| 意味 | 例文 |  |
Weblio英和対訳辞書 |
 
|
「判断力批判」の部分一致の例文検索結果
該当件数 : 2件
三・一独立運動に衝撃を受けた日本政府は、武力だけで朝鮮支配は不可能と判断し、また大正デモクラシー期における政党内閣の登場や、武断政治批判の日本国内世論にも配慮し、武断政治を一部変更した。
The Japanese government, shocked by the March First Movement, found that it was impossible to rule Korea only by force of arms, and changed its Budan seiji partly, also in consideration of the emergence of the party cabinet in the Taisho Democracy period and Japanese domestic public criticism of Budan seiji. - Wikipedia日英京都関連文書対訳コーパス
だが、戦後に入ると土田直鎮らによる批判などがあり、現在では院政初期までは摂政・関白と天皇との間に力関係の差はあっても、両者の協議によって政治判断が行われており、摂政・関白が専断的に政務を取った時期は存在しなかったこと、国政に関する命令は摂関政治全盛期でも宣旨・太政官符による命令系統が機能しており、政所下文及び御教書はあくまで摂政・関白個人の私的あるいは宣旨・太政官符内部の問題に対してのみ有効な命令文書であったことが明らかとされており、この説は成り立たないと考えられている。
However, after World War II, based on the criticisms by people like Naoshige TSUCHIDA, the theory is no longer held as true for the following reasons: Until the early Insei period (the period ruled by the retired Emperor), even if there were differences in strength of authority between the Sessho/Kanpaku and the Emperor, political decisions were made through a consultation of both sides, and there was never a time in which the Sessho and/or Kanpaku arbitrarily took the initiative in political affairs; and orders that related to state politics were issued based on the chain of command through senshi and daijokanpu (official documents issued by the Daijokan and the Grand Council of State) even during the golden days of the regency, and it was revealed that kudashibumi and migosho documents issued by the Mandokoro were only effective for private or internal problems of the sessho and kanpaku themselves. - Wikipedia日英京都関連文書対訳コーパス
| 意味 | 例文 |
| 判断力批判のページへのリンク |
