http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
이홍균(Hongkyun Lee) 한국인문사회과학회 2006 현상과 인식 Vol.30 No.3
‘Human right’ is a main-stream issue in the discourses of modern society. The rights of expanding private space as well as the rights of reducing unequal expansion in private space are primarily discussed in the discourses. People living in the modern industrialized society are ruled by the coercive power, namely the rate of expanded reproduction. The total rule by the rate make men in the industrialized countries mutually acknowledge the destruction of public space as the result of expanding private space. The situation of forcing each other to expand own private space makes people indifferent of public space. As the result, the public space are destructed very rapidly. Ironically, the exhaustion of both moral resources and natural resources make the expansion of private space no more possible. Nevertheless, the standpoint of “pursuing private gains will bring to the increase of public goods” by Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek is generally accepted. The public goods mentioned by them are material wealth. Such a standpoint can be regarded as an ancient ethic that Garrett Hardin pointed out. And as the club of Rome has also pointed, the plus feedback loop is converting to minus feedback loop. The conversion from the discourses about human rights to the viewpoint of the greater whole society is urgent. At the same time, it is required to convert from the logic of ‘expanded reproduction rate’ which is the basis of mainstream discourses of human rights in modern society.
이홍균(Hongkyun Lee) 한양대학교 수행인문학연구소 2008 수행인문학 Vol.38 No.2
This paper tries to explain the unintended results of economic growth. Even if economic growth is usually interpreted as the increase of material wealth, this study makes an attempt to interpret it as the results of social pressure to reach a higher standard of living which rises along with economic growth. This means that people degenerate into a social failure if they have not reached a certain level of economic growth. Of course the social pressure they constantly feel is to accomplish economic growth, not to degenerate into a social failure. The social pressure for economic growth is circulating. While the unintended results are in general produced from the circulation of social pressure, it is especially from the circulation of social pressure for economic growth that they are produced; for example, unemployment, poverty, individualization, expansion of instrumental reason, environmental crisis, etc. This paper points out that nobody takes the responsibility for these unintended results, because everybody is in the situation not free from social pressure.
미드와 뚜렌의 '자아' 이론 비교 : 행위의 일반 이론 구성을 위한 시도
이홍균(Hongkyun Lee) 한국인문사회과학회 2005 현상과 인식 Vol.29 No.3
이 논문은 미드와 뚜렌의 객관적 자아와 주관적 자아 이론을 비교, 종합함으로써 행위의 다양성을 포괄할 수 있는 행위의 일반 이론을 구성하기 위한 기초를 마련하기 위한 것이다. 미드와 뚜렌은 각각 서로 다른 이론적 맥락에서, 곧 미드는 사회화 과정을 이론화하는 과정에서 그리고 뚜렌은 현대성을 비판하고 주체화를 그 대안으로 제시하는 과정에서, 객관적 자아와 주관적 자아 개념을 사용하고 있다. 따라서 그들의 이론을 종합하면 행위의 다양성을 포괄할 수 있게 된다. 그러나 그들의 이론을 종합하여도 다양한 행위의 일부분만을 설명하는 데 그친다. This paper attempts to construct a general theory of action by comparing and synthesizing George Herbert Mead and Alain Touraine's theories of the objective and subjective self. The concepts of the objective and subjective self are used in completely different contexts. While Mead's context is of theorizing the process of socialization, Touraine's is about criticizing modernity and suggesting subjectivity as its alternative. Thus, the synthesis of the two theories will contribute to enlightening the hidden facets of human action. However, even when the two theories are combined well, the result can only explain several facets of various kinds of actions.<br/> The term action is classified in 12 categories. First of all, the self is divided into two parts: the objective self and the subjective self. Then, the objective self is divided into social norm and social pressure and the subjective self is split into creative and critical parts versus impulsive and deviant parts. Thus, four different kinds of action exist in ‘self’ and they have influences on each other. In this relationship, eight different kinds of action are induced. Since social norm and social pressure are not directly related to each other, creative and critical parts have no influence on impulsive and deviant parts.<br/> Mead explains only two kinds of action, that is the ‘action of social norm’ and the ‘action of subjective self’. Furthermore, Touraine elucidates two different kinds of action: action of social pressure and alternative action of subjectivity. Despite the different emphasis, the synthesis of these two theorists will provide very significant resources to construct a new action theory.
이홍균(Hongkyun Lee) 한국인문사회과학회 2008 현상과 인식 Vol.32 No.1·2
일반적으로 민주화 이행론과 민주주의 공고화론에서는, 민주화를 선거 제도의 확립과 정당민주주의 제도의 정착으로 여기고 있다. 그러나 이 논문은 민주화 이전 단계에서 일어난 사회ㆍ경제적 독점의 해체가 일어나야 민주화 이후 민주주의의 정착이 일어나게 된다는 것을 증명하기 위한 이론적 시도의 하나이다. 이 논문에서는 동유럽의 민주화 이후, 사회ㆍ경제적 독점의 해체 과정을 추적하고 있다. 정치에 의해 사회와 경제가 결정되고 있었던 동유럽 국가들은 정치적 독점에 의해 사회ㆍ경제적 독점이 결정되고 있었던 대표적인 사례에 속한다. 따라서 동유럽에서 진행되고 있는 정치적 독점의 해체는 사회ㆍ경제적 독점의 해체까지 연장하여 추적되어야 할 대표적인 사례이다. 이 논문에서는 특히 과거의 공산당원이 동유럽의 민주화 이후 계승 정당으로 변신하여 정치권력을 재장악하는 과정, 공산당원이 경제인ㆍ기업가인 노멘클라투라로 변신하는 과정, 그리고 사회적 독점의 해체 이후 민족간의 분쟁의 심화 등을 중점적으로 다루고 있다. In theory of democratization and consolidation of democracy it is generally accepted as taking root of democracy if the institution of election and party democracy has settled down. But this paper tries to prove that the taking root of democracy includes of dissolving the social-economic monopoly, which in the era of political monopoly has taken place. This paper follows up the process of dissolving the social-economic monopoly, after the democratization of eastern europe. In eastern europe, which the politics had determined the social and the economic, the social-economic monopoly had been determined by political monopoly. Consequently eastern europe is the important example to trace not only the process of dissolving the political monopoly, but also the process of the social-economic monopoly. This paper focuses on the process of reholding the political power by the old member of a communist party, on the process of transforming the old member of a communist party into the businessmen, and on the process of deepening the struggles between the races after dissolving the social monopoly.