자기(Self)에 대한 철학적, 심리학적 이해: 칸트와 코헛 연결 짓기 = Philosophical and Psychological Understanding of Self: Connecting Kant and Kohut

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Richard Chessick saw similarities between Kant’s understanding of self and Kohut’s understanding of self, and this study contained an empirical approach that drew attention to Chessick’s notion. The purpose of this study was to explore whether Kant’s and Kohut’s understanding of self can be linked, and if so, what was is the connection point between them and how to connect them.
Both Kant and Kohut formally established their understanding of self under a dual structure. There The dual structure was showed a clear difference from the dual structure, but it seemed that there can be a complementary understanding between two aspects of self seems possible. In Kant’s 『the Critique of Pure Reason』, he established self(ego) as a dual structure of ‘thinking ego’ and ‘perceiving ego’. And in 『Opus Postumum』, Kant still established ego as self-consciousness with a dual structure, ‘fundamental intuition’ and ‘derivative intuition’. Kohut, who had a psychological understanding of self, explained self as a dual structure. He saw that the perfect self was formed by combining and integrating the two axes of ‘grandiose self’ and ‘idealized parental imago’.
Kant’s and Kohut’s understandings of self each had a different starting point. Kant analyzed ego as self-consciousness with a dual structure as a result of philosophical inquiry into self as the subject of recognition and consciousness based on Deutscher Idealismus. His interest was in the epistemology of “How can I recognize self and objects?” on On the other hand, Kohut analyzed self with a psychological and psychoanalytic approach, rather than a philosophical approach, as a means to understand clients with pathological narcissism or narcissistic disabilities. His interest was in the pragmatic approach of “How can I form a healthy self?”Even though its their starting points differedwas different and there were several other differences existed, both Kant’s and Kohut’s aspects can be foundhave a commonality in that they formulate self in a dual structure. In particular, the dual structure of Kant’s ego can be linked to Kohut’s self in that it can be a suggestion that explained how the ‘virtual self’ of a child described by Kohut was formed and what wasdescribed the detailed process. In addition, both Kant and Kohut pointed out that if the ego as a subject of perception of self and objects is not fully integrated, human beings suffer from the same kind ofa mental illness as similar to a depression and pathological problems. This point can be seen as linking a common understanding of them.
The work of linking Kant’s philosophical understanding of self to Kohut’s psychological understanding of self was important forcontributes to the whole human understanding of a client. Even if this study cannot propose a practical application in the counseling area, it is expected that it willshould be enough to help a client with pathological problems who visits the counseling room in terms of a more affluent full and holistic understanding of the client.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 홍래경, "한국목회상담과 결합적 자기" 한국목회상담학회 22 : 248-281, 2014
• 2 홍이화, "하인즈코헛의 자기심리학 이야기" 한국심리치료연구소 2011
• 3 시걸, 앨런, "하인즈 코헛과 자기심리학" 한국심리치료연구소 2002
• 4 김정주, "칸트의인식론" 철학과현실사 2001
• 5 김정주, "칸트의 ？순수이성비판？에서의 내감과 자기 인식의 문제" 한국현상학회 (18) : 6-227, 2002
• 6 권오상, "칸트의 자아의식과 연역적 상담방법에 관한 고찰" 인문학연구원 59 : 151-176, 2014
• 7 남정우, "칸트의 선험론적 자기의식에 대한 비판적 수용 ― 피히테와 셸링의 경우 ―" 동서사상연구소 (9) : 21-49, 2010
• 8 변재봉, "찰스 거킨의 이야기해석학에 대한 목회상담학적 평가 및 적용" 한국목회상담학회 25 : 112-149, 2015
• 9 존즈, 제임스W., "종교안에서의 자기애의 역할" 6 : 27-41, 2005
• 10 조종화, "자기의식의 가능성 - 칸트와 헤겔을 중심으로" 한국헤겔학회 (28) : 309-349, 2010
• 11 최소인, "자기의식과 자기직관" 40 : 31-58, 1997
• 12 최의헌, "자기애의 정신의학적 접근" 6 : 87-105, 2005
• 13 유근준, "자기애 개념에 대한 통합적 접근" 한국목회상담학회 19 : 104-132, 2012
• 14 체식, 리처드 D., "자기심리학과 나르시시즘의 치료" NUM 2012
• 15 하재성, "자기 심리학의 목회 신학적 의미: 관계 중심성과 일상성" 한국목회상담학회 13 : 7-33, 2009
• 16 박경애, "인지·정서·행동치료" 학지사 2012
• 17 칸트, 임마누엘, "실용적 관점에서의 인간학" 아카넷 2014
• 18 최영민, "쉽게 쓴 자기 심리학" 학지사 2011
• 19 홍이화, "수치심에 대한 자기심리학적 이해와 목회적 돌봄" 한국목회상담학회 15 : 41-71, 2010
• 20 문성학, "선험적 자아론과 순수이성의 제1오류 추리론" 46 : 61-89, 1996
• 21 최소인, "선험적 자기의식과 자아의 문제- 칸트의 『순수 이성 비판』을 중심으로 -" 대한철학회 123 : 441-465, 2012
• 22 Kohut, Heinz, "The Restoration of the Self" International Universities Press 1977
• 23 Kohut, Heinz, "The Analysis of the Self" International Universities Press 1971
• 24 Kant, Immanuel, "Opus postumum. Gesammelte Schriften Kants Bd. XXI" 1983
• 25 Kant, Immanuel., "Kritik der reinen Vernunft" Felix Meiner Verlag 1990
• 26 Kohut, Heinz, "Forms and Transformations of Narcissism" 14 : 243-272, 1966