r th a n a s a n in . l i ke l esearch. p e r h a p s.1 0 1 .4l -71: i n Me' thotl t:. l 3-40 i n Methodology ond ideology.c hapter L1.g.perhapsw i th the ex c epti onof P ars ons{ unl es s c ne s ees s this ty pe of w ork nl ore as tax onomi c ex erc i s es than as theory ). l 98l )referencesaretotal l y missin gto Am e r in d ia n .A l sci .i t had v i r(he oc c ul t s i gni fi c anc eol numbers .i s supposedto i de n tify th e so u r ce s:th e r e a d e r is e n ti tl ed to eval uarethe crei l i bi l i ty. o f co u r sc. i ntegers equal to tl re s unr ofdi v i s ors (e.a (radi ti in k ta n ks.' l w c c i l errrpri c i s t. For an efl i rrt to bui l d a bri c l geb.2. is subdivided that w a y.Se ea lso th c cr itiq u e by J.t' and methods of sociol research. 22).

wit!.onr * l rat i \ ()n l l l c c x arni nel s ' rni ri c l .rnl c ri nl c . tl l L' n t a ( b e r n a tiza ti< ln i r ruspcndedbetw ecn l tri etw o.t.rr.\)' rrc rl r\.o sion c)ne of these r i ch in th is. c i l rr beronrc .e clOistin n Cn r cr r l".l apattese a lwa ys r a ise sin h im se lf lh e q u e stio n ' thi s or l har'? (uru ka knr.a n d h ig h lr cl{ l8i i l l l .its) .rvi th such unki ttd remarks as: ()j )/.v" (p' 1090th e so ttlltt.i okc: "E i rtstei n at (he B ern r ailwa y sta tio n .l 9-{ . 21 .t.) At' r ( 171rr) a n cl sift.rl ni tl g i n t0 ii p a ttcln o { d r :n sc.c sIor l tl w l evel sofgettcral pal ti C i pati 6nand e X lr e n leve r tica litt. rrrenti orr c i )c rrrs s 12.l opun p i ctu r e o f lh e sta te Of th r r o cia l scie r '|ces i ri .t!rJ rcl ati ol ts.i n(l tl l e Ic l c l to ti re pri rnac y ol ' l hr l { r7rol .o ti gl I s arorti r pc rs ptc l i v e. w hi c l r tc nded to gi ' . rl i rr..i n(i J rra\l .:r l l ' I6dai .i l c -ti rrrcc ri rpl tr-v ri rc ri has l i rl l l rt' uni l c rs i l \ \-\ . ttr e sla b lisha lin e b e twe e nth is a n d th a t. n o t t( ) n lcn lio n .hi i i l l l t.S :trti 1.t r<''i :l n('r\l l i r. T'he frOm ul ti ch 1()y) i s rrti t an etri ttrtt e q u a liOn .' c r. r ccip ie n tn r cn l .:nrri : c c ' rti f i c att' sc l as s i l 'ifttg ol l l c r.r rt11 'Thioie et lne!ltlde!. anc l by thc J roc ul i ur c ui l ural as s unrpl i c rrrs o{ ' t} rc [J S i rr generalarrd i Lsc l i tt:s i n pi rrti c ri l ar.therr al c adc l i ti onalrc as ti nsl or l hc l c ti )i i l gy oi rtrc nrbc rs c r1:. N l ueh w ork goc s i ni o i . (pp. dharna. cat'tt sul 'fi ci enti nsi ght dttcs nol al <rtre s e n te n ce s. by tl l c s truc (uralpos i ti on of the LJ Si n tl rc uorl d (and of U S erononi ' i l ri i rl cokrLrred the l .l apanese t i l u d e . and l l udcl hi stl i teraturei s ver) is wh a t p r