글로버메뉴 바로가기 본문 바로가기 하단메뉴 바로가기

논문검색은 역시 페이퍼서치

인문논총검색

Seoul National University the Journal of Humanites


  • - 주제 : 인문과학분야 > 기타(인문과학)
  • - 성격 : 학술지
  • - 간기: 계간
  • - 국내 등재 : KCI 등재
  • - 해외 등재 : -
  • - ISSN : 1598-3021
  • - 간행물명 변경 사항 :
논문제목
수록 범위 : 19권 0호 (1987)

영국 낭만시의 특질 -영국낭만시의 존재론적 인식론

이정호 ( Chong Ho Lee )
11,700
키워드보기
초록보기
This paper proposes to investigate the characteristics of English romantic poetry from an ontological and epistemological point of view. English Romantic Poetry is a by-product of divergent changes taking place in political systems and social structures in the early Nineteenth Century England, which has witnessed a series of revolutions in Europe and America: the American Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, the French Revolution, and others. These revolutions, however, are not the pace-setters for social changes; they are rather the result and reflection of the changes that have been and are still going on in various fields of society. One significant aspect of this change is found in man``s changed perception of himself, his society, and the universe. Social and political relationships have been so far seen in terms of vertical hierachy, with the king at the top and the common people at the bottom. Political revolutions have brought about a change in man``s perception of this fixed vertical hierarchy, opening the way to an open and horizontal relationship based on equality and freedom of man. Philosophers and their theories that have enabled these changes to take place have been examined: empiricism, transendentalism, J.J. Rousseau, William Godwim, among others. Romantic theories of the imagination proposed by different Romantic poets such as Blake, Wordsworth, Coleridge, Keats, Shelley, and Byron have been examined in this paper, because a proper understanding of Romantic poets and their poetry cannot be achieved without understanding their theories of the imagination and their practices of it.

19세기 불란서 문학사조

홍승오 ( Seung O Hong )
6,000
키워드보기
초록보기
Nous nous sommes proposes, dans la presente etude qui falt partie des recerches collectives sur la civilication et l``histoire do l``Europe au XIXe siecle, de mettre en lumiere les idees litteraires de la premiere moitie du XIXe siecle en France, surtout le romantisme. Nous avons essaye d``abord do situer le romantisme francais par rapport a l``evolution generale de la civilisation francaise dependant elle-meme e mille donnees, parce que le mouvement romantique, tel qu``il se precise a partir de 1820, est l``aboutissement d``un mouvement qui se reparait depuis tres longtemps, des la premiere moitie du XVIIIe siecle, epoque ou le classicisme regnait. Nous avons cherche ensuite a examiner comment les elements divers, tels que l``envahissement progressif de la litterature par le gout du pathetique et dii sombre, l``amour du reve, de la melancolie, de la solitude, puis le mal du siecle, le refus des regles de la litterature classique, l``enrichissement du langage, l``assouplissement de Ia versification, l``influence des litteratures etrangeres et de Ia Revolution, etc., concourent a former l``atmosphere favorable aux romantiques. Apres avoir suivi les phases du mouvement romantique proprement dit, nous avons essaye de degager les traits caracteristiques du romantisme francais en analysant les genres litteraires et les principales uuvres litteraires. pour conclure, nous avons essaye de montrer que le romantisme est un mouvement extremement complexe visant a Clargir et a enrichir les domaines de la litterature, voire meme do l``art par in liberation du moi de l``homme moderne des convictions rationalistes.

