지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The so-called "Asiatic Value" controversy in the 1990s was primarily spun on the axis of human rights and culture. Given that the controversy is still an unsettling issue in the new Millenium, this paper attempts to make an interim review of the scholarly debates and to examine their critical relevancy-especially those views that have drawn much critical attention in South Korean academic circles.
Although modem society is underiably moving towards multiculturalism, it is still troubled by cultural nationalism. Despite the de-politicizing, de-nationalizing cultural trends across the modem world, "nation" in a traditional sense has not entirely lost its currency on the contrary, it is gaining more force in some regions, particularly in Asia, as the central bearer of culture. Some Asian politicians and intellectuals have emphasized (1) the priorities of the values of community over human rights; and (2) innate Asian cultural heritages that may fully counter Western concepts of human rights. There are three types of Asiatic Value theories.
The first one is the theory of innate Asiatic values, of which the leading proponent is Lee Kuan-yew, former Premier of Singapore. Lee, who has been the key figure in the development of Singapore into an economically advanced country, has criticized the unmoralism of Western democracy in comparison with the Asians' innate values, which he argues are at the core of his country's success. This theory arguably reduces the terms of moral value to a matter of economic success. Also, it provokingly extends the ideas of democracy and human rights to the whole spectrum of culture. Accordingly, the Western culture that emphasizes human rights is to be denounced as a "colonizing" one vis-a-vis the traditional cultures of Asia. As many European scholars have pointed out, this theory is based on a misunderstanding of the concept of human rights.
The second type is the theory of Confucian democracy, of which the central scholar is Ham Jae-Bong. Ham argues (1) that Confucianism and the concept of human rights are not contradictory; (2) that, even if we come across a certain contradiction, we must choose traditional moral values. One may find Ham's moral proposition refutable, in that Ham considers morality only in terms of the self-discipline of an individual, excluding any room for moral concerns in Western democracy. In so doing, Ham overlooks the history of Western democracy that fought over individualism in ideas as well as political systems.
The third type is the theory of progressive cultural democracy. Lee Seung-Hwan puts forward a proposal (1) that we may discover concepts of "rights" and social "Justice" within the Confucian tradition that could be compared to the Western concepts; (2) that a liberal culture respecting individuals rights and a community-oriented traditional culture could complement each other. Lee's position is not different from Ham's, in that he also considers modem Western liberalism privileging "freedom irrespective of morals". The kind of "active freedom" proposed by Lee can hardly be applied to every citizen; It is one that may be allowed to a moralist who can exercise an absolute control over his or her own desires. Lee too admits that moral virtue and social Justice are different matters; so he leaves his theory begging questions about how they could be simultaneously ensured in our society. Furthermore, Lee does not present any realistic vision about how moral virtue could be a foundation for the management of the entire society.
In conclusion, the theorists of "Asiatic Values" originally come from a distrust about the modernity of Western civilization that is characterized by enlightenment, capitalism, and industrialization. They share a strong antipathy against the history of Western imperial conquests and individualism. Consequently they refuse certain general concepts of a civil society, such as democracy and human rights, because they see them as "Western" and contradictory to Asiatic values.
To settle the controversy, we need to first recognize that human rights is an issue of morality that requires a voluntary civic consensus based on the respect of cultural differences.
Although modem society is underiably moving towards multiculturalism, it is still troubled by cultural nationalism. Despite the de-politicizing, de-nationalizing cultural trends across the modem world, "nation" in a traditional sense has not entirely lost its currency on the contrary, it is gaining more force in some regions, particularly in Asia, as the central bearer of culture. Some Asian politicians and intellectuals have emphasized (1) the priorities of the values of community over human rights; and (2) innate Asian cultural heritages that may fully counter Western concepts of human rights. There are three types of Asiatic Value theories.
The first one is the theory of innate Asiatic values, of which the leading proponent is Lee Kuan-yew, former Premier of Singapore. Lee, who has been the key figure in the development of Singapore into an economically advanced country, has criticized the unmoralism of Western democracy in comparison with the Asians' innate values, which he argues are at the core of his country's success. This theory arguably reduces the terms of moral value to a matter of economic success. Also, it provokingly extends the ideas of democracy and human rights to the whole spectrum of culture. Accordingly, the Western culture that emphasizes human rights is to be denounced as a "colonizing" one vis-a-vis the traditional cultures of Asia. As many European scholars have pointed out, this theory is based on a misunderstanding of the concept of human rights.
