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.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Since the mid-1930s, intellectuals of colonial Korea had become professionals of social science academics. In this paper, I tracked the whereabouts of this professional knowledge in total war period.
After political conversion(1938), In Jeongsik(印貞植) obtained and produced by himself the data which were more detailed and accurate than before for the society of colonial Korea. Using these indexes, In defined the historical status of it. At the same time, he compared colonial Korea with Southeast Asia, China, and Manchuria. Firstly, In argued that capitalistic industrialization was advanced in colonial Korea under Japanese imperialism, on the contrary, feudalism had been exacerbated in Southeast Asia since colonization by Western imperialism. Secondly, he represented China as a stagnant society based on the theory of "Asiatic mode of production"(K. Wittfogel), excepting colonial Korea from the range of that theory. Finally, In argued that Korean society was modernized based on the fact that the system of nuclear family was overwhelming, in contrast to Manchuria which had been evaluated as a large family system society.
However, In"s claims were the answers to the questions suggested from Japanese resident intellectuals in Korea. These questions, produced in the asymmetry of power between empire and colony, were to serve the purpose of Japanese imperialism to mobilize colonial Korean society. In, without denying these questions, only looked to the others, neighboring Asian states, which were evaluated inferior than Korea by himself. After all, In neither could recognize accurately the "colonial Korea", nor fairly neighboring others. Disregarding the violence of questions he tried to answer, In distorted the history and reality of others.
The way that In Jeongsik walked on as a social scientist of colonial Korea, needs to be remembered as the typical case that clearly says why colonial intellectuals fail to know their society and others accurately.
After political conversion(1938), In Jeongsik(印貞植) obtained and produced by himself the data which were more detailed and accurate than before for the society of colonial Korea. Using these indexes, In defined the historical status of it. At the same time, he compared colonial Korea with Southeast Asia, China, and Manchuria. Firstly, In argued that capitalistic industrialization was advanced in colonial Korea under Japanese imperialism, on the contrary, feudalism had been exacerbated in Southeast Asia since colonization by Western imperialism. Secondly, he represented China as a stagnant society based on the theory of "Asiatic mode of production"(K. Wittfogel), excepting colonial Korea from the range of that theory. Finally, In argued that Korean society was modernized based on the fact that the system of nuclear family was overwhelming, in contrast to Manchuria which had been evaluated as a large family system society.
However, In"s claims were the answers to the questions suggested from Japanese resident intellectuals in Korea. These questions, produced in the asymmetry of power between empire and colony, were to serve the purpose of Japanese imperialism to mobilize colonial Korean society. In, without denying these questions, only looked to the others, neighboring Asian states, which were evaluated inferior than Korea by himself. After all, In neither could recognize accurately the "colonial Korea", nor fairly neighboring others. Disregarding the violence of questions he tried to answer, In distorted the history and reality of others.
The way that In Jeongsik walked on as a social scientist of colonial Korea, needs to be remembered as the typical case that clearly says why colonial intellectuals fail to know their society and others accurately.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 총력전기 조선의 지식장(知識場)의 구조변동
Ⅲ. 자기인식과 타자인식: 정치적 실천으로서의 ‘비교’
Ⅳ. 나가며
참고문헌
영문초록
참고문헌 (2)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
어떤 인문학적 상상력이 필요한가 : '언론학에 대한 새로운 접근으로서의 인문학'의 현실과 과제
박진우
커뮤니케이션 이론
2013
.09
여성들이 걸어온 길을 묻다 : 『인문학, 여성을 말하다』
최혜진
아시아여성연구
2013
.11
식민지 지식국가론 : 1930년대 ‘조선사회성격논쟁’에 대한 재고
김인수
한국사회학회 사회학대회 논문집
2012
.12
1920년대 맑스주의 문예학에서 ‘과학적 태도’ 형성의 배경
송민호
한국현대문학연구
2009
.12
20세기 중국 과학사·기술사·의학사 독법(讀法) : 자기 부정과 자기 재생산을 양극으로 하는 하나의 스펙트럼 안에서
이종식
아세아연구
2021
.06
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-900-001030662