The March 11 earthquake and the nuclear accident led people to question their daily life based on science and technology. Is this an absolutely new situation? For example, it is often said that rebuilding the community is important. Is the argument against the shock doctrine named by Naomi Klein equal to supporting the opinion that the community before the disaster should be rebuilt just as it was? It is not necessarily true that emphasizing plurality and criticizing the policies that apply particular criteria in all cases means that the community before the disaster was best for people in the concerned area.
The Yanba dam provides a case study that can be used to examine the antagonism between universalism and pluralism. Relations in the community steadily deteriorated as they split into several groups that disputed whether they should accept the plan to construct the dam. They were too exhausted to resist the plan and finally accepted but a cessation of construction was recently declared. Many people in the community were opposed to the declaration. Here can be seen a situation in which notions of environmental preservation are in conflict with the community situation. Should the opinions of the concerned people be accepted absolutely in this case? The purpose of this paper is to show the possibility that theories drawn from sociology can work as frames of reference for people to examine their premises and to try to choose a new options they have not previously considered.