At first, the disciplined, proper, and moralistic Confucian might seem a far cry from the free, independent, and spontaneous individual of liberalism. However, Confucian self-discipline and ritual propriety are quite suitable for a democratic society. Liberal political theories privilege individual freedom, but there is little in them that deals with concrete ways in which this freedom can be exercised. Confucian theories of self-discipline and ritual propriety can fill this gap in liberal theory. Michel Foucault's investigations of Ancient Greek and Roman (...) technologies of the self show that self-cultivation, self-discipline, and ritual conduct are indispensable for the proper practice of freedom. Thus, Foucault provides us with a new perspective from which to investigate and affirm the democratic potential of Confucianism. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Confucian Rituals and the Technology of the Self:A Foucaultian InterpretationHahm ChaibongIntroductionModern political theory is "liberation" theory. Liberalism pivots on the idea of individual liberty, defined largely as freedom from government interference in private lives. All major versions of it, from the Lockian social-contract theory to the Rawlsian theory of justice, focus on protecting the rights of the individual. Marxism and other leftist political theories revolve around the notion of (...) recovering and liberating the original freedom of humanity that has been corrupted or otherwise twisted out of recognition by modern society and its institutions. Rousseau, Marx, and Freud all long for the "total revolution" that will free humanity from the decadence of modern society, capitalism, and even civilization itself.1 In marked contrast to modern Western political theories, Confucianism emphasizes harmony in interpersonal relationships and affirms the role of the family, the community, and the state as essential components of a just and humane society. Civilization is considered both the means and the end of human flourishing, not something to be limited, abolished, or otherwise overcome. In terms of its "micro-theory," Confucianism emphasizes self-discipline, ritual propriety, and moral uprightness, not individual freedom and liberation.At first sight, the disciplined, proper, and moralistic Confucian might seem a far cry from the free, independent, and spontaneous individual of liberalism. The strong emphasis placed on human-relatedness and social harmony, enforced by elaborate codes of ritual conduct, would seem to encourage "rational adjustment to the world," not revolutionary incitement to change it. Confucianism is thus often regarded as the premodern political theory par excellence by modern political theorists. From the May Fourth Movement through the Great Cultural Revolution to the Asian Values debate, Confucianism has always stood as the symbol of feudalism and as the single greatest obstacle to modernity, hindering the development of a scientific outlook, class consciousness, and liberal democratic values.In what follows, however, I argue that the Confucian practices of self-discipline and ritual propriety are quite suitable for a democratic society. Indeed, not only is Confucianism suitable for democracy, but it also fills an important lacuna in modern democratic theory. In a liberal-democratic society, citizens are given ever more freedom to exercise their rights. However, theories of negative freedom and other "primacy-of-rights" theories have privileged individual liberty and rights to such an extent that citizens in a modern democracy have little basis for mutual consultation, deliberation, and agreement. As a result, there is very little in liberal theory, or in [End Page 315] theories of the left, for that matter, that deals with concrete ways in which freedom can be exercised. Confucian theories and practices of self-discipline and ritual propriety can fill this gap in liberal theory.In making this point, I enlist the help of Michel Foucault. Foucault's investigations of ancient Greek and Roman technologies of the self in his later works show that the practices of self-cultivation, self-discipline, and ritual conduct do not necessarily inhibit freedom.2 In fact, such practices are indispensable for the proper practice of freedom. Moreover, Foucault's now-famous investigation of the logic of power, discipline, truth, and knowledge provides a profound insight into the nature of freedom and its practice that is not to be found in currently dominant liberal theories. It provides an important antidote to the common misconception that selfdiscipline and ritual propriety are contrary to individual freedom. Foucault thus provides us with a new perspective from which to investigate and affirm the democratic potential of Confucianism.The Scrutable Body and LiIn the Western philosophical tradition, the metaphysical, the transcendental, or the purely rational has always been the "real." The Platonic eidos, the Christian soul, the Cartesian cogito, and the Kantian noumena all emphasize the priority and the primacy of the metaphysical over the physical as the repository of truth, beauty, and reality. The physical body, on the other hand, has been viewed as the corrupted shadow of the ideal form, the prison of the soul, a mere physical extension or a passing phenomenon. Modern psychology, Freudian or otherwise, emphasizes the conscious/unconscious as the realm that determines our being and character. In contrast... (shrink)

철학계의 올림픽이라 할 세계철학대회가 2008년, 아시아권에서는 처음으로 서울에서 열렸다. 대회의 주제는 ‘동서 철학 전통의 만남과 융합’이었고, 유영모와 함석헌의 사상을 소개하는 특별분과가 열렸다. 다른 분과의 수강생은 서너 명에 불과했지만 유영모ᆞ함석헌 분과에는 800여 명이 몰리는 현상이 벌어졌고 이후 유럽과 일본에서는 씨알사상에 대한 본격적 연구가 시작되었다. 철학이 없어 더욱 불행했던 시기라고 하는 우리의 20세기는 유영모와 함석헌이라는 두 사상가를 숨겨 놓았다. 이 책은『다석일지』, 『다석강의』, 『뜻으로 본 한국역사』 등 두 거장의 저작에서 알짬을 뽑아 해설을 덧붙인 365일 묵상집이다. 우리말과 우리글로 철학을 한 두 사상가를 오랫동안 연구하고 (...) 글을 발표해 온 박재순 씨알사상연구소 소장이 해설을 붙였다. (shrink)

교사와 장학관을 역임한 저자가 들려주는 전통도덕의 원리와 실천서. 유가의 사상, 유가의 생활, 제도와 예법, 유가 전적의 이해 등을 설명했다. 전통적 생활방 식과 가치를 이해하고 실천하는데 도움이 되도록 엮었다.

Culture is a concept that is claimed these days as the last authority for appeal in most discussions on human affairs and as the ultimate cause of important differences among people: “[C]ulture is the sole source of the validity of a moral right or rule”1 Only culture seems to be conclusive for almost all of what men are and what they do. Culture is what we collectively create but, at the same time, what we are determined by; we are our (...) own masters and at the same time slaves of our own creations. The culture that is so decisive today, however, is not a universal culture common to everyone but the concrete culture of each society2 here and now. Thus the culture that is concretely relevant to us today is plural. Pluralism in the present understanding may not necessarily trouble Christians, but the relativism that accompanies it does. More alarming, however, is cultural determinism that seriously discourages Christian efforts for evangelism and, especially, foreign mission. (shrink)

The rapid growth of Korean churches and the conflict-ridden Korean society may serve to illustrate how evangelists should face critical socio-political issues. The Korean experience seems to indicate that evangelists are most effective when they concentrate their entire efforts on preaching “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified” alone. Believers in general, however, should be keenly interested in such issues as human rights and social justice, not only for their own sake but also for the sake of effective future evangelism. The Church's (...) involvement in these issues gives a favourable impression of Christianity, which in turn facilitates evangelism. (shrink)