인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상

@article{ART002003454},
author={ 정대현 },
title={인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상},
journal={탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities},
issn={2092-6081},
year={2015},
volume={8},
number={2},
pages={5-40},
doi={10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5}

TY - JOUR
AU - 정대현
TI - 인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상
T2 - 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities
PY - 2015
VL - 8
IS - 2
PB - 이화여자대학교 이화인문과학원
SP - 5-40
SN - 2092-6081
AB - 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).
KW - non-symmetry between sciences and humanities, questions, digital technology, integrational anthropology, division of labour and relation of bonding
DO - 10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5
ER -

정대현 (2015). 인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상. 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities, 8( 2), 5- 40.

정대현 . 2015, “인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상”, 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 5-40. Available from: doi:10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5

정대현 “인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상” 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities 8.2 pp. 5-40 (2015): 5.

정대현 . 인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities [Internet]. 2015; 8( 2), : 5-40. Available from: doi:10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5

정대현 . “인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상” 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities 8, no.2 (2015): 5-40. doi: 10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5

홈 권호 목록 논문 목록 논문 상세

인문성과 문본성, 그 편재적 성격: 한국 인문학의 새로운 구상

탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities

약어 : -

2015, vol.8, no.2, pp.5 - 40

DOI : 10.22901/trans.2015.8.2.5

발행기관 : 이화여자대학교 이화인문과학원

연구분야 : 기타인문학

정대현¹

¹이화여자대학교

인용한 논문 수 : 3 서지 간략 보기

초록

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).

키워드

non-symmetry between sciences and humanities, questions, digital technology, integrational anthropology, division of labour and relation of bonding

참고문헌(39)

[단행본] Allen, Richard / 1997 / Film Theory and Philosophy / Clarendon Press : 76 ~ 94
[단행본] 백종현 / 2010 / 칸트와헤겔의 철학: 시대와의 대화 / 아카넷
[단행본] 최영진 / 2000 / 한국철학의 쟁점 / 철학과 현실사 : 121 ~ 149
[단행본] 정대현 / 1997 / 맞음의 철학-진리와 의미를 위하여 / 철학과 현실사
[단행본] 정대현 / 2001 / 심성내용의 신체성: 심리언어의 문맥적 외재주의(494면) / 아카디아(대우학술총서)
[학술지] 정대현 / 2004 / 그런 사실은 없다 - 사실 문장의 규칙 규범성을 위한 모색 / 철학적 분석 (10) : 1 ~ 24
[학술지] 정대현 / 2005 / 성기성물(成己成物) : 대안적 가치를 향하여 / 범한철학 36 (1) : 97 ~ 125
[학술지] 정대현 / 2005 / 성(誠)의 지향성: 이원적 지향성에서 음양적 지향성에로 / 철학논집 9 : 73 ~ 88
[학술지] 정대현 / 2009 / 그라함 나잇 저니의 언어성 -언어로서의 무용 / 무용예술학연구 27 (27) : 95 ~ 115
[단행본] 정대현 / 2013 / 이것을 저렇게도: 다원주의적 실재론 / 세창출판사
[학술지] 정대현 / 2014 / 지칭의 자연화 - 음양 존재론을 향한 지칭 개념 모색 / 철학 (120) : 27 ~ 52
[단행본] 정대현 / 2000 / 표현인문학 / 생각의 나무
[단행본] Church, George / 2012 / Regenesis: How Synthetic Biology Will Reinvent Nature and Ourselves / Basic Books
[학술지] Gaus, Gerald F / 1994 / Property, Rights, and Freedom / Social Philosophy and Policy 11 (2) : 209 ~ 240
[단행본] 굳맨, 넬슨 / 1993 / 예술의 언어들: 기호이론을 향하여 / 이화여자대학교출판부
[단행본] / 2006 / 국어사전 / 민중서림 : 212
[단행본] 하버마스, 위르겐 / 1994 / 현대성의 철학적 담론 / 문예출판사
[단행본] 카네만, 대니얼 / 2001 / 불확실한 상황에서의 판단 / 아카넷
[단행본] 칸트, 임마누엘 / 2009 / 칸트의 역사 철학 / 서광사
[단행본] 김기현 / 2011 / 현대 인식론 / 민음사
[단행본] 김상환 / 2012 / 철학과 인문적 상상력 / 문학과지성사
[학술지] 고인석 / 2003 / 파이어아벤트의 포퍼 비판:이론증식 테제의 의미 / 범한철학 (28) : 5 ~ 30
[단행본] 이종관 / 2003 / 사이버 문화와 예술의 유혹 / 문예출판사
[단행본] 이성원 / 1996 / 대학개혁의 과제와 방향 / 민음사 : 127 ~ 132
[학술지] Luther, Martin / 1955 / Commentary on Galatians / Concordia Theological Monthly 26 : 801
[단행본] Margolis, Joseph / 1983 / What is Dance? / Oxford UP : 376 ~ 389
[단행본] Mill, John Stuart / 1965 / Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Vol. 8 / U of Toronto P
[단행본] 오생근 / 2013 / 미셀 푸코와 현대성 / 나남
[단행본] 박이문 / 1983 / 예술철학 / 문학과 지성사
[단행본] 박이문 / 2010 / 예술과 생태 / 미다스북스 : 27 ~ 52
[단행본] 박이문 / 1998 / Reality, Rationality and Value / Seoul National UP
[단행본] 박이문 / 2000 / 표현인문학 / 생각의 나무
[단행본] Quine, Willard Van Orman / 1960 / Word and Object / MIT Press
[단행본] Rawls, John / 1993 / A Theory of Justice / Harvard UP : 56
[단행본] Rorty, Richard / 1991 / Objectivity. Relativism, and Truth: Philosophical Papers. Vol. 1 / Cambridge UP
[단행본] Taylor, Charles / 1985 / Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Philosophical Papers 2 / Cambridge UP
[단행본] Turvey, Malcolm / 1997 / Film Theory and Philosophy / Clarendon Press : 431 ~ 457
[단행본] Walzer, Michael / 1983 / Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality / Basic Books
[학위논문] 염인선 / 2000 / 인과적 지각론과 국면보기