Contested Modernities in Masaji Chiba’s Legal Pluralism: An Ethnomethodological Re-reading of Its Accomplishment in Practice

Abstract This article contributes to the “praxiological turn” in legal pluralism studies by offering an ethnomethodological re-reading of Masaji Chiba’s theory. Responding to critiques of its “rigidity,” it reframes Chiba’s theoretical “three dichotomies” not as static classificatory categories, but as a set of heuristic questions for discovering the practical methods members use to accomplish a pluralistic legal order. This approach reveals how legal pluralism is achieved in situ . It demonstrates that normative tensions—such as official/unofficial—are not pre-existing structures but are dynamically produced by participants in their moment-to-moment interaction. An analysis of Japanese lay judge deliberations illustrates how these dichotomies function as practical resources that members use to organize and negotiate “contested modernities.” This perspective unlocks the potential of Chiba’s legacy for empirically elucidating the interactional foundations of law as a lived phenomenon.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Asian Journal of Law and Society
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2025.10032
Primary Topic
Law in Society and Culture
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Contested Modernities in Masaji Chiba’s Legal Pluralism: An Ethnomethodological Re-reading of Its Accomplishment in Practice

Takanori Kitamura
Asian Journal of Law and Society
Law in Society and Culture
article

Contested Modernities in Masaji Chiba’s Legal Pluralism: An Ethnomethodological Re-reading of Its Accomplishment in Practice

Takanori Kitamura
article en

Abstract

Abstract This article contributes to the “praxiological turn” in legal pluralism studies by offering an ethnomethodological re-reading of Masaji Chiba’s theory. Responding to critiques of its “rigidity,” it reframes Chiba’s theoretical “three dichotomies” not as static classificatory categories, but as a set of heuristic questions for discovering the practical methods members use to accomplish a pluralistic legal order. This approach reveals how legal pluralism is achieved in situ . It demonstrates that normative tensions—such as official/unofficial—are not pre-existing structures but are dynamically produced by participants in their moment-to-moment interaction. An analysis of Japanese lay judge deliberations illustrates how these dichotomies function as practical resources that members use to organize and negotiate “contested modernities.” This perspective unlocks the potential of Chiba’s legacy for empirically elucidating the interactional foundations of law as a lived phenomenon.

Asian Journal of Law and SocietyVol. 12(4)
Tokai University (JP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Law in Society and Culture
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.