• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.20 no.6
• /
• pp.57-76
• /
• 2011

This study is on the pedagogical convention of architectural history in Korea, especially that of Western Architecture. Recent institutional change in architectural school in Korea has caused overall restructuring of academic program. In spite of extension in the field of history there was no progress of method and way of thinking. There is no change in the point of view to see the western architecture and its history as a unique and specialized phenomenon in the civilization of mankind. Because of no recognition about for what, for whom, and how to, and because of orientalism, the cultural position of western architectural history and its narrative was not asked. With the help of post-colonialism, de-constructivism and critical historiography this paper tries to show the fundamental premise of western architectural history as a myth and show its prejudice as not being justifiable. The background of the discourse there has been a representation effect with regard to knowledge as a power. we need to escape from this kind of cognitional frame With the analysis of the its premise and narrative we can find it is a historical construct that was made in the age of imperialism. In fact it has a lot of false information and problematic point of view. The Identity and originality of western architecture and its history has no logical reason or foundation if we think that it depends on the difference and comparison with other civilization. For example the explanation of its historical origin western architecture has big difference with Islamic architecture in spite of the resemblance each other. This paper try to show several reasons that discourse of western architectural history can not be survived any longer. So we need to reconstruct new pedagogy with deconstruction for the students of non western, or Korean students. Because it has important effect to see and think about architecture and its history.

• Asia pacific journal of information systems
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.31-49
• /
• 2012

In this essay, we problematize the problematics of the KMIS SOLOMO research agenda. We propose that the SOLOMO agenda is a conditioned product of the various assumptions, biases, premises, and presuppositions that the field of IS collectively succumbs to and shares, and thus needs to be problematized to arrive at a new set of research questions for the field. The problematization begins with the ontology that underlies the agenda. We argue that the agenda is largely drawn from a dichotomic, deep ontology of Human vs. Technology. While such ontology is neither right nor wrong in its own right, we suggest it is what underlies and influences the field's whole mode of inquiry including its research agenda. We propose an alternative ontology, the Actor-Network Theory (ANT), which as a flat ontology provides a radically different set of research questions for the field. Next we take issue with the teleology of the SOLOMO agenda, and suggest that the telos of the agenda, and of the field of IS and the whole of Management discipline together, are anchored upon the capitalist episteme so that it creates a significant hole in its teleological scape. While not in any sense calling for an ideological demagogue, we propose that the field of IS should open itself to an alternative teleology including a leftist perspective. We draw upon the Critical Management Studies (CMS) to explore how further problematization can be made on the SOLOMO agenda, generating questions about its performativity, denaturalization, and reflexivity. As a result of the discussions, a list of new problematized research questions for the SOLOMO agenda is generated. In the end we state the motivation of the essay and call for a critical refurbishing of the field of IS.