르 귄의 시에서의 정의

양승갑(Yang, Sung-Kap) 문학과환경학회 2017 문학과 환경 Vol.16 No.3

본 연구는 어슐라 크뢰버 르 귄(Ursula Kroeber Le Guin: 1929- )의 시에서 드러나는 ‘정의’의 문제에 초점을 맞추기 위하여 그녀의 시에서의 정의를 “사회 정의,” “환경 정의” 그리고 “생태 정의”로 나누어서 살펴보았다. 르 귄은 오늘날 우리 사회에 만연한 부정의가 기득권층의 정보와 지식의 독점에서 비롯된 사회 구조적인 문제임을 직시한다. 그녀는 이러한 편중이 낳은 사회적 부정의가 빈부 계층의 고착화로 이어지며, 나아가 환경 정의의 문제로까지 확대된다고 본다. 환경적 부정의의 문제에 대한 르 귄의 고찰은 기득권층과 현대인들의 부정의에 대한 ‘무지’와 ‘무감각’을 꼬집는다. 이 무지와 무감각은 그녀의 시에서 ‘다른 곳’과 ‘거리감’으로 가시화된다. 그리하여, 모든 부정의의 해결점이자 결론에 해당하는 생태 정의에서, 르 귄은 자연 속에서의 모든 종(種)들의 평등성에 대한 철저한 수용이 무지와 무감각으로 생긴 모든 거리감을 일소할 수 있음을 주장한다. 이 모든 과정에서 르 귄은 ‘열린 의식’을 강조한다. 그녀가 ‘열린 집’에 거주하는 ‘세상의 주부’임을 자처하는 것은 모든 현대인들이 그 어떤 차별과 구별도 없는 ‘정의로운’ 그 집에 함께 기거하기를 바라기 때문이다. 결과적으로 르 귄의 시에서의 정의는 만물과의 공생을 위한 열린 인식에 다름 아니다. Among the existing man of letters, Ursula Kroeber Le Guin(1929-) is one of the most influential writers. The influence comes from the fact that She has been a practical activist on the various spots of anti-war, anti-nuclear, anti-racism movement and so on. And also in her works especially in her poetry she clarifies that literature and imagination can/must be a powerful weapon for the fights against all the injustices deeply permeated in the modern society. Broadly speaking, all the justices can be concluded into ‘fairness.’ But to focus on the “justice” in the poetry of Le Guin, this paper categorizes justice into three types; “Social Justice,” “Environmental Justice,” and “Ecological Justice.” For the social justice, the first step Le Guin takes is the diagnosis of the injustices widespread in the modern society. She points out “the mis-recognition” of the weak and the low by the established who have monopolized knowledge and information also. The structural injustice in our society is more expanding and deepening in the “environmental justice.” All the environmental injustices, Le Guin believes, come from the environmental inequality and the inequality from the ignorance and insensibility of the established to the weak. In her poems “distance” and “other place or elsewhere” are the metaphor for the ignorance and insensibility. “Ecological justice,” the last and complete justice, is to be ‘oneness’ with everything fulfilled by the removing of the ignorance and insensibility. And in her poetry, all the justices are arranged into the ecological justice. As a poet, Le Guin claims to be “a world’s housekeeper.” And her house which knows no inequality nor injustice at all is wide open to every direction and every one and every thing under the heaven. As a result, in Le Guin’s poetry, justice has the exactly same meaning with the ‘open consciousness’ toward everything in Nature for ‘symbiosis.’

Roles of Consumer’s Social Relationship and Perceived Justice Type on Service Recovery Satisfaction

Nak-Hwan Choi,Su-Min Park,Ah-Young Lim 한국유통과학회 2018 The Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business( Vol.9 No.1

Purpose – Past research has not given much attention to the roles of consumers’ social relationship type in the effects of justice type of service failure recovery alternatives on their satisfaction to the alternative exposed to them. Current research aimed at exploring the moderation role of consumers’ social relationship central versus peripheral in the effects of justice types of service failure recovery alternatives on the recovery satisfaction, and this research also explored whether the level of satisfaction to interaction justice-focused alternative are significantly different between the two, their social relationship central and peripheral relationship. Research design, data, and methodology – 2(social relationship central versus peripheral) between-subjects design was employed. 50 participants for each experimental group there were. Participants of each group took forceful steps in choosing one between the procedural justice-focused alternative and the distribution justice-focused alternative. χ2-analysis was used to verify that the number of choosing each alternative becomes different between the two experimental groups, and a one way ANOVA was used to verify that the extent to which participants are satisfied to the alternative chosen by them becomes different between the two groups. Results – The number of participants choosing procedural justice-focused alternative at the group of social relationship central was larger than that at the group of social relationship peripheral, whereas the number of participants choosing distribution justice-focused alternative at the group of social relationship peripheral was larger than that at the group of social relationship central. And the level of satisfaction to procedural justice-focused alternative at the group of social relationship central was higher than that at the group of social relationship peripheral, whereas the level of satisfaction to distribution justice-focused alternative at the group of social relationship peripheral was higher than that at the group of social relationship central. In addition, the level of satisfaction to interaction justice-focused alternative was not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions – Marketers should give attention to the type of justice when developing alternatives by which consumers’ service failure can be recovered. They should suggest procedural justice-focused alternative to consumers under social relationship central, whereas they should develop distribution justice-focused alternative for consumers under social relationship peripheral. And in the process of recovering service failure they also should focus on interaction justice.

유가철학에서 본 정의(正義)

이연도 ( Yun Do Lee ) 한국중국학회 2012 중국학보 Vol.66 No.-

It is difficult to try to define the concept of ``justice``. While the Oriental term "義" means ``justice`` or "righteousness", that is the ethical concept, the concept of ``justice`` in the Western thoughts often is defined with ``social justice`` that mainly contains the social and political meanings. Discussions about ``justice`` in our society, of course, are not extricable from the questions of political philosophy in the Western society. I think that the concept of justice as ``fairness`` in the Western philosophy seems to be excluded with human emotion, moral feelings. ``Civil society`` in the Western world has been established by the theory of ``Social Contract`` which was base on the "rationality" in Modern age. On the other hand, the Confucian philosophy as the mainstream of Eastern thought emphasize that Justice should be based on moral human nature and then only has a true meaning. Because human is the subject which can compose the righteous society, can realize public justice. According to the viewpoint of Confucianism, social institutions(order, law) without moral subjectivity of human, could not realize the righteous society. From this basic viewpoint, political thought of Confucius also contains a lot of meaningful public ethics. Concept of Confucian "公(public)" cannot be regarded with the "public goodness" in modern society, but it`s meaning still has a lot of vitality in these days. In this paper, I tried to analyze the concept of "Justice" and it`s implications in the Confucian tradition, compared with definition of Western political philosophy. "Justice" is the most important concept in Eastern and Western political philosophy, relations to social justice, ideal society in human world. From a comparative analysis of Justice in Eastern and Western definition, it will provide for the ultimate principle and possibility of consilience between the East and the West.

급진민주주의적 사회정의와 입법 ―포스트 마르크스주의를 중심으로―

심우민 한국법철학회 2011 법철학연구 Vol.14 No.2

Concerns about justice in Korea has increased recently. This has special meaning in the respect that these concerns are resulted from realistic politics. Generally speaking, the demand for the social justice asks for the management of law on the ground of justice. In the same line, there must be the law-making which fits for this conception of justice. As a matter of fact, many discussions about social justice are related to the legislative issues. The concerns about social justice in Korean society cannot be separated from the orders of capitalism or neo-liberalism. In this respect, we need to concentrate on the theories of Marxism, which provide the critical alternatives for these orders. This article concentrates on the Post-marxist theories among many different readings of marxist theories. Most of theorists of Post-Marxism claim for radical democracy. This article is focusing on these theme; (ⅰ) What does Marx think about the conceptions of justice? The main point of this part is whether there are ideal type of justice in the theories of Marx or not. The writer suggests that Marx criticized the ideological character of justice. And in this respect, (ⅱ) how can we explain Marx’s conceptions of justice in the perspectives on Post-Marxist? In this part, Chantal Mouffe and Ernesto Laclau are mainly explained. However, because these scholars concentrate on the political issues, their theories need to be supplied with legal and institutional aspects. Therefore, the writer introduces the theories of legal scholar, Roberto Unger. Those Scholars in these both disciplines suggest the same alternative, “radical democracy”. Finally, (ⅲ) how can the principles of legislation be constructed on the basis on the conceptions of justice within Post-Marxist alternatives, radical democracy? For this explanations, the writer introduces the analyses of Luc Wintgens, who researches in the field of Legisprudence. In his analyses, there are four principles of legislation; The Principle of Alternativity, The Principle of Normative Density, The Principle of Coherence, and The Principle of Temporality. This part mainly explains how these principles can be read in the perspectives of radical democracy. Concerns about justice in Korea has increased recently. This has special meaning in the respect that these concerns are resulted from realistic politics. Generally speaking, the demand for the social justice asks for the management of law on the ground of justice. In the same line, there must be the law-making which fits for this conception of justice. As a matter of fact, many discussions about social justice are related to the legislative issues. The concerns about social justice in Korean society cannot be separated from the orders of capitalism or neo-liberalism. In this respect, we need to concentrate on the theories of Marxism, which provide the critical alternatives for these orders. This article concentrates on the Post-marxist theories among many different readings of marxist theories. Most of theorists of Post-Marxism claim for radical democracy. This article is focusing on these theme; (ⅰ) What does Marx think about the conceptions of justice? The main point of this part is whether there are ideal type of justice in the theories of Marx or not. The writer suggests that Marx criticized the ideological character of justice. And in this respect, (ⅱ) how can we explain Marx’s conceptions of justice in the perspectives on Post-Marxist? In this part, Chantal Mouffe and Ernesto Laclau are mainly explained. However, because these scholars concentrate on the political issues, their theories need to be supplied with legal and institutional aspects. Therefore, the writer introduces the theories of legal scholar, Roberto Unger. Those Scholars in these both disciplines suggest the same alternative, “radical democracy”. Finally, (ⅲ) how can the principles of legislation be constructed on the basis on the conceptions of justice within Post-Marxist alternatives, radical democracy? For this explanations, the writer introduces the analyses of Luc Wintgens, who researches in the field of Legisprudence. In his analyses, there are four principles of legislation; The Principle of Alternativity, The Principle of Normative Density, The Principle of Coherence, and The Principle of Temporality. This part mainly explains how these principles can be read in the perspectives of radical democracy.

생태공유지의 정의론과 기본소득

권정임 ( Jeongim Kwon ) 사단법인 아시아문화학술원 2019 인문사회 21 Vol.10 No.2

이 글은 기본소득을 공유지 수익에 대한 분배정의로만 정식화 한 판 빠레이스의 주장을 비판적으로 재구성하여 기본소득의 정의론을 수선적 정의 개념으로까지 확장하려는 시도이다. ‘분배정의’에 따른 공유지 수익만이 아니라, ‘수선적 정의’에 따라 공유지 훼손에 대한 보상으로서 생태세나 경유세 등도 기본소득의 재원이 될 수 있다. 그리고 ‘분배정의+수선적 정의’의 적용범위를 지구촌과 미래세대로까지 확장하면 지속가능한 지구기본소득의 가능성도 열린다. 이처럼 ‘분배정의’에 ‘수선적 정의’를 더하여 이 글에서는 판 빠레이스가 제시한 것보다 더 넓은 생태기본소득의 지평을 열었다. 더 나아가 ‘분배정의+수선적 정의’를 4차 산업혁명과 연계하면 기본소득의 미래 재원을 더 풍부하고 구체적으로 밝혀낼 수도 있다. 이에 대한 연구는 다음의 과제이다. This article is an attempt to expand justice theory to the concept ‘reparative justice’ through a critical reconstruction of Van Parijs’ argument which formulated basic income as a distributive justice on the revenue of the Commons. Eco-tax or diesel tax as compensation for damage to ecological Commons linked to the concept of reparative justice can be a financial source of basic income, not just the revenues of eco-Commons associated with the concept of distributive justice. Expanding the scope of 'distributive justice + reparative justice' to the global village and future generations opens also the opportunity for a sustainable earth basic income. In this way, adding ‘reparative justice’ to ‘distributive justice’ opens the wider horizon for the eco basic income than Van Parijs suggests. And this ‘distributive justice +reparative justice’ in link with the forth industrial revolution could reveal the affluent and sustainable financial source for earth basic income. The survey on this is the next project.

The Conceptual Foundation of Justice in Dance

Chang, Chung-Yoon 한국체육무용국제교류학회 2002 한국체육무용국제교류학회지 Vol.8 No.-

The category of justice plays a key role in the consciousness of the public. In justice people evaluate the social relationship and conduct in terms of equality. It reflects the economic, social, and political conditions of a specific social constituent through the moral evaluation of various classes. Justice in relation with art expresses the condition in which every person has the absolute potential to show his own personality, talent, and ability. The discussion of the relation between arts and justice in this essay starts from understanding both abstract and concrete concepts of justice dealt in Aristotle's Politics, Nichomachian Ethics and Poetics. The concrete form of realizing justice through art is virtue, and the concrete virtue can be found in art, which realizes catharsis and justice. The realization of justice is placed in virtue in terms of art, criticizing right and wrong of an artistic act. However, Aristotle's concept of realizing justice refers to good in human being prior to art. An artistic act with right attitude means an act that follows the disposition which asks the right and is done in law-abiding spirit and just attitude for the food of the national community. The purpose of this essay is to provide the fundamental understanding about what human being pursues and the ideology of art with regard to justice. In this essay I discuss three points. First, Aristotle's concept of justice which fundamentally is operative in art. Secondly I discuss interrelation of dance and justice and in this context discusses 'resistance', 'mobilization', 'social movement' and 'diversity' of dance aspects. Lastly I discuss contemporary practices of the 1960s' Judson dance activities which is regarded as revolutionary activity, challenged to the prevailing social ideology, and its relationship with politics and social movement is considered. The practices are examined by the themes of freedom, equality and liberation of the body through their choreographic works.

Etude sur la justice restaurative en France

Kim Moonkwi(김문귀) 한국법학회 2016 법학연구 Vol.63 No.-

이 연구는 형사조정 처분을 중심으로 프랑스의 회복적 사법을 비판적인 관점에서 다루고 있다. 형사조정의 현 실무에 대한 분석을 통해 이 연구는 프랑스의 회복적 사법의 문제점과 회복적 사법 분야와 관련해서 프랑스가 보여주고 있는 불완전성과 유보의 원인을 밝히고, 프랑스 형사체계내에 회복적 사법이 성공적으로 자리를 잡고 통합될 수 있도록 해주는 바람직한 일반적 지향점을 제시하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 회복적 사법이 프랑스에 존재하고 있음은 의문의 여지가 없고 발전될 가능성이 있음에도 불구하고 회복적 사법은 아직 프랑스 형사체계에 진정으로 스며들어 있지 않다. 이러한 진단은 무엇보다도 프랑스에서 적어도 이론상으로는 회복적 사법 모델과 가장 근접한 회복적 사법 처분으로 제시되는 형사조정의 잘못되고 불완전한 적용에 의해 증명된다. 이 연구는 국가/사법 주도의 회복적 사법이 초래할 수 있는 악영향과 위험을 명백하게 보여주고 있다. 사법기관(검찰)에 의해 도구화됨으로써, 형사조정은 본연의 회복적 지향점과 목표를 잃어버리게 되고, 조정자와 조정기관 등 형사조정을 실행하는 사람들은 사법기관의 그늘 하에서 자율성을 거의 갖지 못하게 된다. 이러한 형사적 분위기 속에서, 새로운 법을 만들거나 새로운 처분을 도입하는 것만으로는 회복적 사법이 프랑스 형사체계 내에 진정으로 자리를 잡고 발전되기에는 불충분할 것이다. 중요한 것은 형사사법의 전문가들의 사고방식의 변화를 통해 그들이 갖고 있는 회복적 사법에 대한 주저함이나 저항을 최소화하는 것이다. 또한, 현 시점에서 중요한 것은 회복적 사법의 철학을 재고하고 실행중인 회복적 처분들이 진정한 회복적 처분으로 다시 태어나게 하게끔 그것들을 회복적 이념에 맞게 올바르게 적용하는 것이다. 이러한 근본적인 변화 혹은 혁신 없이는 프랑스에서의 회복적 사법은 매우 오랫동안 지배적 형사체계의 주변에서 실험적인 것 혹은 부가적인 것으로서만 작동할 것이다. 놀랍게도, 프랑스의 형사조정이 갖고 있는 문제점들은 2007년 말부터 한국에서 전국적으로 시행되고 있는 검찰 단계의 형사조정실무가 갖고 있는 문제점들과 매우 흡사하다. 따라서 이 연구에서 제시된 프랑스의 형사조정, 더 나아가 회복적 사법의 발전을 위한 개선방안들은 한국에서의 형사조정 그리고 회복적 사법의 발전에 시사하는 바가 크다고 하겠다. This recherch treat, in the critical point of view, restorative justice in France by focusing on the measure of penal mediation. Through the analysis of the current practice of penal mediation, this study aims to address problems of the French restorative justice and reasons of french imperfection and reserve in matter of restorative justice, and provide general and relevant guidance for the restorative to be successfully implanted and integrated in the criminal justice system in place. Despite its indisputable presence and development opportunity in France, restorative justice has not truly permeated its penal system. This diagnosis is evidenced, among other things, by the misguided and flawed implementation of penal mediation, presented in France, at least in theory, as a measure of restorative justice most closer to the restorative justice models. Thus, this research clearly shows the harmful effects and dangers that restorative justice dominated by the state and judicial institution could result. Instrumentalised by the judicial institution(prosecutors), penal mediation measure loses its specific restorative aims and objectives. And, in the shadow of the judicial institution, the actors who implement dont have any autonomy in relation to the institution. In this criminal climate, make a new law or introduce a new measures can not be sufficient for restorative justice to be truly implanted and developed within the French penal system. The mentality change among criminal justice professionals in place is critical to minimize a great reluctance and resistance against the restorative justice. In addition, the important thing to do at this time, is to rethink the philosophy of restorative justice, to apply properly restorative measures for them to be reborn as the authentic restorative measures. Without these fundamental changes or reforms, restorative justice would be condemned in France more or less for a long time to serve as a reservoir for experiments or accessories of the dominant criminal justice system. Very surprisingly, most of the problems of the French penal mediation identified in this research are common to the South Korean penal mediation which is at work since 2007. Therefore, all findings and/or recommendations on restorative justice in France mentioned in this research are instructive for the desirable development of penal mediation and restorative justice in South Korea.

정의(Justice)에 대한 목적론적 접근-리쾨르(P. Ricoeur)의 롤즈(J. Rawls)의 정의론에 대한 비판과해석을 중심으로-

김기복 한국하이데거학회 2013 현대유럽철학연구 Vol.0 No.33

This paper aims at showing how P. Ricoeur J. Rawls’s deontological theory of justice accepts dialectically while he criticises it. By doing this, this paper tries to suggest which significance in dispute over justice in modern political philosophy P. Ricoeur’s theory of justice has. First, this paper suggests that P. Ricoeur’s teleological theory of justice has its own important charateristic unlike some communitarians in that it regards ‘distributive justice’as its central concept. While communitarians regard ‘loyalty to the contry’ or patriotism as their central concepts instead of justice, he tries to reconstruct the concept of justice itself. Second, on one hand, P. Ricoeur shows that J. Rawls’s deontological theory of justice is based on teleological theory of justice, on the other hand, he argues that sense of justice on which teleological theory of justice depends ultimately must pass through the test of norm, which is the key concept of deontological theory of justice. In that sense, he accepts J. Rawls’s ‘reflective equilibrium’ and regards it as a excellent theory which explains the dialect of norm and sense of justice. Finally, on one hand, P. Ricoeur shows that universalism of deontological theory of justice always gives rise to many conflicts when it applies its principle to concrete situations, on the other hand, he argues that teleological theory of justice needs to accept the stimulus of universalism since teleological theory of justice is always inclined toward relativism and contextualism. In that sense, he tries to reconciles univeralism with contextualism in modern political philosophy. In conclusion, P. Ricoeur tries to accept the test of norm and universalism of J. Rawls’s deontological theory of justice as a stimulus needed to the modern development of teleological theory of justice. 본 글은 리쾨르가 어떻게 롤즈의 의무론적 정의론을 비판하면서도 그것을 그의 목적론적 정의론 안으로 변증법적으로 포섭하는지를 보이고자 한다. 이를 통해 리쾨르의 정의론이 현대의 ‘정의’를 둘러싼 논쟁에서어떤 의의를 가지는지를 제시해보고자 하였다. 첫째, 리쾨르는 롤즈와 마찬가지로 정의의 문제, 그 가운데 특히 분배적 정의의 문제를 자신의 정치 철학의 중심 문제로 설정하고 있다는 사실에 그의목적론적 정의론의 일차적인 특징이 있다는 점을 제시하였다. 리쾨르는 정의개념을 회피하되 대신 애국심이나 공동체에 대한 충직성을 제시하는 샌델이나 매킨타이어와 같은 공동체주의자들과 달리 정의 개념 자체를 목적론적으로 재설정하고자한다. 둘째, 리쾨르는 한편으로는 롤즈의 의무론적 정의론이 목적론적 정의론에 정초하고 있다는 것을 보이면서도, 다른 한편으로는 목적론적 정의론이 최종적으로 호소하는 것인 바, 역사적이고 문화적으로 침전되어 있는 정의감은 의무론적 정의론의 핵심 개념인 규범의 테스트를 반드시 거쳐야 한다는 점을보인다. 그러한 의미에서 리쾨르는 롤즈의 ‘반성적 평형’이라는 개념을 수용하고 그것을 의무의 규범성과 공동체의 관습적인 정의감 사이의 변증법적관계를 설명하는 탁월한 이론으로 간주한다. 마지막으로 리쾨르는 한편으로는 의무론적 정의론의 보편주의는 항상 자신이 설정한 원칙의 현실적 적용에서 갈등을 양산하는 것이 사실이라 할지라도, 그리하여 항상 그러한 갈등의 최종적인 해결을 위해 구체적이고 개별적인 맥락을 고려하는 ‘실천적인 지혜’에 호소할 수밖에 없다할지라도, 다른한편으로 롤즈와 같이 정의의 원칙을 설정하고자 하는 보편주의적 태도를취하는 것은 반드시 필요하다고 본다. 왜냐하면 목적론적 정의론이 경도될수 있는 맥락주의는 논의와 토론을 무용하게 만드는 바, 소위 ‘차이를 위한차이’에 대한 변명으로 끝나버릴 위험이 있기 때문이다. 그러한 의미에서 리쾨르는 현대 정치 철학에서 강요되고 있는 보편주의와 맥락주의의 생산성없는 대립과 적대를 벗어나, 그 둘을 생산성 있는 불화로서의 변증법적 관계로 파악하고자 한다는 의의가 있다. 결론적으로 리쾨르는 한편으로는 롤즈의 의무론적 정의론이 목적론적 정의론에 정초하고 있다는 것을 보이면서도, 다른 한편으로 롤즈의 의무론적 정의론의 규범성에 대한 강조와 보편주의적 태도를 목적론적 정의론의 현대적인 전개에 반드시 필요한 자극제로 받아들이고자 한다.

제4장 단재 신채호의 정의관에 관한 연구

박병철,김형빈 한국민족사상학회 2013 민족사상 Vol.7 No.3

This study analyses Danjae Sin Chae-ho's view of justice. His idea of justice was an ultimate driving force to propel the Korean national liberation movement under the Japanese colonial rule. For him, 'justice' was a way to establish 'the public interest' by overcoming our individual pursuit of 'private interests.' In this context, 'the public interest' means the independence of Korea and is considered a virtue of new Korean nationals. Thus, he argued that where there was 'justice', there was the final 'common good' and the people should be protected by justice and the nation would be liberated by justice. In his view, 'justice' was an ethical criterion to overcome the colonial situation. As a result, he expected an emergence of new Korean nationals who would rid themselves of 'private interests' and sacrifice themselves for the national 'public interest.' He established the idea of justice on the basis of 'the public interest' in the 'understanding' and 'argument' for 'justice'. As a methodology to put it into practice, he revealed an 'aggressive view of justice.' Therefore, this study examines Danjae's view of justice based on his perception of it through his activities to overcome the colonial circumstances. 본 논문은 단재 신채호의 정의관을 분석한 것이다. 단재의 정의관은 자신이 민족독립운동을 지속적으로 추진할 수 있었던 궁극적인 원동력이었다. 그에 있어 ‘정의(justice)’는 ‘사리심(私利心)’의 극복을 통한 ‘공리(公利)’의 확립이었다. 여기서 ‘공리’는 국가의 자립이며, 이는 신국민(新國民)의 덕목이 되는 것이다. 따라서 그는 ‘정의’가 있는 곳에 최후의 ‘공(公)’이 있으며, 국민은 정의로서 보존하고 또한 국가는 정의로서 독립할 수 있다는 것이다. 그에 있어 이러한 ‘정의’는 식민지 상황을 극복하는 윤리적 기준이었다. ‘정의’는 국권회복을 위한 민족의 활동을 의미하며, 이에 벗어나 일제와 결탁하고 자신의 이익을 쫓는 자는 사리가 되는 것이다. 그러므로 그는 정의를 통해 개인적 ‘사리심’에서 벗어나 국가적 ‘공리’에 희생하는 신국민을 기대하고 있었다. 한편 그는 ‘정의’를 위한 ‘이해’와 ‘시비’에서 ‘공리’에 근거한 정의관을 확립하고 있다. 이를 실천하기 위한 방법론으로 ‘투쟁적 정의관’을 보여 주고 있는 것이다. 따라서 본 연구는 그가 제시한 ‘정의’에 대한 인식을 바탕으로 그 당시 식민지 환경을 극복하려는

Justice and Interpretation for Christian Praxis - Georgia Warnke's Justice Hermeneutics in Dialogue with Francis Schüssler Fiorenza's Reconstructive Hermeneutics -

Moon, Youngbin,Koh, Juhee 한국실천신학회 2011 신학과 실천 Vol.0 No.29

Diverse issues pertinent to justice are incessantly disturbing contemporary society, provoking appropriate responses and, certainly, Christian ones, as well. In this context, this paper tries to critically investigate Georgia Warnke's Justice and Interpretation to see how her contentions can contribute to Christian praxis and theology, and in what ways they are limited. Warnke is among the scholars who have brought hermeneutics into the discourse of justice, conceiving justice as something that emerges through the participation of every member of the community. Warnke's understanding of justice is advantageous as it overcomes the Kantian understanding of justice. However, it is disadvantageous in overlooking the pragmatic dimension of decision making. We contend that this point of Warnke is problematic, particularly for theology that is indispensably related to praxis. In order to supplement Warnke's justice hermeneutics, this paper invites Francis Schüssler Fiorenza's reconstructive hermeneutical theology. While recognizing the importance of hermeneutics, Fiorenza tries to overcome its limitations, suggesting that we should consider the background theory of the interpreter and the text. Background theory is beneficial as it would enable the interpreter to understand both the text and himself/herself with a more critical stance. Moreover, he emphasizes three essential factors required to do hermeneutics - solidarity, community, and integrity - so that theology could place more weight on decision making toward justice. In short, this paper aims to contribute to nurturing these two points: (1) the importance of accommodating as many voices as possible in the course of decision making, and (2) the importance of decision making within time constraints for practical application in concrete situations. By this way, theology could be more concretely connected with contemporary praxis concerning the issues of justice