역사사회학에서의 제한적 탈맥락화: 역사적 특수성과 제한적 일반화의 방법론적 재정식화

김석 한국사회역사학회 2026 담론 201 Vol.29 No.2

본 논문은 역사사회학에서 역사적 사건의 특수성과 제한적 일반화의 관계를 방법론적 설명 형식의 문제로 재정식화한다. 역사사회학은 역사학과 사회학의 경계에서 형성되어 왔기 때문에, 한편으로는 사건의 개별성ㆍ시간성ㆍ맥락성을 보존해야 한다는 요구를 받고, 다른 한편으로는 단순한 서사적 재구성을 넘어 비교와 설명을 수행해야 한다는 요구를 받는다. 이 긴장은 역사적 특수성을 일반화의 반대항으로만 이해할 때 해결되지 않는다. 본 논문은 역사적 사건이 구체적 시공간 속에서 발생한다는 존재론적 특수성과, 연구자가 특정 분석수준에서 사건을 개념화ㆍ비교ㆍ설명하는 방법론적 절차를 구분할 필요가 있다고 주장한다. 이를 바탕으로 역사사회학의 제한적 일반화를 보편법칙의 약화판이 아니라, 사건의 의미맥락과 시간적 배열을 보존하면서도 분석을 위해 특정 맥락 요소를 선택적으로 괄호치는 ‘제한적 탈맥락화’의 설명 형식으로 정의한다. 본 논문은 먼저 국내외 역사사회학 논의에서 이 문제가 어떻게 분산적으로 제기되어 왔는지를 검토하고, 이어 역사주의 전통 전체가 아니라 역사적 개별성을 일반화와 비교의 원리적 금지명령으로 전환하는 ‘강한 특수성 논리’를 비판적으로 검토한다. 다음으로 사건연쇄, 경로의존, 이념형, 비교역사분석이 제한적 일반화를 가능하게 하는 구체적 장치임을 논의한다. 마지막으로 루만의 사회진화이론과 분화이론을 메타이론적 시험 사례로 검토하면서, 그것이 역사적 특수성을 일반 사회이론의 관찰수준에서 재배치하는 장점과 중범위 역사사회학적 설명을 대체하기 어려운 한계를 함께 보인다고 주장한다. 이를 통해 본 논문은 역사적 특수성이 역사사회학적 설명의 장애물이 아니라, 제한적 일반화의 조건이자 출발점임을 밝히고자 한다. This article reformulates the relationship between historical specificity and limited generalization in historical sociology as a problem of methodological explanation. Historical sociology must preserve the individuality, temporality, and contextuality of historical events while moving beyond narrative reconstruction toward comparison and explanation. To address this tension, the article distinguishes the ontological specificity of events, which occur in concrete spatiotemporal contexts, from the methodological procedures through which researchers conceptualize, compare, and explain them at a particular analytical level. On this basis, limited generalization is defined not as a weakened version of universal law-like generalization, but as a form of “limited decontextualization”: certain contextual elements are selectively bracketed while contexts of meaning and temporal sequences remain within the explanation. The article critically examines a strong logic of specificity that turns historical individuality into a principled prohibition against comparison and generalization. It then discusses event sequences, path dependence, ideal types, and comparative-historical analysis as devices that make limited generalization possible. Finally, Luhmann’s theory of social evolution and differentiation is considered as a metatheoretical test case. It offers a way to relocate historical specificity at the level of general social theory, but cannot replace middle-range historical-sociological explanation. Historical specificity is therefore not an obstacle to explanation, but its condition and point of departure.

3⋅1운동 100주년, 역사전쟁과 고종 독시(毒弑)

