1930년대 조선 역사과학의 연구방법론
Research methodology of the historical science of Joseon in the 1930’s
0
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper examined the research methodology of the historical science of Joseon of the 1930’s with focus on the method of understanding historical materialism, perception of development opportunities, and strategies for combining historical materialism with the study of the history of Joseon. Earlier studies paid attention to the two research trends, i.e. the theory of the universality of the world history and the theory of Asian specificity within historical science, but specific analysis of the theoretical backgrounds of the two trends and the method of connecting them to the history of Joseon was lacking. Advocates of the theory of the universality of the world history interpreted historical materialism from the monistic viewpoint, while criticizing theories and descriptions that emphasize the inferiority of Joseon. They considered primitive communism-slavery-feudalism-capitalistic society as the common development path of world history, and placed emphasis on national opportunities in historical development especially under the influence of the nationalistic viewpoint. To prove it, they adopted the method of comparing Joseon with various countries around the world. It was a precursor to the Joseon history perception system, i.e. the history of Joseon developed along the same path as the world history. Advocates of the theory of Asian specificity classify countries around the world according to the current level of their production capacity, and interpreted historical materialism from the pluralistic viewpoint. They agreed that there were only four types of production in history, but they believed that each stage can be omitted and modified depending on various conditions. Their perception of the uneven development of the world history led them to pay attention to the international opportunities in historical development. To prove it, they classify the Asian society as a separate form of development, and put Joseon into this category. As the difference from the West was highlighted, the historical perception trying to find the cause of backwardness came into being.
Abstract
This paper examined the research methodology of the historical science of Joseon of the 1930’s with focus on the method of understanding historical materialism, perception of development opportunities, and strategies for combining historical materialism with the study of the history of Joseon. Earlier studies paid attention to the two research trends, i.e. the theory of the universality of the world history and the theory of Asian specificity within historical science, but specific analysis of the theoretical backgrounds of the two trends and the method of connecting them to the history of Joseon was lacking. Advocates of the theory of the universality of the world history interpreted historical materialism from the monistic viewpoint, while criticizing theories and descriptions that emphasize the inferiority of Joseon. They considered primitive communism-slavery-feudalism-capitalistic society as the common development path of world history, and placed emphasis on national opportunities in historical development especially under the influence of the nationalistic viewpoint. To prove it, they adopted the method of comparing Joseon with various countries around the world. It was a precursor to the Joseon history perception system, i.e. the history of Joseon developed along the same path as the world history. Advocates of the theory of Asian specificity classify countries around the world according to the current level of their production capacity, and interpreted historical materialism from the pluralistic viewpoint. They agreed that there were only four types of production in history, but they believed that each stage can be omitted and modified depending on various conditions. Their perception of the uneven development of the world history led them to pay attention to the international opportunities in historical development. To prove it, they classify the Asian society as a separate form of development, and put Joseon into this category. As the difference from the West was highlighted, the historical perception trying to find the cause of backwardness came into being.
참고문헌 (27)
- "東亞日報", ~
- "普專學會論集", ~
- "新東亞", ~
- "新興", ~
- "批判", ~
- "朝鮮社會經濟史硏究", ~
- "社會", ~
- "生きた新聞", ~
- "歷史科學", ~
- "唯物論硏究", ~
- 李淸源, "朝鮮社會史讀本" (1936), 白揚社
- 朝鮮科學者同盟, "李朝社會經濟史" (1946), 勞農社
- 李北滿, "李朝社會經濟史硏究" (1948), 大成出版社
- 김태준, "김태준전집 1-5" (1990), 보고사
- 백남운, "백남운전집 1-4" (1991), 이론과실천
- 신남철, "신남철 문장선집 Ⅰ" (2013), 성균관대학교 출판부
- 심지연, "朝鮮革命論 硏究 : 해방정국논쟁사 2" (1987), 실천문학사
- V.I.레닌, "제국주의론" (1988), 백산서당
- 방기중, "한국근대사상사 연구" (1992), 역사비평사
- 한형식, "맑스주의 역사 강의" (2011), 그린비
- F.엥겔스, "가족 사유재산 국가의 기원" (2012), 두레
- 金容燮, "日本ㆍ韓國에 있어서의 韓國史敍述", 역사학보, 31 (1966)
- 아리프 딜릭, "중국사시대구분론" (1984), 창작과비평사
- 조형열, "1930년대 마르크스주의 지식인의 학술문화기관 구상과 ‘科學的 朝鮮學’ 수립론", 역사학연구, (61), pp.125~151 (2016), 호남사학회
- 조형열, "1930년대 조선 ‘역사과학’ 계열의 보편특수성 인식과 아시아적 생산양식론 수용 양상", 전북사학, (49), pp.213~240 (2016), 전북사학회
- 조형열, "1930년대 마르크스주의 지식인의 프롤레타리아문화운동과 ‘실천적 조선연구’론", 한국사연구, (177), pp.231~265 (2017), 한국사연구회
- 洪宗郁, "講座東アジアの知識人 4" (2014), 有志舍
