12 members joined at the monthly meeting on 30th of November.
Its beginning was Saito-san's introduction, a facilitator of the community, of his experience of illness.
Recently there were some news about the illness from norovirus, so we should take much care of ourselves.

The first topic was the decline of the number of Japanese students studying abroad. According to the article of Monday, August 20, 2012 in The Japan Times, its number in 2007 was 56,060 and the latest figure is 45,556, so the rate of decline is by about minus 19 per cent. We were asked why the student number declined. Was it because of IT such as an SNS and programs on the net, or was it due to the changes of economic situations and the difficulty of getting a job in Japan for students studying abroad, or something else? Some agreed on the opinions basically and others talked about the minds; the mindsets of students changed. So, our discussion moved to a student's mentality and motivation. Compared to an Asian student' motivation, it's said the Japanese one is not specific, not strong, and inward-looking. However, the recent students have taken part in some activities as volunteers and some universities have encouraged them to do so. The next question was the relation between inward-looking and motivation. Honestly speaking, this topic confused us a little. It was a kind of a matter of sociology: why they have little interest in the outside world, why they participate in volunteer activities. Some members developed their ideas from the viewpoint of the social security system, using examples of the Scandinavia countries. Some talked about the advantages of volunteer experiences when interviewing at a company. Anyway, it seemed to need some knowledge or backgrounds of sociology.

The second was Education minister Makiko Tanaka's decisions. She rejected recommendation to establish 3 new universities. So, the topics were her decision, the quality levels of the recent universities, and the numbers of university. Many members delivered their views of her irrational decision, especially its timing. Strangely, there was no opinion to support her. In retrospect, there might be a viewpoint of a matter of leadership. For example, if a minister only accepts recommendations, then what is their roles? Sometimes leaders need to say 'No' even though the majority say 'Yes'. The top position requires us to have insight and wisdom. Now a drop in academic ability is concerned, and thus her views are very meaningful, I believe.

The third was about the company's culture towards working women. At first, a facilitator seemed to try to pick it up as a debate issue. However, the atmosphere stayed a little chilly. Pregnant women often have passed a promotion up, so is it acceptable or inevitable? What roles do husbands, companies and communities play in? A member said she didn't feel about any gender discriminations at her company. Perhaps, it seems a rare example. In general, there is a strong relation between a business performance and a promotion. Anyway, since the topic consists of several viewpoints such as a company's culture, a relationship with a community, the social values or so, the discussion was not so active.

The debate was the publisher of the Shukan Asahi weekly magazine. They ran the article of the Osaka mayor, Toru Hashimoto and had a huge criticism from a readership and people. So they couldn't help but apology to him publicly. The issue was whether they should be abolished or not. The affirmative side was 8 members and the negative was 3 ones.
The affirmative explained as follows;
- The mass media is one of authority, so they have to use their power very carefully, considering about fairness. However, they failed. They did the wrong things.
- Everyone has privacy, even though public people like politicians have it. The article referred to the birth and lineage that the majority considered very inappropriate, and many believed they exposed the privacy too much.
- The media's mission is to make efforts to improve our society and create a more comfortable one. However, what they did was the opposite. Therefore, their behaviors were equal to being abolished.
On the other hand, the negative presented;
- It was a matter of freedom of speech and the article was within an acceptable level.
- The purpose of the article was to enlighten our ways of thinking and provide the problems brought by him, not give mental abuse.
- The media's role was to inform a lot of people about facts. And the facts themselves were correct. Therefore, forcing to cease their publication would go beyond the acceptable level.

After expressing the reasons, we asked some questions each other; the relationship between freedom of speech and abuse of power; facts between the known and the unknown.
I believe a way of thinking like ‘Pyramid Principle’ or ‘Strucured Thinking’ is necessary in debate.

Senya Miura