http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Heejung Seo-Reich(Heejung Seo-Reich ) (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
An Analysis of the Problems and Causes of the Formation of Multicultural Families in Korea 2010-2020
Heejung Seo-Reich(Heejung Seo-Reich ),Sun Yiwei(Yiwei Sun),Yu Yinxia(Yinxia Yu),Jin Liuxi(Liuxi Jin),Wang Dehui(Dehui Wang) 영남퇴계학연구원 2022 The Journal of Toegye Studies Vol.5 No.2
This article aims to examine the status of multicultural families in Korea from 2010 to 2020, while analyzing their problems and reasons from a multi-layered perspective, to provide an academic foundation for reference in supporting a social safety system for the stable settlement of those families. Although foreign immigrants experience a certain acceptance due to economic necessity, this attitude is often only a conditional and partial acceptance that does not consider migrants as full members of the community and, moreover, sometimes even suspects them of promoting social division through their presence. This study comprehensively analyzes the current status, problems, and causes of problems in multicultural families in Korea through related data between 2010 and 2020. The problems of multicultural families are manifested mainly in economic, cultural and social terms, and each of these problems is organically interconnected. International marriages between Korean men and female immigrants from developing countries are facing a special set of issues such as unequal status of the spouses or specific problems in child’s education. These problems are serious in the sense that they are not only a temporary burden for the multicultural families, but can also affect future generations, the chances of their development and their inclusion in society. Analysis of these problems, which lie in factors of the social environment and cultural differences, can serve as a basis for countermeasures that will benefit multicultural families in Korea. The problems of multinational families must be understood and addressed in their intertwined complexity in order to find solutions that benefit not only these families, but ultimately society as a whole.
-
An Analysis of the Research Categories of Aesthetics in Contemporary China
Heejung Seo Reich 영남퇴계학연구원 2021 The Journal of Toegye Studies Vol.4 No.2
This paper aims to present the direction in which aesthetic research in East Asian countries should move forward through the analysis of Chinese aesthetic research trends that have developed discussions about aesthetics into a grand de–bate called aesthetic popularity (美學熱). “Aesthetics” was received relatively early during the modernization process in East Asian countries, but due to its conflicting characteristics of “ambiguity” and “inclusiveness” that created obstacles to its development it could not obtain its status as an academic discipline. Meanwhile, aesthetic research in China today has grown rapidly and maintains a world-class level in terms of scale and research performance. This paper inquires the background of the development of aesthetic research in China and subsequently analyzes the research trends of contemporary Chinese aesthetics in five categories to examine the status of current aesthetic research.
-
『장자』 「제물론」에서의 두 가지 자아 ‘오(吾)’와 ‘아(我)’ 연구
徐希定 ( Heejung Seo Reich ) 한국유교학회 2021 유교사상문화연구 Vol.- No.86