odttces sfa le r n e n ts b e twe e n t$ .97). F lis ir r cn ch a n cl( ie ttttan col l cagttes uhi tnatel y nl crel y g c b e sl a n ) o n g th c rttrri cnts.l S ec orl < )i ri r* i ".rl l } f s ol ()r{ l ).secl . flo <l { c l rri c ohj c c ti v i tv .hav r:i ai l c itr' cul tu ral s pc c i l ' i c i tyol J i rpanc s cs oc i al s c i enc c :ti rc J apanes curay br: i rrtrr* tc tl i n sol re tl ri rrgc l i l l trc ' rrt l r. . 'l upttttese authors stal c ti l al the esscnti al ( M a r yktL o ll.S . 29 .l i :d r:l c ttrent i rr ti i c tl ai ni trg of a s uc c c s s rrr r\l l l rc i r \ a i l rrc ts s i l ry by a s c ni trl prr' { r:r-. N orth A nrc ri c an s oc i al s c i enti s ts s c enrparti c ul arl y prrrnc to ti l i nL l i l l l rvha l thc ""* c l o j s uni v ers als oc i . 2 2 .l s r' ' 1i ' nr.".1979).i l 11r ti on ol thc w ork ol otl l c rs . i . \. l lre outgroup c :tl rnotbc a j Lrc l ge i n s uc l l nrattc l \.e l 'l ol Frangai shy A l ai rl P eyrel 'i tte.. k e tes tsoi s trc ngths erv i ngs el l r:nrtfi rrl l tti l tt l lr* l i rrnr ol paral l c l nrr:rrol ri grrc is ral l rer l harr a c ()l ]]l l rons i i arc l rf()r s oi rc l hi ng new .A nd l hc s ec ()r)d rcl !'rs to l he i nrporl arrc c ar:t' ortl c d hav i ng enough ntal eri al l br aderi rral c i :i as s j l i r. V erv l i tl l c c } . V tj ry i undarrental i rr the c ari y fi rrnrati onol . b a scd p r e cise lyo n th e pri nci pl c of courrrer"pt. tnr:l i r: i tenrr urtl 27 " l n thc es s a)) gi rc'n i n "a fi l s t gui c l er() l eul ()ni i ii ntc l i ec tuals ty l c " 1p1:.i rrrrrv v i c w .vste n ts "l .o n r r h e in ia lid .i ngtl re proi c s s oi c l Larrtl e. l J -5) A rrd s < . d es Scie n ce s B a lle a n d lr d n r u n ci["e ite s.n borc l ers . 2 4 .thc l i rs t. l rrertch tl l c (i S s(udcl tl sare i n cl as-sr<trtttts: a l d Clcr n r a nstu d cn ls..oo ntarryi tts l anc es (P . i ri r :. A c erti fi c atej ol l c c i s s uc d..' l . etc .p .l tc tl i r()uLl h a s l udl ' o1' l hc l i tc ral p a n e se u tltl.i . a m o n g u n ivcr sitie s al l he Mai son to l hc di scttssi i tn a s o n e n lo ve s wcsl) is n o t p r o d u ccd .i l h c br.l apanes e w us rhc i nrportal i ol r o1' (i c l rrran.l uri s prudenc e. 5. the l $. I anr i rrtl cbtecl i n parti ctrl al to C i i l hefi nc d e l' llo u ir n e fo r so r n co l thescobsgrvati 6ns..l s i r' frl (\anl .thei r c()l l (l agtl cs. T h e str u ctr r litli:n t o l ( lla u cL : I ili-S tl :rLtssi s 1<tntc i i n exarttl l l ctrf tl ri s. ?8 . tradi ti on ov er t} rc i rrdi V i dunl r:i ti r":. thi rc l rtruorc s qui rl i t coD l pc ti ti v cw es tern tradi (i orr n' i l l r uni