• 영어영문학
• /
• 제58권4호
• /
• pp.655-678
• /
• 2012

Doris Lessing, who considers science and technology as instruments of capitalism, deals with the theme of 'biological evolution' in The Sirian Experiments, the third book in the Canopus in Argos: Archives series. One of her themes that repeats throughout is that of 'spiritual evolution,' and in The Four-Gated City she even used 'biological evolution' as its metaphor. This paper analyzes The Sirian Experiments using scientific knowledge such as the concept of 'biological evolution' from Charles Darwin's evolution theory and Edward O. Wilson's sociobiology. Lessing concludes that while 'biological evolution' not accompanied with 'spiritual evolution' puts humans in existential problems and mental breakdown, the one in equilibrium with the other can bring social and political revolution. Lessing's concept of 'spiritual evolution' is basically a product of her holistic view and her own philosophical view that human evolution is a necessary process following the Universal Order, which shows that she is influenced by Sufism. The basic tenet in Sufi philosophy is to achieve equilibrium between the rational and non-rational modes of consciousness. Lessing incorporates her rational and irrational ideas into The Sirian Experiments to make a field for confluence where the biological, the sociological, and the spiritual thinking converge.

• 과학기술학연구
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.131-158
• /
• 2008

생물학결정론은 경험연구에 의해서 사실로 입증된 과학진리가 아니라 서유럽 백인중심의 가부장제 자본주의 지배질서와 억압구조의 실상을 은폐하거나 재생산하는 이데올로기에 지나지 않음을 드러내려는 의도에서 인간존재의 특수성을 문화인류학적으로 고찰한 결과는, 인간은 생물학적 유전요인에 의해서 태어나는 것이 아니라 사회문화적 환경요인에 의해서 만들어지는 존재라는 것이었다. 그리고 생물학결정론의 사회맥락에 대한 분석결과로 밝혀진 것은, 골상학과 사회진화론에서 사회생물학과 IQ옹호론에 이르는 생물학결정론 자체가 사회모순의 분출로 기존의 지배질서가 위태로워진 위기상황으로부터 벗어나기 위한 타개책으로 등장하였다는 점이다. 이로 인해 생물학결정론은 태생적으로 불평등한 사회구조를 은폐하고 재생산하는 인종차별주의와 자민족우월주의, 계급차등주의와 남성중심주의의 정당화기제로 작동할 수밖에 없는 문제를 안고 있는 것이다. 그러므로 생명과학이 인류의 희망이 되고자 한다면, 생물학결정론은 반드시 극복해야만 하는 문제로 불평등한 사회구조의 변혁이 선행되지 않고는 해결할 수 없는 난제 중의 난제이다.

• 영어영문학
• /
• 제54권4호
• /
• pp.483-509
• /
• 2008

For the last decades, criticism on Frankenstein has tried to make a link between Victor's Creature and Rousseaurean "man in a state of nature." Like the Rousseaurean savage in a state of animal, the monster has only basic instincts least needed for his survival, i.e. self-preservation, but turns into a civilized man after learning language. Most critics argue that, despite the monster's acquisition of language, his failure in entry into a cultural and linguistic community is the outcome of a lack of sympathy for him by others, which displays the stark existence of epistemological barriers between them. That is to say, the monster imagines his being the same as others in the pre-linguistic stage but, in the linguistic stage, he realizes that he is different from others. Interpreting the Rousseaurean idea of language, which appears in his writings, as much more focused on emotion than many critics think, I read the dispute between Victor and his Creature as a variation of parent-offspring conflict. Shelley criticizes Rousseau's parental negligence in putting his children into a foundling hospital and leaving them dying there. The monster's revenge on uncaring Victor parallels the likely retaliation Rousseau's displaced children would perform against Rousseau, which Shelley imaginatively reproduces in her novel. The conflict between the monster and Victor is due to a disrupted attachment between parent and child in terms of Darwinian developmental psychology. Affective asynchrony between parent and child, which refers to a state of lack of mutual favorable feelings, accounts for numerous dysfunctional families. This paper shifts a focus from a semiotics-oriented perspective on the monster's social isolation to a Darwinian perspective, drawing attention to emotional problems transpiring in familial interactions. In doing so, it finds that language is a means of communicating one's internal emotions to others along with other means such as facial expressions and body movements. It also demonstrates that how to promote emotional well-being in either familial or social relationships entirely depends on the way in which one employs language that can entail either pleasure or anger on hearers' part.