이영재 한국사회역사학회 2019 담론 201 Vol.22 No.2

This paper especially focuses on the hypothesis of poisoning Emperor Gojong, because the intensity of the ideological rejection of poisoning of Emperor Gojong on the 100th anniversary of the 3⋅1 movement. There is a concern about the historical war that makes history a tool for certain ideologies. The ideological denial of the poisoning of Gojong is likely to extend to the exclusion of Gojong and the Korean Empire in relation to the interpretation of political modernization in Korea. The purpose of this study is a dual purpose, the one is to watch out for the concern that the hypothesis of poisoning Emperor Gojong will be instrumentalized as part of the ‘historical war’. The other is to examine the controversy over the political necessity of Japan to assassinate Gojong, the actual issue of the poisoning of Gojong, the point of time of death of Gojong and the cause of death, and to overcome the contributing to the elimination of exhaustion controversy. 이 논문이 특히 고종 독살설에 주목한 것은 3⋅1운동 100주년을 맞아 유독 고종 독살설에 대한 부정의 강도가 실체적 진실이 아닌 이념적 강도를 더해가며 증폭되고 있기 때문이다. 자칫 특정 이념에 역사를 도구화하는 역사전쟁의 우려가 나타나고 있다. 고종 독살설에 대한 이념적 부정은 한국의 정치적 근대화 해석과 관련하여 고종과 대한제국에 대한 배제로까지 확대될 가능성이 높다는 점에서 유의할 필요가 있다. 이 연구의 연구목적은 이중적인 데 하나는 역사가들의 이념에 따라 역사적 사실을 주조하는 근현대사 ‘역사전쟁’의 일환으로 고종독살설이 도구화될 우려를 경계하는 것이다. 다른 하나는 고종독살설의 실체적 쟁점인 고종을 암살해야 할 일본의 정치적 필요성, 고종의 사망시점 및 사망원인 등에 대한 논란을 검토해 고종 독살설의 실체에 다가감으로써 최근 ‘야사’로까지 치부되고 있는 고종 독살설과 관련한 소모적 논란을 해소하는데 있다.

담론 201 을 창간하며 ( 한국사회역사학회 , 담론 201 , 제 1 권 2 호 )

김성건 한국사회역사학회 1998 담론 201 Vol.1 No.2

N/A

기조강연 : 한국사회역사학회 2007년도 추계 학술대회 기조강연 : 세계화와 민족주의를 생각하면서 -우리 시대의 학문하기-

진덕규 ( Duk Kyu Jin ) 한국사회역사학회 2007 담론 201 Vol.10 No.3

담론 201 의 지향점 ( 한국사회역사학회 , 담론 201 제 2 권 3 호 , 1999 )

김왕식 한국사회역사학회 1999 담론 201 Vol.2 No.3

N/A

IMF 경제위기 이후 초대형 교회 목회자들의 설교에 나타난 부(富) 담론 분석

장형철 ( Hyung Chull Jang ) 한국사회역사학회 2014 담론 201 Vol.17 No.1

This research aims to discuss how the economic wealth is conceived in Korean Protestantism since the IMF economic crisis by means of analyzing the dicourse of wealth appeared in the sermons of ministers of Korean mega- churches. More specifically, this research attempts to reply some questions such as ``what is the social implication of these sermons?``, ``in what way was the wealth discourse produced in those sermons?``, ``how can this wealth discourse have some effects on Korean society?``, and ``how can this religious discourse have an interaction with the dominant social discourse? By employing critical discourse analysis theory of Fairclough, this article discusses that the wealth discourse in the ministers`` sermons leads the belief of which the blessed are the rich. Also it causes the rich to perform social behaviors in order to approach the perfection of the blessed. The discourse also represents that the economic wealth is the blessing of God. In tandem, there is an interpretation of which tithing and making financial contribution to the church can guarantee the blessing of wealth. And utilizing their own epistemic and deontic modality, the minsters lead their audience, the rich or upper middle class, to identify themselves as rich Christians. This wealth discourse of Korean Protestantism is subject to the dominant social discourse of wealth produced under the strong influence of neo liberalism after the IMF crisis in 1997. In this religious wealth discourse, the lower middleclass and the poor can be excluded and become the others. If so, the wealth discourse cannot imply the universal love and social justice for everyone and endangers to become a religious ideology.

