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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This study is to trying to re-understand thought of ‘A(아, 我, I)’ and ‘Extension of A’ in Shin chae-ho’s essays. By re-understanding mean of ‘A’, it make sure of consistency of his thought in essay. Then, this study would be laid on premise that reserves for existing view-point which translate the Shin chae-ho’s ‘A’ to the concept of modern Subject
Shin chae-ho distinguished the concept of ‘A’ to ‘So-A’(작은 나, 小我, Small-I) and ‘Dae-A’(큰 나, 大我, Large-I). He conceptualized Small-I as physical presence, and Large-I as spiritual presence. By the way, thus the concept approach is distinguished conventions for Confucian intellectuals who have emphasized the ethical practice of individual as social existence and assorted Small-I and Large-I, Physical body(體) and Spirit(精神). And this logic originated with the Works of Mencius that distinguished between human personality Small body(小體) and Large body(大體). In this manner, Park eun-sik who was the Wang Yang-ming school of learning and colleague of Shin, had classified ‘I’ into two types as False-I(假我) and True-I(眞我). Shin chae-ho’s Small-Large I conception was in this context, his Large-I was spirit of True-I and ethical practice consciousness on real under colonial ruled by imperialism of Japan. Independence of modern Chosun ethnos was what ethical practice end, this active awareness of conscious was that of core of Large-I and extension of I theory.
Shin chae-ho"s Small-I oriented identity consciousness toward Large-I. His historical narrative represented hero in history of Chosun. His historical hero was represented as example of the nature of Large-I. In 1916s, Ggum-ha-nul (『꿈하늘』, Dream Sky) narrated awareness courses of han-nom(한 놈, ones) as ethnicity membership which had become ethical criterion of Large-I. Furthermore, In 1920s, when Shin chae-ho was working as an anarchist, extension of I to anarchist was based on ethics from the perspective of the ruled ethnic.
Shin chae-ho distinguished the concept of ‘A’ to ‘So-A’(작은 나, 小我, Small-I) and ‘Dae-A’(큰 나, 大我, Large-I). He conceptualized Small-I as physical presence, and Large-I as spiritual presence. By the way, thus the concept approach is distinguished conventions for Confucian intellectuals who have emphasized the ethical practice of individual as social existence and assorted Small-I and Large-I, Physical body(體) and Spirit(精神). And this logic originated with the Works of Mencius that distinguished between human personality Small body(小體) and Large body(大體). In this manner, Park eun-sik who was the Wang Yang-ming school of learning and colleague of Shin, had classified ‘I’ into two types as False-I(假我) and True-I(眞我). Shin chae-ho’s Small-Large I conception was in this context, his Large-I was spirit of True-I and ethical practice consciousness on real under colonial ruled by imperialism of Japan. Independence of modern Chosun ethnos was what ethical practice end, this active awareness of conscious was that of core of Large-I and extension of I theory.
Shin chae-ho"s Small-I oriented identity consciousness toward Large-I. His historical narrative represented hero in history of Chosun. His historical hero was represented as example of the nature of Large-I. In 1916s, Ggum-ha-nul (『꿈하늘』, Dream Sky) narrated awareness courses of han-nom(한 놈, ones) as ethnicity membership which had become ethical criterion of Large-I. Furthermore, In 1920s, when Shin chae-ho was working as an anarchist, extension of I to anarchist was based on ethics from the perspective of the ruled ethnic.
목차
1. 머리말
2. 도덕 원리로서 아(我)의 규정, 아(我)와 체(體)
3. 아(我)의 확장과 실현태로서의 민족
4. 대아(大我)를 상상하는 서사
5. 맺음말
참고자료
국문초록
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2017-710-002223350