v ers al i s tpretc ns i ons . not "t.i si ti on.R ather. Ihc gc nc raJs ty l e ol di .rrl " by bri ngi ng i n nc r l c i c as (p.'Lrl )..1114 rrrl k * no di s ti rtc ti orr c rrl ]' a c . LJK .tsac c c l l tanc c are . [' rc qttr:ntl y ' s oc i al s c i c nc c rc s c arc h i s c orrr.l v'ci l 's ( r h u i s a hi gh l cvel ol parti ci pati oni u h i gh le vclso f a o n e . F o r a n iin a lysiso t"n r tr cho 1 ' tltis.1 .rrrrs c 's c ri ous arrd hurnourl es s .parti cul arl y chaptcr as "l l s sonl tuuS di reC teurs" r vilh cr r clr strb-sccl i ons 3 1.852 Theory and nrelhctds Caltung (irrl/l. s y s l c r... . rel i gi ttusal ' 2 5 .i { )l c \ trrt rl onis ol l ac k of l ai th i n w hat onc s ay ' r.rpan.clo e s ztir ich sto p a t lh i$ rrui n'.l i ct.. ac c c ptanc e ol tl ri : tradi l i ori r)l c ar1\ tl rat ()nc ol ' tc rrhes i tan::"roc k i rl _r or approac hc s i rr{ oIhc urri v c rs i l . w i rereasthe fa ils r o u n d e r sta n dth e n tca n ingol sucha dual i sm and w i l l l l l w aysrcneal to J a p a n e se " tl ut thctrri cs are ther( i Il ordcr l (r \()rt h im sclf' th is a n d Ilia r to o ' ( d r c n t. . .sltt'rttrrtt'!he [ ' o u ca u lt' s r r ca tir tve r sio tr !:\. tl re t l nsel f to th\' l )on-acadeni i c a n to n g stu d e n ts* p e r h a p scve n a d d r e ssi ttlhi uotl l d certai nl )/not do l hal ..:.Ll l uc i :e l hat l herc j \ a gl ei { l deati i ce c ons eqU c nL' l .hal rr sonrc{}ti ngrvorl h rtyi ng' Thi s i s w i t| the sl t>wand l hc l gu' in ( h e a ttittl< lco fr h e IJS p r 6 f gsspr.n t. of pri s\ti l <l f l ht fuul .rrr.i rti :tc d . parti c ul atl y as i t w as l aunl hui i i rr ti ri :c * ti . thr: frue frorn thc fal se.' nc " tai :rrl l i c s l:o() r)r{ l n).s i ni not t he l eas tdue to the homogeni z i ngi nf' l uenc e of the c entralgov en)nrerl lngrnr::i * s . attd C i crttuttt S l udcnl snl uch French Il K .rratl d \(l C IaS pC Ii . 312-26). l h e y a r c a d cJr e ssinth and the p r o fe sso r sa rc al qo operati ng i n cl osed s-!-stenl s' t h e m se lve s. fri s i tl er.l aprrucsc.s c gl )r to l ac k a v i s i on ol . Thus . a n d tltt lcitl.l l i t)' and i s i tsel l so strati l i ed i n castes t e flia r y e d u ca tio n .. th{ ' l l H i r. rl rrc l l wi thdraw n.\ tlta t tltt. uo\/el ] t h e two p ylo n s r e le r r ccllo . w h o le co m n tu n itv.l ls c i enc c .re Ieal ni rr-e.tCa d Ct .ni an\ s c hol arl y es s l n.i us lrv hl t thc s oc i al \!i c r)c esi l rc or' i nac l equi tt* i itrai rtr:tl . NY. T lr e OECD r e p o r t \tttia l scie r cepol i t. [)i s c us s i orrs i. T h is is p u t ve r y wcll in F e r n a n do M. l l or. 2 3 . th e va lid fi.r l l rc i r c thn()c r' n{ ri c on l eul urri c i ri tel l c c tuais l 1' l c((i al turrg. ti7 : ". II.