• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.147
• /
• pp.29-58
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that Hegel's philosophy of right is a dialectic critique of liberalism. The dialectical criticism in this article does not mean the formal logical denial, but a return to self by self-negation. Thus, if Hegel's philosophy of right is a dialectical critique of liberalism, Hegel's philosophy of right will be critical of liberalism and at the same time, it will not reject liberalism, but rather have aspects of liberalism. The criticism of liberalism implies that individual freedoms and rights can not be realized subjectively through individual free acts, but are realized intersubjectively through social mediums. And this is also found in controversies among modern liberalists because modern liberalism requires the government's role and institutional arrangements for the realization of individual freedoms and rights. We can find the aspects of liberalism in Hegel's philosophy of right since Hegel's ethical life entails ultimately the concrete realization and extension of individual freedom and rights.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.197-212
• /
• 2019

This study points out how the two conflicting elements of empathy and estrangement that constitute the dual structure of are incorporated by dialectic; finally, this paper explores the spontaneous estrangement effects' meaning and value on the point of view of reception aesthetics. As results of these studies, First, the Brechtian set of estrangement effects techniques showed that in it could function as an empathy technique for audiences. Second, the role of Sanbazi to increase the audience's participation was to produce both the immersion effect and the estrangement effect simultaneously. These double features of Sanbazi are dialectically incorporated and simultaneously bring about both the social reality reflection and enjoyment of the audience. Third, the puppetry is valid as not a way to describe reality but one of the ways to look at social reality. Conclusionally, in terms of producing counter-discourse, the puppet show has more extensible than any other form of performance with regard to expression.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.62 no.2
• /
• pp.349-373
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze the way of knowledge production in social welfare and to graft feminist epistemology to the discipline of social welfare. To put it more concretely, as analyzing the epistemological and methodological issues appeared in the articles in "orean Journal of Social Welfare", this study examines the meanings of feminist epistemology and its implications to research and practice in social welfare. From its onset, feminist research criticized the 'mainstream' ways of conceptualizing knowledge construction via research conducted upon a positivist epistemological position. Particularly, western feminists have problematized the androcentric bias embedded within the so-called 'social sciences' that we have taken for granted as 'scientific,' 'objective,' and 'neutral,' and attempted to redirect and reformulate the way of knowledge production with new concepts of 'strong objectivity,' 'partial/situated knowledge,' and 'strong reflection.' We believe that the implications of feminist epistemology to enable us to reflect the power relationship between subject and object, I and Other, and the researcher and the researched will contribute to recover the original vision of social welfare as critical theory and liberating practice in social work.

• Journal of the Korean association of regional geographers
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.288-310
• /
• 2017

This paper aims to provide a conceptual framework to see the special zones in East Asia in relation to the territorialities of the state. For this, it will introduce Aihwa Ong's notion of 'spaces of exception', and provide some critical discussions on it. Unlike Ong, I do not see the spaces of exception as an outcome of neoliberal changes of the state. Instead, I propose to see the special zones in terms of the internal limitations of the modern state territoriality. In particular, I try to theorize the special zones in relation to the dialectics of the contradictory relations between mobility and fixity inherent in the territoriality of the modern nation state. In addition, it will be suggested to see special zones as an essential part of the spatiality of the East Asian developmental states, given the spatio-temporal contexts of the East Asian capitalist development. On the basis of these theoretical discussions, this paper will divide the special zones that have been developed in East Asia since the 1960s into 3 different types, including 1) developmentalist special zones, 2) neo-liberal special zones, and 3) special zones for transition, and discuss their characteristics.

• Journal of the Korean association of regional geographers
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.76-84
• /
• 2010

This study is to critically examine a variety of perspectives of seeing the interactions among space, people, and society. According to Tuan, place is a center of meaning constructed by people's experience, and its attributes consist of natural and built-up environments. Entrikin suggests a way of seeing place from a contrary perspective, that is, the subjective and existential sense of place and the objective and naturalistic conception of place. Lefebvre examines the historical transformation of social space through the dialectics among the perceived space, the conceived space, and the lived space. Social space is (re)produced and changed through the conflictual unit of the spatial triad. The project of Foucault's spatial metaphor is to tightly combine three critical concepts, power, knowledge, and space. Those concepts are not objectively existed regardless of specific times and spaces, but they are socially and culturally constructed through the networks of people under particular environments. In the following papers, it is needed to comparatively examine the various perspectives mentioned above to make a new conceptual framework of understanding the interactions among space, people, and society.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.27 no.7
• /
• pp.609-622
• /
• 2007

The Science Month Festival which is held in our schools provides students with more access to science to expand their science base. However current Science Month Festival is recognized as a pro forma event without it's educational ideal. For this reason, the Science Month Festival has been criticized. This study was aimed to reconsider Science Month Festival by straining at the voices of subjects which were connected to it directly or indirectly. The results showed that every subject didn't make public discourse which makes mutual connections dialectically. Therefore, the voices of dissatisfaction couldn't make alternative plans to solve the problems. Finally, we proposed transaction between private and public discourses in subjects for substance for the Science Month Festival.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.142
• /
• pp.75-97
• /
• 2017

This study purpose is to discuss critically the conception of history in Hegel and Marx by drawing on Merleau-Ponty's existential theory of history, finishing with concluding remarks. Merleau-Ponty insists that history is always history experienced. This thesis is his own principle in investigating human history. From this perspective, he begins to flesh out problems with history which Hegel and Marx had understood idealistically and materialistically respectively. He criticised that if Hegel grasps history in terms of teleology, he failed to explain the source and origin of historical meaning from which history makes sense. He failed to think that what gives history meaning comes from embodied consciousness. This means that history is not made of dialectical thinking. The thing is different from such an imaginative construal. History as it stands is not like that. It is not running around like Hegelian dialectical thinking. Marx understood historical behavior wrongly when he explained class struggle in terms of productive relations. He disregarded how class was sedimented or embodied in the minds of proletarians. Owing to this, Marx could not suppose that class consciousness is determined not causally or externally but by incarnated experience. It is affected in so far as it is affected by somebody, that is, the worker. At that moment only Class consciousness begins to work. Marx did not catch sight of this hidden fact.