‘돌보지 않으면 살 수 없는’: 양안(兩岸)결혼이주자 사례를 통해 본 돌봄의 역설과 젠더 질서의 재구성

문경연 ( Kyungyun Moon ) 한국사회역사학회 2026 담론 201 Vol.29 No.1

This study analyzes how Cross-Strait marriage migrants have been incorporated into the care system in Taiwan during the transition to a super-aged society and the restructuring of the long-term care system. Since 1987, many of these migrants initially remained household caregivers due to legal and social constraints. In particular, male Cross-Strait marriage migrants assumed primary responsibility for childcare and domestic care, experiencing a reconfiguration of gender roles as they shifted from breadwinners to caregivers. As the demand for care labor increased, Cross-Strait marriage migrants who obtained legal and institutional citizenship began to acquire caregiving qualifications and move into the formal care labor sector. Although this shift appears to indicate expanded social participation, it also reflects efforts to reduce reliance on migrant care workers from other countries while incorporating the labor of Cross-Strait marriage migrants into the care system. This study conceptualizes this process as the “paradox of care.” While Cross-Strait marriage migrants seem to have moved beyond household care, they are once again positioned within social care, ultimately leading lives in which caring becomes a condition for survival. Within the reorganization of the care hierarchy in Taiwan, their care practices reveal how the politicization of care reshapes gender order and citizenship, positioning caregiving as a condition of survival.

뉴미디어가 이끄는 중국 담론지형의 변화

조복수 ( Bok Soo Cho ) 한국사회역사학회 2013 담론 201 Vol.16 No.4

This article observes the changes of main agendas and subjects concerning the right to discourse in China and analyzes the changing trend that the new media brought to China. From the socio-cultural perspective, the article tries to prove that due to the invigoration of the two-way communication channel, Chinese society is increasingly turning towards more open and communicative-friendly society. Through the chronological observation, the right to disclose, which was in fact the divine right of the party, has evolved from the nation to the economic actors. The article argues that the emergence of new media has expanded towards the public, diversifying the right to disclose. Moreover, resistance, criticism, agreement and participation of the Chinese public stipulate the new trend of the right to disclose driven by the new media. With the aforementioned arguments, the following can be concluded. First, the emergence of new media allowed the public to be the principal agents of the right to disclose. General public holds diverse thinking with diverse backgrounds. This allowed them to have the channel to express their own intentions. Second, the emergence of new media allows diverse agendas to be discussed. In the socialistic community where discussions were restricted by law, the debatable agendas were only those related to socialism. If the emergence of market opened the debate on economic agendas, the emergence of new media allowed for political, economic an diverse societal issues to be addressed. Third, new media attracted minor details of the daily lives of the Chinese public. As inferred by the article, the changes of the right to disclose in China led by new media resulted in opening up with the societal communication network and openness of the current China.

다문화주의의 역설

김희강 ( Hee Kang Kim ) 한국사회역사학회 2013 담론 201 Vol.16 No.4

In the current ‘post-multicultural era’ it would be meaningful to re-evaluate the existing evaluations on multiculturalism. This paper is concerned with the re-evaluation of multiculturalism recently posed by Will Kymlicka. According to Kymlicka, the existing evaluations on multiculturalism that diagnose the fall of it are theoretically inaccurate and empirically ungrounded. Instead, he suggests the factors that determine the rise or fall of multiculturalism, which he calls the precondition of multiculturalism. This paper focuses on the paradoxical aspect of multiculturalism rooted in the precondition of multiculturalism. The precondition includes (1) the dichotomous distinction between immigrant culture and majority culture, (2) receiving country`s border control power, and (3) the understanding of migration from the perspective of receiving country. Considering, however, that multiculturalism is generated from the global context of the movement of people and culture, the erose of a nation border, and the retreat of a nation-centric discourse, this paper argues that the precondition of multiculturalism is retrogressive to multiculturalism. That is, the paradox of multiculturalism lies in the fact that multiculturalism itself overlooks motives and dynamics of it.

한국의 보수 -개념의 궤적과 역사적 특징

권용립 ( Yong Lib Gweon ) 한국사회역사학회 2013 담론 201 Vol.16 No.4

Since the ‘Conservative Party’ of the Great Britain was translated into ‘bosu-dang’(保守黨) in the 1880s, ‘bosu’(保守), a word meaning to keep and protect, began to be used as a concept. Before the 1980s, however, the use of ‘bosu’ in South Korea was confined to daily lives with negative connotations. In the midst of political democratization in the 1980s and with the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, progressive political factions and liberal media turned ‘bosu’ into a political concept implying pro-Americanism, Anti-North Korea. This means that the concept of ‘bosu’ after 1980s has been re-coined with the heritage of the ideological war between the Left and the Right in the 1940s. This paper aims to explain how and why the concept of ‘bosu’ 1) has had heavy international implications, 2) has been used rhetorically rather than conceptually, and 3) has been captured in the memory of the past.