19세기 독일문학사조(獨逸文學思潮)

지명렬 ( Myung Yul Chi )
6,700
키워드보기
초록보기
Die vorliegende Arbeit ist em Kapitel Uber deutsche Literatur in dem Sammelband unter dem Titel "Europ?ische Kultur und Geschichte im 19. Jahrhundert," und untersucht die deutsche Romantik als literarische Hauptstromung in jener Zeit. Im 18. Jahrhundert waren Kultur und Politik in Deutschland voneinander getrennt, d.h. Kulturtrager und Politiker hatten keine gegenseitiges Verstindnis und gingen eigene Wege; wobei jene die geistliche Welt, diese die reale Welt beherrschten. Erst im 19. Jahrhundcrt ?bten Kultur und Politik gegenseitig starkere Wirkung aus. In der Zeit hatten die Kulturtrager begonnen, an der Wirklichkeit starker Anteil zu nebmen. Vor allem die Heidelberger Romantik wendete ihre Interesse zur Volkskultur, beschiiftigte sich mit der Volkskulturforschung. Sie suchte den Volksgeist in der Volkssprache, in dem Volksglauben und Gewohnheitsrecht. Die deutsche Klassik(1786``1832) und Romantik(1798``--1835) sind die Geistesbewegungen, die nebeneinander einhergegangen sind. Der Unterschied zwischen ihren Welt-und Staatsan-schauungen ist aber groß. Jener blieb bei dem Kosmopolitismus, dagegen betonte dieser den Patriotismus und hatte die grouße Leistung zur Ausbildung einer nationalen Idee. In der literarischen Bewegung hatte die deutsche Kiassik nichts besonderes fur die Entfaltung der europaischen Geistesgeschichte beigetragen, dagegen hat die deutsche Romantik erstmals in der deutschen Geschichte eine grofße Wirkung auf die Geistesbewegung in Europa ausgeubt. Daraus ist zu schließen, daß die Romantik als eine typische deutsche Geistesbe-wegung im 19. Jahrhundert anerkannt werden muß. Der Inhalt dieser Arbeit ist folgende: I . Geschichtliche Hintergrund II. Goethezeit Ⅲ. Philosopischer Hintergrund der deutschen Romantik 1) Johann Gottlieb Fichte 2) Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling 3) Friedrich Schleiermachcr Ⅳ. Verhaltnis der deutschen Romantik zur vorigen Geistesbewegung 1) Verhaltnis zur Aufkhirung 2) Verh?ltnis zur Kiassik V. Wesenszuge der deutschen Romantik 1) Die Universalpoesie 2) Die Romantische Sehnsucht 3) Selbst-Ironie Ⅵ. Das romantische Engagement 1) Das BewuBtsein der Volkskultur 2) Kulturelle Staatsauffassung

독일 관념론(觀念論)과 실천적 유물론(唯物論)의 사회철학(社會哲學)