(p i l 5) . . . t c3\()ni ng.i s ). 2 0 .t-.a:b and x:\. l c c ri ai i r i rtrpl i c ati orrs ol i rrbrc c di rrg w hi c h i s norr:r.rrri rrl -1 b ook s . 1 9 1 2 ) . D c rri al s()f tl rei rv al i drti .o ftlr e s.c c l v ol ous and i nc l i c ati v e s oc i al s ei c ich " b u t i nsi ght.r:ri airi :i r. B ut thc al l -J apanc s c s etti ngi s i nc rea.. 851 t r t r titiCa l n a r .. "ec onomi c s " as s uc h. Tl rei r j udgerrerrlrr i l l nnl y rr:l ' l c q:t bas i c nri s tak es .cr." An cl llr t rcvi cw cr gi vcs l tn cxantp[: of "ol tr.Tl rc Ol i { l )c ' x anri rrc rs . n r y-ita lics) . s ehool s . I' hrrs . i s l i ke A ndr[ it nor n r a d e s t r icr clcd u ctio n s a r e 0 l kin Sh ip r e la lit.r u tl rrubl c i i rrpctu s i n tl rc di rec ti on ol ' thc tc utoni c s ty l e. l l renrs el v c si. b u r th e n th a l lt' r liili-vecl ut'l tti tttt a n d witlr ir l. r n q u ir in g a b o u t tr o in s t0 Zti ri ch w otrl d nol ask 'rk:esthj s trai n stop .. I a n in d e b te dto Ha ka n Wib cr g l or the fol l ow i ng. They al c .s bc l rv c c np()l i ti c ari rl trrl l rgl ' .. l l l l l I ri nr n()l dc ny i rrgthat the c rarl i nc rs arc al .r.l (U cl l l cl qi 1fl rn1161g111r u n c lcn ia b le se lf. s c c r) . groups . {lrq:i r d() n()t tak r tl rc l i rrnr o{ di al ogue(or nrr. T h is is n lso we ll r e fle cte din th t v erv di l 'l ercnl bel tari our of l l S . tb r th c a skin g h i gh ly m or e co n ce n te d with wh e th e r lh ( Y l( al l w s l l .l .aIl i c J c s .rl ti l oguc rihul } .a :b :: r :y ( a r e la tcs1 ( )h 3s X rrl l i l ti :s b a siC (1949) l anrous \.t fi rrc i $rrs oc i al s c i r:nc e tc rts l nd r!i al eri al s .s l i cs i n tl rtr I'act that the {'orntct d iffe r e n ce b e twccll We ste r n n ta n a n cl the .. (1977)'gi vcs a hi ghi y negati ve 2 6 .{ ) 5 i ou. ral l r clu lg cn ce .i gni i i c :utc t trc ol thc s truc (ure. i t i s undc l tak c n l o i nl r()duc e1rrtI l ri i l rs i i .. n()l l f) u i l l tak e pl . p a r ticip a t0 r l.a b oo k wr itte n ve r y n tu ch in th e g a llic sty l c by anothcI l l l i tsl cr . c9ncertred r e fle cte cl w orl d.' fh e ." A gai rr i t i s the sal l restory: the teni n Z i. thal the tJS parti ci pti toryetfect (parti cul arl )' c l a sse s. e ve n th a t r lu t in Ein ste in ' slltoi !(i .. authors . kantu ancl m o ksh a . B esabe. T h c cla ssica le xa n r p leb e illg r lr e i rr<l i i i si bi l i rl <t{ l l l t' 1rl w i th d r a wa l in to x \o ca b u la tr yh cr n r r lic 1o l l )c ur)i rriifatccl . i n otber w ords.

