신수사학의 관점에서 본 데카르트의 논증과 설득의 문제 - 제6성찰을 중심으로 -
Descartes' Argumentation and Persuasion in a New-rhetorical View
0
조회
0
다운로드
7
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In these days, the philosophy of Descartes as being mythicized as a first signal of modern philosophy still remains in a state of interruption of interpretation. It means that there have not been efforts to strictly dissect Descartes' texts. It may come from fixed studies about notions such as subject, ego and cogito. When a reader presents a new interpretation of the text by a critical reading, the text will have fertile meanings, which can be shared with many people. A reader who accomplishes a writing about an interpretation of original text and a reinterpretation of it should concentrate to revive and modernize the dead letters of author's meaningful ideas for one's own self. This is the reason why I analyse the problem of Descartes' argumentation and persuasion in the Method of discourse and Meditations ― especially, in the sixth meditation ― on the view of new-rhetoric as a new criterion of truth and a method of research, and suggest a critical opinion about his theory. In this new-rhetorical view, Descartes' philosophy, especially the cogito argument is closed and self-centered. For Descartes as a speaker unilaterally stated his ideas to manifest his own conviction. But he neglected the rapport between readers and hearers. So, as G. Vigneaud pointed, Descartes failed to "suggest a controlled thought and a suitable expression to this thought." More than worse, Cogito ergo sum as the first principle of his philosophy implies a paradox that the principle must be explained by God as the superior criterion of truth. In fact, the way to reach the universal truth in philosophy is too steep. Maybe that is why many people suggest Hermes rather than Apollon ― especially, for M. Serres ― as a symbol of contemporary philosophy. Undoubtedly, of course, if we consider this concept as a prejudice, we should throw away. The important point is that truth is not simply the only one, but exists in multiplicity, diversity, complexity. In our universe, the truth is not a solo, but a ensemble. The truth is not a supposed and reconfirmed thing as Descartes said, but a newly expanded thing which is created by our efforts.
Abstract
In these days, the philosophy of Descartes as being mythicized as a first signal of modern philosophy still remains in a state of interruption of interpretation. It means that there have not been efforts to strictly dissect Descartes' texts. It may come from fixed studies about notions such as subject, ego and cogito. When a reader presents a new interpretation of the text by a critical reading, the text will have fertile meanings, which can be shared with many people. A reader who accomplishes a writing about an interpretation of original text and a reinterpretation of it should concentrate to revive and modernize the dead letters of author's meaningful ideas for one's own self. This is the reason why I analyse the problem of Descartes' argumentation and persuasion in the Method of discourse and Meditations ― especially, in the sixth meditation ― on the view of new-rhetoric as a new criterion of truth and a method of research, and suggest a critical opinion about his theory. In this new-rhetorical view, Descartes' philosophy, especially the cogito argument is closed and self-centered. For Descartes as a speaker unilaterally stated his ideas to manifest his own conviction. But he neglected the rapport between readers and hearers. So, as G. Vigneaud pointed, Descartes failed to "suggest a controlled thought and a suitable expression to this thought." More than worse, Cogito ergo sum as the first principle of his philosophy implies a paradox that the principle must be explained by God as the superior criterion of truth. In fact, the way to reach the universal truth in philosophy is too steep. Maybe that is why many people suggest Hermes rather than Apollon ― especially, for M. Serres ― as a symbol of contemporary philosophy. Undoubtedly, of course, if we consider this concept as a prejudice, we should throw away. The important point is that truth is not simply the only one, but exists in multiplicity, diversity, complexity. In our universe, the truth is not a solo, but a ensemble. The truth is not a supposed and reconfirmed thing as Descartes said, but a newly expanded thing which is created by our efforts.
참고문헌 (31)
- 게레로(J. A. H.), "수사학의 역사" (2001), 문학과 지성사
- 데카르트(R.), "방법서설·성찰·데까르뜨 연구" (1986), 서광사
- 뒤랑(G.), "상징적 상상력" (1990), 문학과 지성사
- 뒤랑(G.), "신화비평과 신화분석" (1998), 살림
- 르불(O.), "수사학" (1999), 한길사
- 마넬리(M.), "페렐만의 신수사학" (2006), 고려대학교 출판부
- 박치완, "데카르트의 <Cogito 논증>, 과연 효과적인가?", 프랑스학연구, (40), pp.269~310 (2007), 프랑스학회
- 박치완, "데카르트와 수사학", 해석학연구, (20), pp.137~185 (2007), 한국해석학회
- 버거(F. R.), "논리철학입문" (1987), 대왕사
- 비뇨(G.), "논증 - 담화에서 사고까지" (2001), 동문선
- 세르(M.), "헤르메스" (1999), 민음사
- 아리스토텔레스, "수사학 I~III" (2007), 리젬
- 전성기, "인문학의 수사학적 탐구" (2007), 고려대학교출판부
- 케니(A.), "데카르트의 철학" (1991), 서광사
- 크로스화이트(J.), "이성의 수사학" (2001), 고려대학교출판부
- 하이데거(M.), "세계상의 시대" (1995), 서광사
- Aristote, "Rhétorique, t. I~III" (2003), Les Belles Lettres
- Balibar(F.), "Larvatus prodeo : rhétorique de Descartes", Critique, (718) (2007)
- Barié(G. E.), "Du «cogtio» cartésien au moi transcendantal", Revue philosophique de la France et de l'Etranger, (4) (1951)
- Chastaing(M.), "L'abbé de Lanion et le problème cartésien de la connaissance d'autrui", Revue philosophique de la France et de l'Etranger, (4) (1951)
- Descartes(R.), "Méditations métaphysiques" (1985), Libraire Larousse
- Loreau(M.), "La rhétorique comme logique des sciences humaines", Critique, (221) (1965)
- Madison(G. B.), "The New Philosophy of Rhetoric", Texte, (8) (1989)
- Manson(J.), "Philosophical Rhetoric. The fonction of indirection in philosophical writing" (1989), Routledge
- Meyer(M.), "Logique, langage et argumentation" (1982), Hachette
- Meyer(M.), "De la problématilogie" (1986), Pierre Mardaga
- Meyer(M.), "The Revival of Questioning in the Twentieth Century", Synthese, 74(1) (1988)
- Meyer(M.), "Questions de rhétorique" (1993), Librairie Générale Française
- Perelman(Ch.), "L'empire rhétorique" (1988), J. Vrin
- Lefèvre(R.), "La structure du cartésianisme" (1978), P.U. de Lille III
- Revel(J.-F.), "Descartes inutile et incertain" (1976), Stock
