근대성 논의에서 패러다임과 방법론의 혁신 문제 -식민지근대화론과 내재적 근대화론을 넘어 差異와 異種의 근대성으로

초록

I look new horizon beyond colonial modernity and national modernity. I reject the "binary constructions" of nationalist historical narratives that have produced such dichotomous interpretations of the period as "imperialist repression versus nationalist resistance" or "colonial development versus national development". Instead I propose a new paradigm and methodology which transfer from the paradigm of identity to that of difference, from single modernity to varieties of modernity. ‘The modern as the real’, ‘the represented modern’, ‘the modern as the desire’, ‘the interpreted modern’ is not the same. However, all the scholars who had researched into the modernity in Korea regarded them as the same. I solved the problem through the thought of difference and theory of varieties of modernity, and methodology of cultural studies. The Chosŏn dynasty approached to the stage of germinal capitalist society in the 18-19th centuries. Its developments were due to both western influences and voluntary engagement. Not only elite group but also peoples contributed to capitalist development. The relation of commodity-money economy appeared between the socio-economic base and the people in the age. There were four types of man's attitudes in this economic system: a irrational moralist, a rational moneymaker, a irrational moneymaker, a rational moralist. While, a rational moneymaker seems to be gradually won in the hegemonic struggle against a irrational moralist, the capitalist development ensured its legitimacy. There was a clear transition in Chosŏn Dynasty in the era of 18-19 centuries. Those transition are a variety of modernity that is different from the western modernization. Now, we can research the modernity in Chosŏn Dynasty more exactly through the thought of difference and theory of varieties of modernity, and methodology of cultural studies.

키워드