맑스(주의) 변증법의 한계와 그 극복 방향 : 인간중심 변증법의 비판적 지적과 그 대안의 타당성 검토

Abstract

According to Man-centered Dialectics, there is no active subject of praxis to lead social movements and developments in the Marx(ist) Materialistic Dialectics, instead only movements, changes and development exist. On that account, Marx (ist) Dialectics does not contribute rightly to the reform and development of human society and the realization of liberation society. The main agent to start a social reform-movement and carry forward the advance and development of society is the human subject, but owing to the absence of such subject of practical action Marx(ist) Dialectics ends in carrying on the role to reveal and explaining critically the course of progress and advance of human society. The main reason for such a situation is that Marx(ist) Dialectics places the cause of movement(change, revolution, reform) in the external objective factors surrounding human life such as the contradiction between productive force and relation of production, thus Materialistic Dialectics is faced with the limitation of ‘principle of movement’ or ‘objectivism’. By comparison with Marx(ist) Dialectics, Man-centered Dialectics which is reconstructed critically based on precedent Materialistic Dialectics by Hwang, looks upon main agent of practice, that is Man as the cause and power source of movement (change, reform, development). And under such a practical-philosophical premise, Man-centered Dialectics tries to widen and reconstruct the role and function of dialectics as the practical-philosophical methodologies and the system of practical guides to lead the realization of more idealistic human society and the improvement of the destiny of humankind, going beyond the limitations of the dialectics as the framework for the cognition and analysis about social evolution. In this respect, Man-centered Dialectics is deserved to be in the position sublating creatively the weak points of Materialistic Dialectics in its degree successfully.