본 논문은 『장자』 「제물론」 해석에 있어서의 주류를 이루어 온 두 가지 입장을 분석하는 동시에 「제물론」 배후에 감춰진 서로 다른 양태의 자아 ‘아’와 ‘오’의 존재를 밝힘으로써 「제물론」의 의도와 목적을 밝히고 그 현대적 의의를 재진단하는 것에 그 목적이 있다. 「제물론」 편명인 ‘제물론’을 어떻게 이해할 것인가에 대해서는 크게 세 가지 관점이 있어왔다. ①‘제-물론’: ‘물론(物論)’, 즉 대상에 관한 논의를 가지런히 하는 논의. ②‘제물-론’: ‘제물(齊物)’, 즉 ‘대상을 가지런히 함’에 관한 논의. ③‘제-(물+론)’: ‘대상(物) 그리고 이론(論) 모두를 가지런히 함’에 관한 논의가 그것이다. 한편, 본 논문에서는 마지막 ③‘제-(물+론)’의 입장이 실제로는 큰 의미가 없다고 판단하고, 이를 분석의 대상에서 제외시켰다. ①‘제-물론’은 노자나 은자와 같은 도가인물의 사상은 물론, 유가나 묵가 담론을 그 주된 대상으로 하며, 이들 간에 형성된 일방적이고 절대적인 담론 체계를 공격한다. ②‘제물-론’은 두 가지 해석이 공존해 왔는데, 그중 하나가 ‘물은 가지런하다’이고, 다른 하나는 ‘물을 가지런히 해야 한다’라는 입장이다. 전자의 경우 ‘가지런함’은 ‘물’에게 주어진 본체론적 특성이 되며, 따라서 주체의 의지에서 벗어나 있다. 반면 후자의 경우 ‘대상을 가지런하게 함’이라는 주체적 행위의 정당성을 논하고 있다. 여기서 ‘물’을 가지런하게 해야 함은 본래 가지런한 ‘물’이 가지런하지 않게 변형되었다는 사실을 전제하고 있으며, 따라서 ‘제물’ 행위의 당위성은 오로지 전자가 논하고 있는 형이상학을 통해서만 보장받을 수 있다. 본 논문은 「제물론」 첫 단락 ‘오상아(吾喪我)’ 우화에 근거하여 가지런한 ‘물’이 가지런하지 못한 ‘물’로 변형된 근본 원인을 인지행위와 감정의 주체인 ‘아’에서 찾았다. 한편 또 다른 인간양태 ‘오’는 자연에서의 ‘물’이라는 인식의 대상과 합일된 상태로 있는 인간 양태로, ‘물’이 근거하는 우주의 법칙에 따라 ‘물’과 함께 변화해 나간다. 그렇기 때문에 ‘오’의 존재는 인식론 차원에서는 설명될 수 없으며, 오로지 ‘오’와 ‘아’라는 서로 다른 양태의 인간이 지니는 생활양식의 격차를 통해서만 드러날 수 있다. 「제물론」의 의도는 인지행위와 감정의 주체 ‘아’가 지니는 삶의 양식의 변형을 통해 ‘아’의 인지 및 감정적 판단의 대상으로서의 ‘물’을 ‘오’와 동등한 위치에서 공존하는 상태의 ‘물’로 되돌리는 것에 있다. 자아의 변형을 통한 ‘제물’ 행위가 성공했을 때, 가지런하지 못한 ‘물’은 다시 본래의 가지런한 상태의 ‘물’로 회귀될 수 있다. This paper analyzes the two viewpoints that constituted the mainstream in the interpretation of the Qiwulun 齊物論 [Equality of Things] chapter in Zhuangzi (莊子). At the same time, it aims for clarifying the purpose of this chapter and seeks to define its significance for modern philosophy by elaborating the two different concepts of self that lie hidden in the text: Wu 吾 and Wo 我. There have been three main viewpoints on how to understand the term “Qiwulun”, which also is the name of the second chapter of Zhuangzi: ① Qi-wulun: The discussion about equalizing debates about wu 物 [things]. ② Qiwu-lun: The discussion about equalizing wu 物 [things]. ③ Qi-(wu+lun): The discussion about equalizing both wu 物 [things] and lun 論 [debates]. However, for this paper, I presume that the third viewpoint does not have any implication other than combining ① and ②, and thus will exclude it from the research. ① The intention of the Qi-wulun discussion is to target the discourses between Daoists - especially Laozi (老子) and the hermits [隱者] -, Confucianists and Mohists and to criticize the unilateral and absolute discourse system they formed among them. For ②, two contradicting interpretations coexisted, one of which is “things are equal” and the other is “to have to equalize things.”In the former case, “equality” becomes an ontological characteristic given to wu 物, and thus is beyond the control of ones subjective will. In the latter case, it discusses the legitimacy of the subjective action of “equalizing things.” Here, the argument that wu 物 should be equalized assumes the fact that the original wu 物 has been deformed, therefore, the justification of the act of “equalizing” it can only be guaranteed through the metaphysics discussed by the former. This paper discovered the underlying causes for how wu 物 in even state became unequalized wu 物, in the concept of wo 我, the subject of cognitive behavior and emotion, as explained in the fable “I lost myself [吾喪我]” in the first paragraph of Qiwulun chapter. In contrast, wu 吾 is a another type of human that is in unity with wu 物 (the object of human recognition), participating in the change with wu 物 [things], according to the laws of the universe on which wu 物 is based. Therefore, the existence of wu 吾 cannot be explained on the epistemological level, it can only be revealed through the gap in the lives of different human types of wu 吾 and wo 我. To sum up, the fundamental purpose of the Qiwulun 齊物論 chapter is to return wu 物 as the object of cognitive and emotional judgment of wo 我. back to wu 物 in a state that coexists with wu 吾 through the transformation of the wo 我, the subject of the cognitive behavior and emotional reaction. Only when one succeeds in the act of Qiwu (齊物), unevened wu 物 can be returned to wu 物 in its original state of evenness.
KCI연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