차인석 ( In Suk Cha )
6,700
키워드보기
초록보기
In der vorliegenden Abhandlung handelt es sicli um die Entwicklung der sozialen Ideen von Kant bis zu Marx in der deutschen Philosophie des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts zu erortem. Der Schwerpunkt liegt darauf, es darzustellen, wie man sich gegenuber der Modemisierung außerte, die das Schicksal der Weltgeschichte zu sein erschien. Es beginnt mit den Problemen, weiche mit der rationalen Herrschaft des Menschen Uber Natur und Gesellschaft gestelit worden sind. Im Zentrum der neuen burgerlichen Weltanschauung steht die Naturwissenschaft und dies betrachtet den Begriff der Vemunft als das ursprungliche Vermogen des Menschen, weiches sich von Cberlieferten zu befreien und sich mit den naturlichen Umgebungen auseinanderzusetzen befahigt. Der englische Empirismus, der franzosische Rationalismus und auch der Aufklarungsbewegung bildeten den Hohepunkt des modemen Denkens. Sie erkannten keine außere Autoritut an. Sie hatten alles der vemunftigen Kritik unterworfen. Mit dem Fortschritt der Naturwissenschaft wurde das neuere Denken allmahlich mechanisch-materialistisch und dementsprechend der Begriff der Vemunft umgewandelt. Naturgesetzen waren Gesetzen der Vemunft geworden. Die edlen demokratischen Ideen wie Freiheit und Gleichheit mußten aus dem Begriff der Materie erklart werden. Mit dieser Situation war der deutsche Idealismus konfrontiert. Sein Auseinandersetzung mit den materialistischen Gedanken war ein Streit um die Philosophie als soiche und auch um die eigentlich rationale Herrschaft des Menschen uber Natur und Gesellschaft. Die Philosophie Kants, Fichtes, Schellings und Hegels bezeichnen die Stufen der theoretischen Bewaltigung des Problems dieser Form der Herrschaft. Die deutsche Philosophie reagierten spiritualistisch gegenuber der vorwarts-drangenden Modemisierung des industriellen Zeitalters. Die deutsche Philosophie von Kant bis zu Hegel war zwar nicht aus der bloßen geistigen Bewegung der Zeit, sondem aus der gesellschaftlichen Wirklichkeit zu erklaren. Aber cler deutsche Idealismus solite den Junghegelianem als Metaphysik, die Zeit im Begriff zu erfassen gelten. Nach Hegels ``rod hatte sich die Situation seiner Schuler verschiirft. Die Diskrepanz zwischen seiner Philosophic und der sozialen Wirklichkeit wurde von ihnen hart erfahren. Die Wirklichkeit in Deutschland war gar nicht vemunftig, wie Hegel sie so zu scm glaubte. Zu den jungen Schulem Hegels, die kritisch zu seiner Philosophic standen, werden Bruno Bauer, Feuerbach, Moses Hess, Amold Ruge, und Max Stimer gezahlt. Sic woilten zwar scm System aufgeben, aher seine dialektische Methode behalten, da der revolutionare Charakter in ihr lag. Die politisch inklinierte Religionskritik von Bauer und Feuerbach zertrummerte das Hegelsche System. Die kritische Aktivitaten der Junghegelianer zielten auf den Kampf gegen die bestehenden sozialen, wirtschaftlichen, politischen und religiosen Gegebenheiten in Deutschland. Die revolutionaren Tatigkeiten geschahen in den Jahren von 1835 bis 1845, innerhaib deren Periode die Grundlage fur die materialistische Geschichtsauffassung von Marx reiften. Indem die Junghegelianer vor aliem das Hegelsche System kritisierten, in dem das Begreifen der Wirklichkeit und die Versohnung der Philosophic mit ihr geschah, widerlegte Marx die Geistigkeit ihrer Kritik und versuchte, die Philosophic in der aktuellen Praxis verwirklichen zu lassen. Fur Marx galten Hegel und die Junghegeiianer nicht mehr in der Lage, das Bestehende zu verandem. Marx nennt seine Gcschichtsauffassung den "praktischen Materialismus" im Gegensatz zum anthropologischen Materialismus Feuerbachs. Im letzteren fehle es nach ihm die wahre Praxis, die revolutionare Praxis. Auflerdem enthah das Praktischwerden der Philosophic bei Feuerbach als Anthropologic keine wesentlich praktische Scite des Menschen. Die Menschen arbeiten und produzieren die Lebensmittel und verkehren mit cinander. Dies ist wirklich die Praxis. Sic bearbeiten die gegebene Natur und eignen sich sic an. Sie verandem die bestehende Welt. Feuerbach abersieht dieses Faktum. Nach Marx soll die menschliche Gcschichte aus clieser materiellen Lcbensiiitigkeiten belracbtet werden.

