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
The relation of spirituality and locality is hard one to bring about in the context of Han's thought. I want to approach Han thought through Lacan's psychoanalysis methode. The psychoanalysis ground for Han thought in which spiritual transcendence submits to its own withdrawal has the effect of returning us again and again?some of Han's thought most fetching prose has to do with obsession?to the originary, withdrawn spiritual transcendence of the other as though the other were continuously present to the self. That is like the movement and obsession of a faith that finds its trust as it returns again and again to its originary experience and claims, no matter how severe the doubt and opposition concerning them.
The returning movement manifests a troubled identity-in-faith, one based on trust of something that is not subject to confirmation except in the language and experience of faith. But in Han's thought this locality of faith is attached to a claim for spiritual. One-for-the-other is not a situation for a few selves or only of Korean selves. All human beings suffer the passivity of given responsibility. Responsibility implicates all of us. This language of universality suggests a strange continuing presence of spiritual transcendence -in-withdrawal as traced in the interrupted self. And it requires in Han's thought account an ethics of responsibility as though such an ethics were commanded. It is not necessarily an authoritarian ethics that is to be enforced by an external authority(although Han's thought often seems to me to be inclined toward an authoritarian ethics). Han's thought is an ethics that requires each individual to suffer its own responsibility, its own unovercomable indebtedness to the other. But each of us is under that requirement. The requirement is spiritual because we are all in a situation of life that is known within the Sumer tradition. Han's thought is an original version of an ethics that universalizes moral aspect of his own lineage.
The movement of faithful if obsessive return to originary, local experiences defines the almost, when I said above that Han's thought almost eliminates spiritual transcendence. I had in mind this movement of return that has the effect of organizing his discourse as though the other were present in a spiritual transcendent sense, as though the other were present to the self all of the time by means of its trace in spite of the loss of the other's immediacy in our experience of the other. The loss of presence in Han's thought, we have seen, gives transcendence to submit to its own withdrawal and suggests an overturning of spiritual transcendence in its power to organize our thought and practice. The returning movement of what we can call quasi faith in his philosophical thought, however, holds the other in place. Not letting the other go-that obsession-grants a sense of transcendence when otherwise the submission to withdrawal might continue its work toward thought and practice without a sense of spiritual transcendence. I believe that this loss of the submission of spiritual transcendence to its own withdrawal is due in part to Han's thought commitment to the universal 'truth' of a Korean sense of call and responsibility.
We have considered thought in which the withdrawal of the language of spiritual transcendence appears to be required by virtue of the withdrawal of the Korean God or the loss of vitality in traditional thought. We have noted the submission of spiritual transcendence to its own withdrawal in the thought of Han's thought. And we are aware that all of these accounts retain the sense of spiritual transcendence in their ways of putting that sense in question. To the extent that the sense of spiritual transcendence is in question, the grounding for our universalizing thought appears to be in question. I have said that to the extent that the sense of spiritual transcendence falls in questions, our seemingly inevitable inclination to universalize our values also falls in question. I suspect that the present, renewed interest in transcendence among some philosophers arises out of the feeling that our axiomatic and universalized values are threatened by growing threat to spiritual transcendental grounding. The sense of transcendence weakens the question of ethics to the extent that the sense of spiritual transcendence posits a movement that surpasses the locale and gives expanded, transcending voice to the local constructions of right, true, and good. that is why the question of ethics in Han's thought revert to an ethics with universal important even when the question is strongest: the question of ethics in his thought maintains a faithful sense of spiritual transcendence while it radically questions the traditional Korean experiences of spiritual transcendence.
The returning movement manifests a troubled identity-in-faith, one based on trust of something that is not subject to confirmation except in the language and experience of faith. But in Han's thought this locality of faith is attached to a claim for spiritual. One-for-the-other is not a situation for a few selves or only of Korean selves. All human beings suffer the passivity of given responsibility. Responsibility implicates all of us. This language of universality suggests a strange continuing presence of spiritual transcendence -in-withdrawal as traced in the interrupted self. And it requires in Han's thought account an ethics of responsibility as though such an ethics were commanded. It is not necessarily an authoritarian ethics that is to be enforced by an external authority(although Han's thought often seems to me to be inclined toward an authoritarian ethics). Han's thought is an ethics that requires each individual to suffer its own responsibility, its own unovercomable indebtedness to the other. But each of us is under that requirement. The requirement is spiritual because we are all in a situation of life that is known within the Sumer tradition. Han's thought is an original version of an ethics that universalizes moral aspect of his own lineage.
