한반도에서의 근대화와 남북한에서의 유교전통문화 수용과 극복 = Modernization in Korean Peninsula, succession and conquest confucian culture

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

We cannot discuss East Asian values without considering Confucianism, whether it is regarded as positive or negative. Although Confucianism has lost much of its power and influence in the shadows of modern Western ideas rather than entering the modern world through self-innovation, it is still obvious that we need to discuss Confucianism in any consideration of East Asian values. Although Confucianism has ceded some authority in terms of the significance of politics and economics, it remains positioned as a powerful idea in the mentality of the East Asians, especially Koreans.
Despite the current differences between the North and South Koreas, it is undeniable that the in-depth characteristics of social culture of both Koreas are closely connected to Confucianism, the main traditional culture of the Joseon Dynasty. In this sense, analyzing the connectedness of Marxism factor and traditional cultural factor in the political ideas of North Korea, and revealing the Confucian traditions of South Korean society are very important when acknowledging the differences between North and South Korea, and trying to understand each by identifying their common factors. This is because the characteristics of the social and political structures of North and South Korea are connected to the political and cultural heritage of the Joseon Dynasty in many ways.
It was pointed out that the familism factor in South Korea remained strong in the process of modernization after Korean Liberation. In addition, the idea of emphasizing self-reliance in North Korean politics does criticize some traditions, but also makes an effort to inherit the traditional Korean heritage through a rejection of the mainstream attitudes of Korean Confucianism, and by inheriting an innovative stream of Korean Confucianism.
This study sought to observe the prominent characteristics of both South and North Koreas, and considered the relationship between South Korea and Confucian traditions in terms of the familism, connected to North Korean traditions in terms of self-reliance. It is thought that even if the same subject for analysis is applied to both Koreas, similarities can be found. Despite having been separated for around 60 years, both Koreas had been one nation for more than a thousand years.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 머리말
• Ⅱ. 한반도에서의 근대화와 유교적 전통
• Ⅲ. 남한의 정치ㆍ경제에 나타난 유교적 전통
• Ⅳ. 북한의 정치에 나타난 유교적 전통
• Ⅴ. 맺음말
• [Abstract]

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 권희영, "한인 사회주의운동 연구" 국학자료원 519-530, 1999
• 2 김길환, "한말 전후의 유학사상 in: 한국사상의 심층연구" 254-259, 1988
• 3 권희영, "한국사의 근대성 연구" 백산서당 2001
• 4 권희영, "한국사와 정신분석" 집문당 96-, 2001
• 5 이광규, "한국가족의 구조분석" 일지사 172-, 1975
• 6 강만길, "한국 근대사" 창작과 비평사 1985
• 7 최석만, "탈현대와 유교" 전남대학교출판부 210-211, 2007
• 8 안찬일, "주체사상의 종언" 을유문화사 104-105, 1997
• 9 김문식, "조선의 지도자 교육과 현대의 보편교육" 1997
• 10 헬가 피히트, "조선 철학사 연구에 있어서의 문제점에 관한 몇 가지 언급" 104-105, 1994
• 11 최봉익, "조선 철학사 개요"
• 12 최창호, "정치 외교의 자주 노선 북한의 정치 이념: 주체사상" 경남대학교 극동문제 연구소 1990
• 13 금장태, "유교사상과 한국사회" 한국학술정보 317-, 2008
• 14 안드레이 N. 란코프, "소련의 문헌을 통해 본 북한의 현대 정치사" 도서출판 오름 38-, 1995
• 15 "세종실록"
• 16 "사회주의 진영을 옹호하자 in: 자주성을 옹호하자" 조선로동당출판사 1966
• 17 김영수, "북한의 정치문화: ‘주체문화’와 전통정치문화" 서강대학교 1991
• 18 신일철, "북한 주체철학 연구" 도서출판 나남 56-, 1993
• 19 찰스 암스트롱, "북조선 탄생" 서해문집 24-, 2006
• 20 예대열, "미국 역사학계의 북한사 인식 비판－찰스 암스트롱을 중심으로－" 고려사학회 (36) : 427-449, 2009
• 21 고병익, "동아시아의 전통과 변용" 문학과 지성사 1996
• 22 윤사순, "단재의 유교관(丹齋의 儒敎觀) in: 한국유학사상론" 열음사 230-, 1992
• 23 김석형, "김옥균의 생애와 활동 in: 김옥균" 사회과학원출판사 3-, 1964
• 24 성대 동아시아 유교문화권 교육ㆍ연구단, "근대 극복을 꿈꾸는 동아시아의 도전" 청어람미디어 205-, 2004
• 25 "국역율곡집"
• 26 오길보, "개화파의 형성과 그의 초기 활동 in: 김옥균" 87-88,
• 27 유석춘, "‘유교 자본주의’의 가능성과 한계" (여름) : 1997
• 28 Morishima, M., "Why Has Japan ‘Succeedeed’?" Cambridge University Press 1981
• 29 Wade, Robert, "Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian industrialization" Princeton University Press 1990
• 30 Hamilton Gary, "Business Networks and Economic Development in East and Southeast Asia" University of Hong Kong Press 1991