The second type is the theory of Confucian democracy, of which the central scholar is Ham Jae-Bong. Ham argues (1) that Confucianism and the concept of human rights are not contradictory; (2) that, even if we come across a certain contradiction, we must choose traditional moral values. One may find Ham's moral proposition refutable, in that Ham considers morality only in terms of the self-discipline of an individual, excluding any room for moral concerns in Western democracy. In so doing, Ham overlooks the history of Western democracy that fought over individualism in ideas as well as political systems.
The third type is the theory of progressive cultural democracy. Lee Seung-Hwan puts forward a proposal (1) that we may discover concepts of "rights" and social "Justice" within the Confucian tradition that could be compared to the Western concepts; (2) that a liberal culture respecting individuals rights and a community-oriented traditional culture could complement each other. Lee's position is not different from Ham's, in that he also considers modem Western liberalism privileging "freedom irrespective of morals". The kind of "active freedom" proposed by Lee can hardly be applied to every citizen; It is one that may be allowed to a moralist who can exercise an absolute control over his or her own desires. Lee too admits that moral virtue and social Justice are different matters; so he leaves his theory begging questions about how they could be simultaneously ensured in our society. Furthermore, Lee does not present any realistic vision about how moral virtue could be a foundation for the management of the entire society.
In conclusion, the theorists of "Asiatic Values" originally come from a distrust about the modernity of Western civilization that is characterized by enlightenment, capitalism, and industrialization. They share a strong antipathy against the history of Western imperial conquests and individualism. Consequently they refuse certain general concepts of a civil society, such as democracy and human rights, because they see them as "Western" and contradictory to Asiatic values.
To settle the controversy, we need to first recognize that human rights is an issue of morality that requires a voluntary civic consensus based on the respect of cultural differences.
목차
Ⅰ. 서언
Ⅱ. 문화적 맥락 속에서의 인권 담론의 위치
Ⅲ. 문화와 인권 담론의 성립
Ⅳ. 다문화사회에서의 보편적 인권의 효력 범위
Ⅴ. 맺는 말
참고문헌
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
[일반논문]21세기의 민주주의와 인권 사상
민주주의와 인권
2001 .10
-
국내적 인권과 국제적 인권? : 인권 개념의 이중성에 대한 소고
한양법학
2011 .08
-
하버마스의 인권 개념에 관하여
법철학연구
2011 .08
-
인권 흥정논리와 한국 민주주의의 재조명
아세아연구
2008 .09
-
인권사상의 현대적 전개
법학연구
2005 .12
-
Individual Freedom and Human Rights Community : A Sociological Intervention
Journal of Asian Sociology
2011 .07
-
Regional Human Rights Mechanism and the Alternatives for Asia
동북아법연구
2017 .01
-
Two Concepts of Human Rights in Contemporary Korea
Journal of Asian Sociology
2010 .12
-
북한 인권문제에 대한 중국의 입장
국제정치연구
2011 .12
-
[동아시아연구]말레이시아의 인권과 민주주의, 그리고 이슬람
민주주의와 인권
2001 .10
-
현대인권론과 공리주의 -인권의 정당화-
법철학연구
2009 .05
-
인권의 국제적 실천성에 대한 연구
사회과학연구
2006 .02
-
[일반논문]인권의 보편성 문제
민주주의와 인권
2001 .04
-
인권개념의 ‘세대’적 접근에 대한 비판적 고찰
법학연구
2018 .05
-
사람들은 어떻게 인권을 평가하는가? : 인권지표, 민주주의 인식, 사회경제적 지위와의 관계를 중심으로
한국사회학
2018 .02
-
Toward Human Rights in the Local Community : Multiple Approaches for Implementation
Journal of Asian Sociology
2010 .07
-
영국의 인권법과 인권기관
유럽헌법연구
2011 .01
-
도덕과 인권교육 방안 : 도덕적 정당화를 중심으로
도덕윤리과교육
2016 .02
-
문화다양성과 인권 갈등 그리고 국가의 역할
한양법학
2018 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
다문화주의와 인권의 문제 : 문화 상대주의와 보편주의의 경계에서
최성환
철학탐구
2011
.11
문화적 권리와 보편적 인권 : 세계 인권 선언에서 문화다양성 협약까지
김남국
국제정치논총
2010
.03
다문화 사회의 법제와 인권 패러다임
송영현
법학연구
2013
.06
한국의 다문화사회 실현을 위한 이론적 연구 : 에스니시티와 다문화주의의 통합을 중심으로
김기홍
민주주의와 인권
2012
.12
세계보편윤리에 대한 유가적 호응 : <세계종교회의선언>의 ‘추상보편성’에 대한 비판과 유가의‘관계보편성’에서의 접근
권상우
철학논총
2008
.10
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-340-013796545