The movement of faithful if obsessive return to originary, local experiences defines the almost, when I said above that Han's thought almost eliminates spiritual transcendence. I had in mind this movement of return that has the effect of organizing his discourse as though the other were present in a spiritual transcendent sense, as though the other were present to the self all of the time by means of its trace in spite of the loss of the other's immediacy in our experience of the other. The loss of presence in Han's thought, we have seen, gives transcendence to submit to its own withdrawal and suggests an overturning of spiritual transcendence in its power to organize our thought and practice. The returning movement of what we can call quasi faith in his philosophical thought, however, holds the other in place. Not letting the other go-that obsession-grants a sense of transcendence when otherwise the submission to withdrawal might continue its work toward thought and practice without a sense of spiritual transcendence. I believe that this loss of the submission of spiritual transcendence to its own withdrawal is due in part to Han's thought commitment to the universal 'truth' of a Korean sense of call and responsibility.
We have considered thought in which the withdrawal of the language of spiritual transcendence appears to be required by virtue of the withdrawal of the Korean God or the loss of vitality in traditional thought. We have noted the submission of spiritual transcendence to its own withdrawal in the thought of Han's thought. And we are aware that all of these accounts retain the sense of spiritual transcendence in their ways of putting that sense in question. To the extent that the sense of spiritual transcendence is in question, the grounding for our universalizing thought appears to be in question. I have said that to the extent that the sense of spiritual transcendence falls in questions, our seemingly inevitable inclination to universalize our values also falls in question. I suspect that the present, renewed interest in transcendence among some philosophers arises out of the feeling that our axiomatic and universalized values are threatened by growing threat to spiritual transcendental grounding. The sense of transcendence weakens the question of ethics to the extent that the sense of spiritual transcendence posits a movement that surpasses the locale and gives expanded, transcending voice to the local constructions of right, true, and good. that is why the question of ethics in Han's thought revert to an ethics with universal important even when the question is strongest: the question of ethics in his thought maintains a faithful sense of spiritual transcendence while it radically questions the traditional Korean experiences of spiritual transcendence.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 한의 정신분석 구조
Ⅲ-1. 광명으로 열린 하늘의 신명계
Ⅲ-2. 이치로 열린 문명의 생태계
Ⅲ-3. 기도로 열린 홍익의 인간계
Ⅳ. 미래로 열린 상생의 대한민국
Ⅴ. 맺음말
＜Abstract＞
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
The Problem of Transcendence in East Asian Religions
Theology and The World
2008 .09
-
영성지능 측정 가능성 탐색
한국기독교신학논총
2012 .04
-
Openness in Religion : A Must for Survival and Self-Transcendence
Korea Journal
1978 .10
-
유교에 초월자는 있는가?
신학과세계
2002 .06
-
자아의 확립과 초월의 상관관계
불교학연구
2018 .01
-
Han and Its New Use
Korea Journal
1989 .08
-
Psychometric Analyses of Spiritual Well-Being Scale and Spiritual Maturity Index
Journal of Christian Education & Information Technology
2001 .06
-
1950년대 고석규 비평의 근대성 연구
비평문학
2004 .11
-
Spiritual Practices as a Means toward Spiritual Formation
Journal of Christian Education & Information Technology
2012 .04
-
초월성의 기독교적 개념
신학연구
1956 .06
-
기독교 영성교육 모델에 관한 연구 : C. G. Jung의 개성화 과정(Individuation Process)을 중심으로
신학논단
2012 .03
-
십자가의 성 요한의 영적 성장에 대한 이해
한국기독교신학논총
2010 .07
-
비표상적 초월, 공, 문학
새한영어영문학
2014 .11
-
영적 신비체험에 대한 목회적 돌봄
오순절 신학 논단
2010 .12
-
영성적 삶을 위한 영적지도와 훈련 방안
신학과 목회
2016 .11
-
Christian Education As Spiritual Direction
Theology and The World
2009 .09
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-911-017255599