RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재후보

      인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격  :  한국 인문학의 새로운 구상 = The Ubiquities of the Humanities and Textuality in Human Experience

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100548536

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      The so-called “crisis of the humanities” can be understood in terms of an asymmetry between the natural and social sciences on the one hand and the humanities on the other. While the sciences approach topics related to human experience in quantificational or experimental terms, the humanities often turn to ancient texts in the search for truths about human experience. As both of these approaches have their own unique limitations, overcoming or rectifying the asymmetry between them is desirable. The present article seeks to do just that by advancing and defending the following two claims: a) that the humanities are ubiquitous wherever language is used, and b) that anything that can be experienced by humans is in need of interpretation. Two arguments are presented in support of these claims. The first argument concerns the nature of questions, which are fundamental marks or manifestations of human language. All questions are ultimately attempts to find alternative meanings or interpretations of what is presented. As such, in questioning phenomena, one seeks to transcend the oppression of imposed structures and in doing so reveals one’s humanity. Second, all phenomena are textual in nature: that which astrophysicists find in distant galaxies or which cognitive neuroscientists find in the structures of the human brain are no less in need of interpretation than the dialogues of Plato or the poems of Homer. Texts are ubiquitous. The implications of these two arguments are identified and discussed in this article. In particular, the ubiquity of humanity and textuality points to a view of human nature that is neither individualistic nor collectivist, but rather integrational in suggesting that the realization of oneself is inseparable from the realization of all others (成己成物).
      번역하기

      The so-called “crisis of the humanities” can be understood in terms of an asymmetry between the natural and social sciences on the one hand and the humanities on the other. While the sciences approach topics related to human experience in quantifi...

      The so-called “crisis of the humanities” can be understood in terms of an asymmetry between the natural and social sciences on the one hand and the humanities on the other. While the sciences approach topics related to human experience in quantificational or experimental terms, the humanities often turn to ancient texts in the search for truths about human experience. As both of these approaches have their own unique limitations, overcoming or rectifying the asymmetry between them is desirable. The present article seeks to do just that by advancing and defending the following two claims: a) that the humanities are ubiquitous wherever language is used, and b) that anything that can be experienced by humans is in need of interpretation. Two arguments are presented in support of these claims. The first argument concerns the nature of questions, which are fundamental marks or manifestations of human language. All questions are ultimately attempts to find alternative meanings or interpretations of what is presented. As such, in questioning phenomena, one seeks to transcend the oppression of imposed structures and in doing so reveals one’s humanity. Second, all phenomena are textual in nature: that which astrophysicists find in distant galaxies or which cognitive neuroscientists find in the structures of the human brain are no less in need of interpretation than the dialogues of Plato or the poems of Homer. Texts are ubiquitous. The implications of these two arguments are identified and discussed in this article. In particular, the ubiquity of humanity and textuality points to a view of human nature that is neither individualistic nor collectivist, but rather integrational in suggesting that the realization of oneself is inseparable from the realization of all others (成己成物).

      더보기

      목차 (Table of Contents)

      • Ⅰ. 들어가며
      • Ⅱ. 편재적 인문성
      • 1. 인문편재성: 왜 묻는가?
      • 2. 인문성 개념
      • 3. 개입적 반인문성
      • Ⅰ. 들어가며
      • Ⅱ. 편재적 인문성
      • 1. 인문편재성: 왜 묻는가?
      • 2. 인문성 개념
      • 3. 개입적 반인문성
      • Ⅲ. 편재적 문본성
      • 1. 문본과 문맥
      • 2. 탈문자언어
      • 3. 영화언어
      • Ⅳ. 인문학의 문본성
      • 1. 고전: 인문성 표시체
      • 2. 인문성과 인문학
      • 3. 영역별 인문학과 탈영역 인문학
      • Ⅴ. 인간 연대성
      • 1. 인문성과 인간론
      • 2. 자유주의 대 공동체주의
      • 3. 결속 관계와 분업 관계
      • Ⅵ. 나가며: 편재성과 인문학
      • Works Cited
      • Abstract
      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