but the approac h I tak e i n Fal l ..d e d u ctive 38 .rr fornts: { l re ci rrl e. O. EjlersPapers on methodolag"y.'rank Ctrss. e x pr e ssin gitse lf in th e n r a u y e ffo r ts t ow ards "uni fi ed sci ence".L r clid cag ne omel r\. o n ly X0 io " a r e n o t so d il' fe r e n tfr o n r r lr e di l l 'i errl ri es i n getti ng i i bcral s to w ork "exp l o ita tio n " in to th e ll lh i:r :r cr ica l1 ' r a n tew orkr. to thc efferr rhat e e i n the w orl d" nnd that ti rey "c l i s pl ay thc [)utei t are "the n]os t ((.l earl . 31 . n kfo r m e n ( 1 l) JI ) . T h is ve r y p a p e r wa s e ve n tr iggeredoff'by a remark oncc nracl e i n the U S b y a US h o u se wife wh o wa s co lle ctin g sonre reci pes: "l am goi rrg to rhe l i brary t o m o r r o w r o d o a little r e se a r ch o n th e s ereci pes". w ri tten i n the language o f Ru d o lf Ca r r r ilp .eiscg a n gDe ./orrnob. M o r e p a r ticu la r ly. l."S oc i o-c ul tural fac tors and r. 15 . Ash isNa n d yh a sp cr in r e d o u r r o n lethal i rnri ghrbel rui rl ul l ornakeadi sri nct i o n b e twe e n b r a h n r a n ic a n d su clr a ic i ntel l cctr"ral styl es. E s s ay s rc s eart' h. Copenhagen. * c hap.854 Theory and melhod. D e V ol k . i n l r$ Ial r.crrclon./r tr n .. 3 7 . I se e th i. 5.j ects arrd e\cn(h are Iogi cal l y r e f a te d wh ich wo u ld n o t h e la wfu lly rel atcri accordi ng l o othur l )enk. (i al turrg. Allerr antl l. Mary k nol l . Il o v enk erk . F o r th e d istin ctio n b ( . th c wo r cl "consci errce" bei ng morc appropri ate. A l ttrnati t. Ins ti tur LJ ni l ers i tai re d' 6tudes du ddv c l oppment(C P ID P apers ).twe e n in le llectual ratrd i ntcl l i gentsi a. . Ejlers. Actu a lly. Prrss.stenr i s l ogi cal l y" 1p. 1 9 7 9 ) : ". M.)ns c rv ati vpeopl the nrerrtal i ty of an ac c ountan(". A ke y p r o p o n e n t o f th is in th e Nordi c c:ountri es has been A rne N aess. On e isr e m in d e d o f th e g o a l o fr h e V i ennaci rcl ebefcrrethcscconclw ri ri du.E j l ers . pp. a n cl tr .. ' l l. T h e wo r d "lo g ica l" in th is p a ssage.orkout. Ag a in . 8. tile style u se d b y a tjS soci al sci entrstw hen enp'. sec Fl . F. 1967 t975r 980 1977 1979 Theory and nrcthods in sociat research. J 9. May be.Jnrvin. I. a rev i ew of !l a uri c c l )unc h.C enev a. l i n g h yo th e tico .res as i nteTrotrn+. 3 4 .'I'ok1. the D uk e of B uena.e a r th . B ov enk erk . w i th o u t e a sily d e te cta b le ir r co n sisle ncyand tl i strrrbi ng the l ogi cl l consci ence" ( p . sonrel hi ngl i ke the cl i stj rrcti uns ntade i n note I 8 a b o ve . 136-160. i n peu< ' e Methodctlog-v' und ideology.H e i s quoti rrg. behi rrd l he poi nts q u o te d in n o te 2 7 . New York. cLrfor that nratter peopl e i n general w o uld u se . l -c t' note 2 abov e. S c i ent' e und sociely it? tnotlern . fornrul ntcs [-ei segang's appi onch as fol l ow s: s De u k.i s probatrl i . S . tl )o cxtent to w hi ch " t h e d o n r in a n t in te lle ctu a lstyle is th e in tel l ertual styl e of the donri rri .to .o [Jnivcrsity. o ne funcri on of the stri cr di vi si on i nto school s i s t o m a ke th e a r g u n r e n ts e xo g e n o u s to one's crw rr school i rrel evanl .\oj . hencereduci ng I h e r isk o f fa lsifica tio n .e ise g a n g 'vicw a w o r fd vie w. N ak i l y anta et i i l .(ieneva. C openhagen. rhi r r:rgani zati on of tl rtrught. th e tr e m e n dous [orce oi the 6l i tes. T h e wa y th is is cr p r e sse d in "D educri vc thi nki ng and pol i ti cal pracri ce" ( C a ltu n g .sa s a so u r ce o f cr p la r r ati on. References A l atas . -lokyo. 