19세기 영국 철학에 있어서의 국가와 개인

김여수 ( Yer Su Kim )
서울대학교 인문학연구원|인문논총  19권 0호, 1987 pp. 119-139 ( 총 21 pages)
6,100
키워드보기
초록보기
This paper attempts to show how two points of view concerning the relationship between the state and the individual-laissez-fairism and etatism-interact with each other and with the forces unleashed by the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century England to produce modern liberal democratic philosophy. This attempt is carried out by examining the problems faced by, and the philosophical synthesis forged by a succession of English social philosophers-John Locke, Jeremy Bentham, Edmund Burke, J.S. Mill and finally T.H. Green. Locke sets the stage for the dialectics between the state and the individual by tracing the origin of political authority not to the divine rights but to the social compact amongst free and equal individuals endowed with natural rights to life, liberty and property. In order to circumvent the tendency toward a free for all due to inherent greed and partiality in men, individuals enter into a social compact to create a government with legislative and executive powers subject to the principle of majority rule. Here the tension between individualism and rejection of anarchism inherent in individualism which characterized English liberalism comes to surface. As a 18-century social philosophers concerned with abolition of absolutism, however, Locke gave clear philosophical priority to individual rights. He sought the philosophical fonndation for these rights in natural law. Such a view however was clearly in conflict with Locke``s epistemology, according to which experience was the sole source of knowledge and truth. As the 18th century advanced, it was clear that Locke``s individualism needed to be provided with a better philosophical foundation. The principle of utility based on hedonistic psychology was able to provide just such a philosophical justification to individnalism in the late 18th century and early 19th century England characterized by anti-metaphysical and empiricist spirit. While repudiating the natural law of medieval metaphysics, it was able to retain the respect for the rights of individual and the advocacy of radical reforms characteristic of Locke``s liberalism. It served in fact as the philosophical basis for the radicalist movement of the early 19th century in England. The principle of utility-the greatest happiness for the greatest number-together with hedonistic psychology on which the principle was based, provided just such a philosophical justification. By postulating the aim of government to be attainment of happiness of greatest number of individuals, Bentham``s utilitarianism gave English liberalism a decisive push toward greater democracy. It served in fact as the philosophical basis for a large number of legislative and penal reforms in England in the early phase of the Industrial Revolution. The conflict however between the altruistic tendency inherent in the utility principle and the egoistic tendency inherent in hedonistic psychology should not go unnoticed. The hedonistie calculus requires that my pleasure and pleasure of others should have equal value. Yet it is far from clear that the pleasure of others can play the motivational role that my pleasure and plays, at least to the same degree. It is the role of government and legislation to mediate whenever conflicts among pleasures arise. It became increasingly evident that the psychology of quantitative hedonism was inadequate to explain the relation between individual and community, particularly in view of the emergence of such social problems as urbanization and pauperization that concern not just individuals but the community as a whole. The need for a communal point of view found early expression in the conservative political views of E. Burke. Basing himself on Hume``s destructive criticism of natural rights, Burke advocates primacy of sentiment over against reason. Just as the liberals did, Burke advocated laissez-faire in economic policy, but for entirely different reasons. His position was based not on the primacy of individual rights and freedoms, but on the primacy of community and state as concrete expression of tradition. Rights and freedoms are prescribed by the tradition as embodied in the long development of state, and members of that state are duty-bound to preserve them. Burke``s vehement opposition to the French Revolution is rooted in his suspicion of abstract ideas in politics. French Revolution was an artificial attempt to put abstract ideas into practice. Such an attempt, according to Burke, is doomed to failure, because a community cannot survive without love and loyalty of its members, which can only grow in tradition. Burke``s etatistic view point has a greater kinship with the idealistic tradition of continental Europe, particularly with romanticism, medievalism and ethnography of the late 18th century German thought. Burke``s emphasis on tradition and stability, however, was an expression of a need for a new synthesis in social philosophy that could adequately account for the changing relation between the state and the individual. It finds its fruition in the more humanely based liberalism of J.S. Mill. Mill``s philosophical task was one of revising the principle of utility in such a way as to meet the needs of a society entering a more mature phase of industrialization. The revision was in essence two-fold. One was to recognize a qualitative differentiation among pleasures. Another was to accept the idea of self-realization as the standard with which to measure qualitative differences among pleasures. One pleasure is qualitatively superior to another, in so far as it contributes more toward realization of capabilities inherent in individuals. Since, however, the development of the community as a whole is not necessarily based on a