confession｜告白・告解
◆立岩 真也 1997/09/05 『私的所有論』，勁草書房，445+66p. ISBN-10: 4326601175 ISBN-13: 978-4326601172 6300 ［amazon］／［kinokuniya］ ※
◆立岩 真也 2013/05/20 『私的所有論 第２版』，生活書院・文庫版，973p. ISBN-10: 4865000062 ISBN-13: 978-4865000061 1800+ ［amazon］／［kinokuniya］ ※
◆Tateiwa, Shinya(立岩 真也) 2016 On Private Property, English Version, Kyoto Books
第６章註１
「この時期はまたキリスト教会において「告解」が最終的に制度化された時期でもある。先にみたキリスト教の教義が実定的なものとして存在し始める。行為、内部を反省として取り出すことが促される。罪は常に私の内部の罪、内部の罪に起因するものであるとされる。（Foucault［1976＝1980］、告白について他にHepworth & Turner［1983］。cf.Morris［1972＝1983］）（以上、より詳しくは立岩［1985］［1986a］［1986b］）
この技術は近代にうけつがれる。例えば一八世紀末からの監獄の改革において独房での孤独が推奨されるが、それは、他の囚人との交流を遮断するとともに、自らの罪を発見させるためである。こうした技術が本文第２節にみる介入策と連続するものであることは明らかである。けれども、連続性をそこにだけ見るのは不十分であることを本文で述べた。また、本文第１節でみる規範のあり様を、内面非関与の性格をもつものとして個人関与の諸技術に対置することに注意深くなくてはならないことも述べる。これはフーコーが記したことをどう考えるかにも関わってくる。少なくとも『監視と処罰』（Foucault［1975＝1977］）はそのような構成になっていない（この点については本章の注03、介入に自己決定が対置されていると解せる発言があることについては第７章注22・533頁を参照のこと）。」
This was also the period during which "confession" in the Christian church was finally systematized, and it is here that the Christian dogma referred to earlier begins to exist as a fixed practice. Reflection on one's own actions and what is internal to the individual is emphasized. Wrongdoing is seen as always being the internal sin of the individual in question or something that should be considered as an internal sin. (Foucault [1976]. On confession, see also Hepworth and Turner [1983], cf. Morris [1972]. For a more detailed discussion of the above, see Tateiwa [1985] [1986a] [1986b]).
The application of this technique has continued into the modern era. One example of this is the promotion of solitary confinement in the prison reforms begun at the end of the 18th century; along with preventing prisoners from mixing with other criminals, this practice was also implemented in order to allow each criminal to become more aware of their own crimes. This technique is clearly connected to the policies of intervention discussed in the Part 2 of this section. In this section I also state, however, that it is insufficient to view the continuation of this technique as existing in this area alone. In the first paragraph I also state that we must be very careful when contrasting the current state of norms with various techniques of intervention regarding individuals as something that has a basic character of non-involvement with the internal aspects of the individual. This is also related to how we think about what is stated by Foucault. In "Discipline and Punish" (Foucault [1975]), at least, he does not adopt this structure (for more on this point see Note 3; regarding there being some statements that can be understood as contrasting interference with self-determination see Chapter 7 Note 22).
UP: REV:20160629