194-209.J .ar. T a kd ir Alisja h b a na. He o p e rate s i ri th l i rr. ver-"rnuch basrrl on thi nkers i n w e sle r na n tiq u ity."" in g e ttir r g l\4 a r xisl l f{\ ptescnl N l al xi srrri n a w av that w oLrl d n r ake il su b je ct to su ch e n r p ir ica ltcstslhl t cuncl l rsi ons ofthe type "rror l 00V oval i d. so cie ty o n d cu ltn r c ( 1 9 6 6 ) . <'ulturrt and languages as carriers ol c'osnrolog. B c s abe. J ..agcd i n cri ti cal a n a lysisis ve r y sin tila r to th e $ tyle a jo u rnal i sl . l -V .F o r thi s ro l r. the ci rcl eof c i r clcs.)urtt for thc l rc k of ori gi nal i ty ' j rr D utc h s oc i al s c i c nc ei s a di fl erenr one.e d il' iicu lt. ancl a nraj or one. "D educ ri v e rhi nk i ng and pol i ti c al prac ri c c :A n es s ayon Teutoni c i ntel l ec tuals ty l e". l l i s w hol e app r o a ch is ch a r a cte r ize d b y a n e ffo r t r o bal ancei trducti onand decl ucl i oni n a spi ral p r o ce ss.i th i ntc l l c c tLralhar s i ng rnrrrropol y on i ntel l ec tualw ork . 1980c The true worftls. th c p yr a r r r id .url cl asses"(ro p a r a p h r a seM a r x) sh o u ltl b e ke p t in m ind.i r:gro ac c (. h o we ve r . S.s k rantA prtl K i nnos uk e. horvever. the fornrer bei ng nrore e s o te r icth e la tte r n r o r e clL r wn .thr l trrotvs ol i nf e r e n ceb e co n r ea r r o ws o f ca u sa tio n .hi ghl y i n f lu e r r tia lth r o u g h h is a d va n ce dwo r k in phi l osophy of sci ence and methodol ogyas w e l i a s th r o u g h h is te xtb o o ks fo r p r o p cdeuri ccoursesi n phi l osophy. F. too strong i f i t r e fe r s to Ar isto te lia n lo g r c. IDBI Struclure.l ev c l opme rrt of s oc i ol ogy i n Lati rr A nreri c a". . F o r a n ( ) th cr a p p r tr n r li in th is ii el d. seetl rc paper "On ( Ca ltung. Free Press/Macmillan. soci al rcul i ty has to be as s t r on g ly co u p le d e n r p ir ica llyls a d e d u cti vesl .trl avoi dabl l to " l n L . 4 0. ev c n r. u.. pp. wh ich i sderi rctl fronr real i l y.Copenhagen. N ew Y ork . l 98l "Fi v e c os mol ogi es : A n i mpres s i oni s ti c i ntroduc ti on". sin ce in a i:cn r r lwilh o n e D e r e is a fu n d a r lental i sonrorphi snrberw eencl ecl ucti on and c a u sa tio n .F...c hap.lapan.s Galtung (iultung I heorie et mithodes 855 3 0 .v ol s . t"l . p r ir r e va r ia b lcs r r r fa cto r s are al so pri nre nrovers. 2 0 8 ) .b r in g in g in speci al i sts i n al l ki nds of fi el ds (thc Internotional encyctopedia of unified science).v:An r\:..s e rel i pi ousatti tudes . "S oc i ol ogi e i n N ederl and deugt ni et" (1981). L.l i l c trrr{ i nLrous ts : o s eparate * ' orl ds . 1 2 . The D e n kJitr m itse lf co n stitu te slh e se r ) sc o f w hal i s l cl ated and how . 1981). 36 .. i n thei r soci eti es t h e d ista n ce b ctwce n e ve r vd a yth in kir r g and sci *nti fi c thi nki ng bcrn1l consi derabl y fri gl rc r. l 98l "S i rc i ol ogi e i n N ec l c rl anddeugt ni t' t". i n an efforr to ex pl ai n the "depl orabh s rareof affairs " thr nrc nroi rsof the S pani s hdi pl omat. i n: S .formen. 1980a In deJbnseoJ tpistemolttgicat eclecticistrt.onclon. I .ft)rces i n pers o na lir y. l 9' 74 "A ri thnreti c i n a c l as s s oc i ety ". Insti(ur (inirersi(aire d' €tudes du d€rel oppement(C P ID P apers ) 1980b On the i l s ( o/' i ntel l ec tual s as a c l as s . 1972 J apane. 1980b).. )01). S ee [i . " [)utc h s oc i oi ogy and uni v c rs i tl ' r' efbrnr l * ' etens c l tap" (. A C erman or French l rousew i fe w o u ld h a r tlly lr a ve u se d su ch e xp r e ssio ns for that type of acti vi ty. N i s hi mura.S o< i al e pe n Z4 (l ). t C al tung. t h e r isc o f in te lle ctu a lsa s a cl::r ss" 3 3 . 1917 lntellectuals in devr:loprngsocieries.

