아렌트의 정치적 판단력 개념과 그 적용에 관한 일고찰 - 아이히만 사례와 관련하여
Arendt’s concept of the political judgment andits application to Eichmann case
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Arendt’s political thinking begins with the critique of the modern world. Arendt describes as the problematic phenomena of the modern world the ‘predominance of the social and the labor’, which results in the ‘disappearance of the political’. She strives theoretically to regenerate ‘the politics’ which is related to the human conditions, such as the plurality and natality of man, the space of appearance, and the capacity of speech and appointment. Focusing on the problem of how to make sense of the political judgment Arendt grounds her own conception of political judgment on Kant’s ‘aesthetic reflective judgment’. especially on Kant’s aesthetic concept of ‘sensus communis’. Arendt’s theoretical interest in Kant is interrelated with the practical interest in Eichmann case that she describes as the banality of evil. She analyzes that the ‘thinklessness and incapacity for judgment’ bring about the political catastrophes. Eichmann trial presents above all the antinomy of political judgment, especially the conflict between freedom and history that can be easily used to justify the wrongful actions under totalitarianism. While the subjective freedom can be restricted by historical contexts, Arendt claims that this antinomy can be solved with the concepts of ‘order of mankind’, ‘sensus communis’, and the ‘capacity of political judgment’. In spite of some inconsistency Arendt strives to combine politics with humanity in the medium of human capacity of judgment. This conception as whole can have the influence on the political thinking of our own day.
Abstract
Arendt’s political thinking begins with the critique of the modern world. Arendt describes as the problematic phenomena of the modern world the ‘predominance of the social and the labor’, which results in the ‘disappearance of the political’. She strives theoretically to regenerate ‘the politics’ which is related to the human conditions, such as the plurality and natality of man, the space of appearance, and the capacity of speech and appointment. Focusing on the problem of how to make sense of the political judgment Arendt grounds her own conception of political judgment on Kant’s ‘aesthetic reflective judgment’. especially on Kant’s aesthetic concept of ‘sensus communis’. Arendt’s theoretical interest in Kant is interrelated with the practical interest in Eichmann case that she describes as the banality of evil. She analyzes that the ‘thinklessness and incapacity for judgment’ bring about the political catastrophes. Eichmann trial presents above all the antinomy of political judgment, especially the conflict between freedom and history that can be easily used to justify the wrongful actions under totalitarianism. While the subjective freedom can be restricted by historical contexts, Arendt claims that this antinomy can be solved with the concepts of ‘order of mankind’, ‘sensus communis’, and the ‘capacity of political judgment’. In spite of some inconsistency Arendt strives to combine politics with humanity in the medium of human capacity of judgment. This conception as whole can have the influence on the political thinking of our own day.
참고문헌 (28)
- 한나 아렌트, "칸트 정치철학 강의" (2011), 푸른숲
- 한나 아렌트, "전체주의의 기원1" (2006), 한길사
- 한나 아렌트, "전체주의의 기원2" (2006), 한길사
- 김선욱, "정치의 약속 (한나 아렌트 저)" (2007), 푸른숲
- 한나 아렌트, "과거와 미래 사이. 정치 사상에 관한 여덟 가지 철학연습" (2009), 푸른숲
- 한나 아렌트, "인간의 조건" (2009), 한길사
- 한나 아렌트, "예루살렘의 아이히만. 악의 평범성에 대한 보고서" (2007), 한길사
- 베이너, "칸트 정치철학 강의" (2011), 푸른숲
- 김비환, "축복과 저주의 정치사상, 20세기와 한나 아렌트" (2001), 한길사
- 백종현, "판단력비판" (2009), 아카넷
- I. Kant, "Kritik der Urteilskraft" (1993), Hamburg
- I. Kant, "Zum ewigen Frieden" (1992), Hamburg
- I. Kant, "Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschft in 12 Bänden", Frankfurt, 8 (1982)
- I. Kant, "Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung" (1992), Stuttgart
- I. Kant, "Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis" (1992), Hamburg
- R. Beardsworth, "Arendt and the Critique of Moralism", International Politics, 45, pp.506~513 (2008)
- M. Becker, "Macht und Herrschaft", pp.217~246 (1998), Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
- S. Benhabib, "Judgment and the Moral Foundations of Politics in Arendt's Thought", Political Theory, 16(1), pp.29~51 (1988)
- K. Breen, "Violence and Power. A critique of Hannah Arendt on the ‘political’", Philosophy & Social Criticism, 33(3), pp.343~372 (2007)
- C. J. Finlay, "Hannah Arendt’s Critique of Violence", Thesis Eleven, (97), pp.26~45 (2009)
- E. Frazer, "Arendt : The risks of the public realm", Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 12(2), pp.203~223 (2009)
- A. Goldman, "antinomy of political judgment: Kant, Arendt, and the role of purposiveness in reflective judgment", Continental Philosophy Review, 43(3), pp.331~352 (2010)
- L. Keedus, "Human and nothing but human’How Schmittian is Hannah Arendt's critique of human rights and international law?", History of European Ideas, 37, pp.190~196 (2011)
- C. Reeves, "Exploding the Limits of Law : Judgment and Freedom in Arendt and Adorno", Res Publica, 15, pp.137~164 (2009)
- S. B. Smith, "Review: Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy by Hannah Arendt; Ronald Beiner", Ethics, 94(3), pp.531~534 (1984)
- T. Thiel, "Ambivalenzen der Ordnung", pp.259~282 (2013), Staat-Souveränität-Nation
- C. Volk, "From Nomos to Lex: Hannah Arendt on Law, Politics, and Order", Leiden Journal of International Law, 23, pp.759~779 (2010)
- M. C. Weidenfeld, "Visions of Judgment: Arendt, Kant, and the Misreading of Judgment", Political Research Quarterly, 66(2), pp.254~266 (2012)