本稿はグッドウィン（Jeff Goodwin）とホロウィッツ（Ruth Horowitz）によって執筆された「質的社会学における方法論的強みと難点」の論文評である．対象論文ではおもに，3つの論点について議論が展開されている．①質的社会学における「科学性」をめぐる論点である．質的社会学には，他の社会科学とは規準の異なる「科学的」方法論が存在する．②調査における少数事例問題である．質的社会学では，事例の数が少なくとも，包括的な理論を構築することが可能である．③調査者の立ち位置に関する論点である．質的調査を行う者は自らの立ち位置についての自覚的態度が求められる．これらに対して，評者は3つの論点を設定し，回答を試みる．一つ，調査者は「壁のハエ」か，それとも議論の好敵手か．調査者と調査対象者の関係の在り方について検討する．二つ，質的調査か，量的調査か．どちらの調査でもその「科学性」を担保するのは，解釈する理論の妥当性であることを指摘する．三つ，質的調査法の規準を設定すべきか．実体的な規準を設けずに，暫定的に説明し続けることに質的調査法の可能性があることを提起する．

This paper is a review of ＂Introduction： The Methodological Strengths and Dilemmas of Qualitative Sociology＂ written by Jeff Goodwin and Ruth Horowitz. They discussed three methodological dilemmas in qualitative sociology： Firstly, the dilemma of ＂scientific＂ methodology in qualitative sociology. Qualitative sociology has its own rigorous standards different from those of other social sciences. Secondly, the dilemma of ＂small-N problem＂. Even when there is only small number of cases, encompassing theories could be built with close engagement with specific cases. Thirdly, the critical reflection upon the positionalities of the researcher and informant. The researcher using the qualitative method needs to be more reflective in their position during observation or while interpreting cases. While reflecting on our own fieldworks, we pointed out three issues from the discussion of Goodwin and Horowitz. Firstly, we reviewed the methodological strengths and limitations of participant observation. We addressed the strengths and the limitations of deep involvement of researchers in the studied field. To discuss the influence of researchers in the field, we also reviewed the relationship between researchers and informants. Secondly, we discussed about the ＂scientific＂ examination of social phenomena. The point of being ＂scientific＂ is not in the qualitative or quantitative. But the most important point is how the researchers use the theories to make their case persuasive and influential. Thirdly, we pointed out the issue of setting methodological standards for ＂scientific＂ qualitative research. Even researchers set the substantial standards or not, every analysis is contextualized by the researcher. From this point of view, qualitative research can be ＂scientific＂ by explaining social phenomena without relying on formal standards.