simple addition of individualities, the common good of the society as a whole must place certain constraints on unlimited development of individuality. Mill``s interest in the common good of the society became increasingly greater, and his advocacy of social legislation in late years was described even by himself as being socialist. The tension in Mill between the individualism inherited from the earlier liberal tradition and the communalistic tendency was an element in Mill``s liberalism which, while making a theoretic integration difficult, gave a richer and more humane base to the liberalism based merely on hedonistic utilitarianism. The ideal of self-realization plays an important role in the idealist revision of liberalism in late 19th century by the Oxford idealists, particularly T.H. Green. For him the end of life was a complete realization of capabilities and potentialities of individuals. Such an ideal was based, unlike the earlier utilitarians of the empiricist tradition, on a collectivistic view of human nature, according to which individual fulfillment is possible only within a social framework. Such a framework is provided by the state. Unlike the absolute etatism of the Hegelian provenance, Green saw the state and- the individual in a mutual interactive process. The function of the state is to create and promote those conditions necessary for the self-realization of the individual members. Green thus opposed the classical liberalist conception of freedon as a mere absence of constraints. Positive freedom must be one that is consonant with the ideal of self-realization of individuals. The idealist revision of liberalism thus explicitly recognizes the role of the state in full realization of the individual self. The dynamic relationship between the state and the individual in the social thought of the 19th century England coincides with the founding process of democratic liberalism One of the essential reasons for the preeminence of Great Britain in 19th century was perhaps this successful balancing and integration of two essentially opposed ideas of the individual and the state in a gradual interactive process.
6,300
키워드보기
초록보기
Plekhanov was not only the father of social democracy in Russia but also a Marxist theoretician of international renown. Yet when the Bolsheviks came to power in October, 1917, Plekhanov found himself not among the victors. This brief essay explains this personal tragedy as a consequence of Plekhanov``s acceptance of Marxism as a closed system of dialectical materialism. Plekhanov joined the revolutionary movement initially as a populist of the Bakuninist bent emphasizing the absolute requirement of mass participation in the coming socialist revolution as opposed to the Tkachevian notion of conspiratorial seizure of power. He was converted to Marxism because he saw it as a philosophical system which guaranteed the eventual victory of socialism and recognized the positive role capitalism and the bourgeoisie were to play. Although Plekhanov tried to make due allowance for the role of individual personalities in history and cautioned against excessive reliance on spontaneity of the masses, he was even more wary of any attempt to force the pace of history. Plekhanov recognized that the development of capitalism in Russia followed a pattern somewhat different from what Marx had in mind, but, unlike Lenin, adamantly refused any necessity to adjust the theory to a reality vastly different from that upon which it had originally been founded. In the end, it was his dogmatic insistence upon the narrowly defined orthodoxy and the idealistic hope to fit the Russian reality into the Procrustean bed of revolutionary Marxism that proved to be Ptekhanov``s undoing.
6,500
키워드보기
초록보기
European society of the former half of the nineteenth century was heavily influenced by the Dual Revolution, that is, the French Revolution and the Industrial Revoltion. The Industrial Revolution produced the working class and the problems of labour, though it accomplished the development of modern capitalism. In the nineteenth century the so-called utopian socialists - Fourier, Owen, Saint-Simon - attempted to solve these problems in their own ways. They tried ``to discover a new and more perfect system of social order and to impose this upon society from without by propaganda, and, wherever it was possible, by the example of model experiments. These new social systems were foredoomed as utopians`` (Engels). Louis Blanc(18l1~82), born later than these utopians and lived through almost the whole century, showed a more practical and concrete way to socialism. He vehemently condemned the limitless competition of capitalist society and deeply sympathised with the poverty-ridden workers. In order to eliminate such social wrongs he proposed to create ``the social workshop``, a kind of producer``s corporation. Initially established under state sponsorship, these workshops should be run by the workers themselves. Blanc believed that his social workshops would prevail over the existing factories based on competition because of their increased productivity based on fraternal solidarity. In the same way, he expected a fraternal absorption of the bourgeoisie rather than a violent revolutionary triumph over it by the proletariat. Blanc firmly believed that a democratically elected republic would willingly initiate the social revolution without violence and terror. So there would be no dictatorial institutions, for even a brief time. Blan``s ideas gained wide popularity among workers during 1840s and had a precarious chance to be realized in the spring of 1848, but failed. Blanc``s socialism stood between the utopian socialism and Marxism, chronologically and ideologically. His belief in peaceful transition to socialism may have some connection with modern French humanistic socialism(socialisme humaniste).
1