著者

金 鳳珍

出版者

大阪経済大学日本経済史研究所

雑誌

経済史研究 (ISSN:1344803X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.15, pp.57-75, 2012-01-20 (Released:2018-10-01)

著者

金 鳳珍

出版者

政治思想学会

雑誌

政治思想研究 (ISSN:1346924X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.6, pp.180-196, 2006-05-01 (Released:2012-11-20)

著者

金 鳳珍

出版者

東京大学東洋文化研究所

雑誌

東洋文化研究所紀要 (ISSN:05638089)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.140, pp.474-453, 2000-12

---

Inoue Kakugōrō, as a foreign assistant or advisor, had been employed at a new government office named Bakmunkuk (博文局), having published the modern newspaper such as 'Hansŏngsunbo (漢城旬報)' and 'Hansŏngzubo (漢城周報).'We may say, in a sense, he had been engaged in enlightening the society or reforming the old system when he stayed in Chosŏn for about four years.However, we need to be careful about what motivated him to do this and/or what was his genuine, real purpose in doing that.We must ask whether his motive/purpose was pure or not.By putting these questions, we can reveal not only the real facts of this historical case but also the real problems resided in the historico-psychological depths of the modern history of Japan and Chosŏn.This paper will be a critical suggestion for 'deconstructing' the history of the Japan-Korea relation.

著者

米原 謙 赤澤 史朗 出原 政雄 金 鳳珍 區 建英 松田 宏一郎

出版者

大阪大学

雑誌

基盤研究(B)

巻号頁・発行日

2005

---

本研究は、近代日本のナショナル・アイデンティティの歴史的形成と変容を、中国や韓国と関連づけて、政治思想史の観点から明らかにしようとしたものである。この三国は、ともに「欧米の衝撃」によって国民国家形成の課題に直面したが、日本だけがいち早く欧米の政治文化を受容し、1890年には立憲政度を導入した。植民地となった韓国や、侵略と内戦によって国家統一に時間を要した中国に比べると、日本は順調に国民国家形成に成功したといえる。しかし日本の立憲主義は、「国体論」という一種の「市民宗教」(ルソー)とセットだったので、1930年代に国体論による立憲主義への逆襲が起こった。つまり政治思想や政策過程の内面まで立ち入ると、近代日本の政治は常に興亜論(アジア主義)-脱亜論、伝統-近代の間を動揺したことがわかる。こうした分裂の構造を、一方ではナショナル・アイデンティティという分析ツールを使うことで、他方では中国や韓国との構造的連関によって明らかにするのが、本共同研究の目的意識である。C・テイラーによれば、アイデンティティの形成は常に「重要な他者」を媒介にしている。近代日本にとって「重要な他者」はまず欧米だったが、中国や韓国は、日本にとって近代化のための反面教師であるとともに、ナショナル・アイデンティティの根拠となる「重要な他者」でもあった。本共同研究の参加者は、国体論・アジア主義・国粋主義・ナショナリズムなどを切り口にして、こうした問題にアプローチした。

著者

金 鳳珍

出版者

大阪経済大学

雑誌

経済史研究 (ISSN:1344803X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.15, pp.57-75, 2012

著者

金 鳳珍

出版者

東京大学東洋文化研究所

雑誌

東洋文化研究所紀要 (ISSN:05638089)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.141, pp.392-366, 2001-03

---

Why the Confucian countries such as China and other Asian states could not bring forth the modern science? This question has been considered an aporia for a long time.And many a scholar has answered that: Neo-Confucianism (or its reign) was the biggest factor which hindered those countries in their scientific progress.And further, it was the greatest obstacle to accept the modern science later on.Each answer is, we may say, worthy of being considered; however, it seems to me that the afore-mentioned question is not an aporia but a silly question, and therewith each answer must be reconsidered before it will go out of use.In this regard, reconsideration entails self-reflexion/criticism upon the obsession of the west-centric modernism or Orientalism.I would rather cross-question; how or why the Confucian countries could and should bring forth the modern science? It is no use answering this question-it is beyond reason.The Confucian countries has had the highly developed science of their own.It goes without saying that Neo-Confucianism had contributed much to the development of science.Neo-Confucian methods of learning, for instance, Zhu Xi's doctrine of gewu (格物; the “investigation of things”) and qiongli (窮理; the “plumbing of principle”), which evoked the scientific mind and evolved natural science in a Neo-Confucian way, have decisive relationality with the modern Western methodology of science.Seemingly most of the ifalic countries except Japan, in the late nine-teenth and early twentieth century, had failed in accepting the modern science.But we cannot say that Nee-Confucianism was the greatest cause of failure.On the contrary I think Neo-Confucianism would have contribut-ed toward accepting and developing the modern science, unless Western countries and Japan had commited an evil act in terms of imperialism.Imperial countries would not permit the Confucian countries to go to the way of selection or rejection by harmonizing the modern with the tradi-tional science or civilization.In this sense, the negative side of the modern/modernity was the greatest cause of the Confucian countries' failure.I think it will be the task of the 21st century to revaluate the scientific thinking and method of Neo-Confucianism for further developing a ‘new science.’

著者

金 鳳珍

出版者

東京大学東洋文化研究所

雑誌

東洋文化研究所紀要 (ISSN:05638089)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.140, pp.474-453, 2000-12

---

Inoue Kakugōrō, as a foreign assistant or advisor, had been employed at a new government office named Bakmunkuk (博文局), having published the modern newspaper such as ‘Hansŏngsunbo (漢城旬報)’ and ‘Hansŏngzubo (漢城周報).’ We may say, in a sense, he had been engaged in enlightening the society or reforming the old system when he stayed in Chosŏn for about four years. However, we need to be careful about what motivated him to do this and/or what was his genuine, real purpose in doing that. We must ask whether his motive/purpose was pure or not. By putting these questions, we can reveal not only the real facts of this historical case but also the real problems resided in the historico-psychological depths of the modern history of Japan and Chosŏn. This paper will be a critical suggestion for ‘deconstructing’ the history of the Japan-Korea relation.