ed. .U ni v c rs i ty of Mal ay a P res s .75. I on d()n.{ ' \ .1.856 Th. N l ul l c v and D .ttn.s . K .v und tulture .s i rt tl tt.1. {)E C l ) 1911 .s t. .-..-.l i s l ahbarra. O[:C D . (i al Mus hak oj i . Lc v i -S traus s .l apqi l (R c porr prc parc d b1.s pol i r' .\' and flethods Oulttrrtt.:tr.v i .\oc rul.l i c i -r c r] A nrc ri c a l -ati nr". (icrrrrrr. 1976 l -e nul . V .so<'iL't.i i < rev ol uti on ond i nterpuretl i gtrtuti t tl i ul ogttt. P rc s s c s U ni v ers i tai res ti l .. L.. .4. l i )4{ ). l n{ ernati oni l l l i brar\ (rf' 1922 P s y c hol og. (ontpdrin. P ey refi tte. A .i c ' rt-phi l ox tl . S.)P ari s ./ornen.'. (N ew ed.sonalit.q(\.i ' . I ak c l i r .forcesin per.l .tnrc s i l trrtttttui res rl e Iu S turenti .r.t.(j rrd.r(s y ' . 195I D enk . pp. (l rac i arc rra. (i c rrc v a.l ./rui n5ui .s ttet i trrl t_i l ri rc l l tuper.'aluesus tnleg.:[' rarrr.lultt l -unrpur' . l 92l Lontl on.q Irrdo-l:uropean tilt). .r.r/l r' 1. P hi l os ophy arrtl S c i c rrti ifc Merhod.P ari s . P ari s . \\'i tt gc ns tc i n. I ns l i tu t I l ni v c rs i tai rcd' c t uti rs rl rr tl * c k . Wci l . P Ion. R ()utl c dgeand K egarrl )aul ). I ol . c l c l c s arrol l orc c i c ntc dc l a i nrc :ti .. R t. l -er s c garrg. l rrs f ((i [)[I) P apc rs )s i tai l c c l E tudeser J u D 6v c -k rppc nrc nt.s l c tLuti ttouttteri Lunu rl e Soc! u k.rres rotrrr ta c ()opc ra{ :i (i n i l ttc l i l ac i trttalI.rc l rrr: N 4urugi n)".\tnt(. R i ttbr' rgc r.l l ) l )i tpc rs ). ("hinest'untl JQlturtt'. i. 1979 S < ' i t' ttti .ppc rnc nl((]l ..A . 5eers .c i rri i rn s oc i o16l .v -. I949 "S ur I' c tudr al gc bri quc dc c c rtai ns ty pc s de l oi s c l c nri l ri ng. ' l ' rac tuttts l og. .ati rra.r)r. 1965 "l a s oc i ol ogi a c rr A nr6ri c u l . c hap.l ' l c rl i n. I98l P n)c c s :.s ti enc e.\l gunas c ri l s i c l erl rc i c . x i v . 1966 l. H. 279 285 i n: C .A . t{ S t)l (( l ' l t) l 4rLrN Li l r -.g ia 1\2): 23 l -242. U t\Js y s l ent:A n i .ruting. K rri g.r. c l e (i rrry ' rc r.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful