고개의 호칭으로서 '현'과 '령'의 변별요인에 관한 연구

조승래,강영조,Cho, Seung-Rae,Kang, Young-Jo 한국조경학회 2007 韓國造景學會誌 Vol.35 No.1

The purpose of this study is to determine the basis for the names of mountain passes that have been different since antiquity, especially names such as those written in Chinese characters. For this purpose, this researcher focused on 108 mountain passes listed in the section of Gyeongsangdo that is a part of Joseon's representative human geographic literature, 'Sinjong Dongguk Yeoji Seungram'. Then the author found out their location by reviewing 'Joseon Hugi Jibang Jido', 'Daedong Yeojido' and 'Hanguk Jimyeong Chongram'. Out of the 180 passes, 30 were finally selected to be analyzed. Again 15 among 30 were found named as 'Hyeon', 7 as 'Ryeong' and remainder were called either term on occasion. The study tried to find out standards according to whether the 30 passes were named as 'Hyeon' or 'Ryeong'. To carry out the study, the author made 3 hypotheses. First, the passes' altitudes were examined. Then visual characteristics were investigated when seen from the summit of the passes. Finally, the number of the passes' turns was investigated to know whether this discriminates between 'Hyeon' and 'Ryeong'. The results of the study can be summarized as follows. With the altitudes and the visual characteristics as mentioned above, it was not possible to determine features that clearly discriminate 'Hyeon' from 'Ryeong'. However, the number of the turns was significantly different in accordance with the names of the passes, 'Hyeon', 'Ryeong' and 'Hyeon or Ryeong'. It seems that 'Hyeon' and 'Ryeong' were discriminatively used depending on how mountain passes were apparently perceived with the number of their turns.

A Mapping of the Ideological British Historiography in Korea : A Story

Cho Seung-rae(조승래) 湖西史學會 2011 역사와 담론 Vol.0 No.58

이 논문은 한국에서 영국사 연구가 본격적으로 시작된 지난 세기 60년대 이래 오늘에 이르기까지 영국사 서술에서 발견되는 이념적 궤적을 추적하고 있다. 영국사 연구의 선구자들은 대부분 영국을 한국의 근대화의 모델로 삼았다. 자본주의와 민주주의가 동시에 추구되면서 선진 자유민주주의 국가로 처음 등장한 나라가 영국이었으며 한국은 그 뒤를 따라야 한다는 것이 그들의 공통된 생각이었다. 그들은 철두철미한 개인주의적 자유주의의 신봉자들로서 군부 독재에 대한 저항 담론을 제공하기도 하는 등 역사가의 사회적 기능도 수행하곤 했다. 그러나 그들의 자유주의는 80년대 이후 그 빛이 바래기 시작했다. 한국 사회에 새롭게 등장한 급진 세력과 잘 조직된 노동 계급의 투쟁은 그러한 유의 자유주의를 계급적 이해를 반영하는 부르주아 지유주의로 규정하기 시작했다. 때맞추어 영국사학계 내부에서도 그러한 지유주의가 아닌 새로운 의미의 자유주의를 영국사 안에서 찾아내려는 시도들이 나타났다. 혹자는 글래드스턴의 도덕적 자유주의가 부르주아 자유주의를 극복하여 19세기 영국에서 새롭게 대두된 노동계급을 시민단의 가치 있는 일원으로서 받아들이려는 숭고한 시도였다고 찬양하는가 하면, 한편에서는 페비안 사회주의나 길드 사회주의와 같은 영국의 독특한 사회주의를 일종의 집단화된 자유주의로 규정하면서 그것이야말로 개인의 지유와 공동체의 복지를 조화시킬 수 있는 훌륭한 대안이었다고 평가했다. 그러나 이에 맞서 자유주의의 한계를 극복한 새로운 대안 이념으로서 공회주의를 영국사 안에서 추적하는 연구도 나타났다. 즉 시민적 공공성과 시민적 평등을 강화하여 자본주의의 병폐를 극복하고자 했던 지적 담론들을 찾아내는 작업이 시작되어 오늘에 이르고 있다.

건설현장 추락사고 방지를 위한 건설 근로자 친화적인 안전 고리 개발 연구

조승래(Seungrae Cho),김재경(Jaekyoung Kim),임정현(Junghyun Yim),김태호(Taeho Kim),김지호(Jiho Kim),임덕신(Dokshin Lim) 한국디자인학회 2022 한국디자인학회 학술발표대회 논문집 Vol.2022 No.11

18세기 영국의 시민사회론

조승래(Cho Seung-Rae) 부산경남사학회 2004 역사와 경계 Vol.51 No.-

The term of civil society was revived amongst intellectuals and social science scholars in the last quarter of the last century when the real socialism of the Eastern Europe collapsed. While the term was used by the Eastern European intellectuals as an alternative of the one-party rule state which had ruined the autonomy of individuals, some Western scholars considered it as an antidote of the pathological phenomena of capitalist individualism which denied civic participation and disintegrated social solidarity. This paper insists that the discourses of civil society as mentioned above can be found in eighteenth-century Britain. The rapid commercialization and the rising of strong state made it possible to discuss on the nature of civil society and its relations with citizenship and state control. This paper concludes that in this discourses of civil society the Hayekean neo-liberal belief in spontaneous order in civil society can not be found.

18세기말 영국의 토지개혁론

조승래 ( Seung Rae Cho ) 한국서양사학회 1997 西洋史論 Vol.55 No.1

찰스 홀의 토지 균분론

조승래(Seung Rae Cho) 영국사학회 1998 영국연구 Vol.2 No.-

N/A

18 세기 애국주의 담론과 국민적 정체성의 형성

조승래(Seung Rae Cho) 영국사학회 1997 영국연구 Vol.1 No.-

N/A

특집 : 서양역사 속의 공공성과 공론장 ; 근대 공사 구분의 지적 계보

조승래 ( Seung Rae Cho ) 한국서양사학회 2011 西洋史論 Vol.0 No.110

The purpose of this paper is to survey an intellectual pedigree of modern conceptions of public and private. Traditionally pre-modern Western intellectuals considered the public essential for human beings to realize themselves, as we see in the famous address of Pericles in which man in apathy to the public was ostracized as useless one. Some modern intellectuals such as Rousseau inherited this conception of the public based on the polis spirit. However, this conception was challenged by modern liberalism which aimed to secure the private of individuals, as we see in the political writings of Locke and Mill. In this context liberalism invented the concept of privacy which should not be interfered and obstructed by any authorities in the name of common weal. This priority of the private was maintained as a result of the historical inevitability by liberal intellectuals such as Constant who affirmed that any intention to bring back the ancient priority of the public only incurred political disaster as Jacobin`s terror showed. This liberal hegemony grew stronger when capitalism possessed the world. However, there also echoed the critical voices that sounded the good old cause of the priority of the public which was able to cure the pathological phenomena of social polarization and political apathy. Representatively Green, Dewey, and Arendt, respectively, discoursed this in their own way, but commonly based on the belief in the recovery of polis spirit. Recently, following these predecessors, among intellectual historians and political philosophers are republicans and communitarians who eagerly excavate the intellectual tradition other than individual liberalism and suggest alternative practical prescriptions. This paper dares to insist on listening to these voices.

시민적 공화주의론에 대한 일고찰

조승래 ( Seung Rae Cho ) 한국서양사학회 1990 西洋史論 Vol.35 No.1

누가 자유주의를 두려워하랴? : 공화주의, 공동체주의, 공화주의

조승래(Cho Seung-Rae) 호서사학회 2009 역사와 담론 Vol.0 No.54

The purpose of this paper is to interpret republicanism as a powerful alternative of liberalism. Liberalism defines liberty just as non-interference, which means anyone is free insofar as she is not actually impeded by someone else to take her choice. It presuppose that one's individual right to choose her action is prior to common good of community. In this point of view, liberals dare to conclude that liberty is enjoyed regardless of the constitutional character of states. However, this kind of individualism is to be the Achilles Heel of liberalism. As new liberalism criticized, liberty as non-interference is only a privilege of the established persons who are capable of doing their own choices. Community can interfere individuals with legitimacy of pursuing general welfare of community. In this point, republicanism provides us with a new conception of liberty as non-domination which means the absence of arbitrary power. According to republicanism, liberal view of liberty implies that even a slave is free as long as his benevolent master has no plan to interfere him. Republicans assert that slave is never free just because his liberty is dependent on his master's mercy and thereby he has to always keep an eye to his action not to provoke and to satisfy his master. Republicans insist that liberty is fulfilled only when there is no possibility of arbitrary domination which prevents us from possessing the status of free men. Therefore republicans conclude that we are free only in a free state which guarantees us to be free citizens as equal members of community. There follows a categorical demand that we always have to be vigilant not to be ruled by superiors and to exercise our civic duties for common good. Thus republicanism deserves to be an effective therapy of the pathological problem of social polarization of late incurred by liberal hegemony.