We will next speak of Liberality. Now this is thought to be the mean state, having for its object-matter Wealth: I mean, the Liberal man is praised not in the circumstances of war, nor in those which constitute the character of perfected self-mastery, nor again in judicial decisions, but in respect of giving and receiving Wealth, chiefly the former. By the term Wealth I mean all those things whose worth is measured by money.

This classic is the benchmark against which all modern books about Nietzsche are measured. When Walter Kaufmann wrote it in the immediate aftermath of World War II, most scholars outside Germany viewed Nietzsche as part madman, part proto-Nazi, and almost wholly unphilosophical. Kaufmann rehabilitated Nietzsche nearly single-handedly, presenting his works as one of the great achievements of Western philosophy. Responding to the powerful myths and countermyths that had sprung up around Nietzsche, Kaufmann offered a patient, evenhanded account of his life (...) and works, and of the uses and abuses to which subsequent generations had put his ideas. Without ignoring or downplaying the ugliness of many of Nietzsche's proclamations, he set them in the context of his work as a whole and of the counterexamples yielded by a responsible reading of his books. More positively, he presented Nietzsche's ideas about power as one of the great accomplishments of modern philosophy, arguing that his conception of the "will to power" was not a crude apology for ruthless self-assertion but must be linked to Nietzsche's equally profound ideas about sublimation. He also presented Nietzsche as a pioneer of modern psychology and argued that a key to understanding his overall philosophy is to see it as a reaction against Christianity. Many scholars in the past half century have taken issue with some of Kaufmann's interpretations, but the book ranks as one of the most influential accounts ever written of any major Western thinker. Featuring a new foreword by Alexander Nehamas, this Princeton Classics edition of Nietzsche introduces a new generation of readers to one the most influential accounts ever written of any major Western thinker. (shrink)

In 2017, Korean crisis escalated as Donald Trump began “war of words” with DPRK’s chairman Kim Jong-un. Each threat both leaders made might eventually be understood by the other party as a declaration of war. Donald Trump wanted to “clean up the mess” left by previous US administrations and solve the problem of North Korean nuclear program. However, his actions were inconsistent: he threatened in a very North Korean way “total destruction” only to emphasize later that it (...) was not a “preferred option.” This article explores how “war of words” was a significant cause of the escalation of the Korean crisis. (shrink)

Die vorliegenden Untersuchungen haben sich aus solchen entwickelt, die ich an andrer Stelle früher veröffentlichte. Die Kenntnis dieser früheren Arbeit wird in keiner Weise hier vorausgesetzt und ist für das folgende unwesentlich. Es sei mir jedoch gestattet, für den Kenner der früheren Arbeit einige Bemerkungen voraufzuschicken. In der genannten Arbeit hatte ich, angeregt ursprünglich durch Gedankengänge von Herrn Behmann, ein typenfreies System der Logik aufgebaut, das allein auf dem Gedanken fußte, daß der Definitionsbereich der Prädikate im allgemeinen beschränkt ist, sodaß (...) nur bestimmte Zusammenstellungen von Prädikaten und Dingen sinnvolle, d.h. wahre oder falsche Aussagen ergeben, und das diesen Gesichtspunkt meiner Meinung nach konsequent durchführte. Eine anschließende Arbeit sollte dann die Widerspruchsfreiheit des Systems untersuchen. Diese Untersuchung ist inzwischen geschehen. Es zeigte sich, daß sich die Widerspruchsfreiheit des Systems nur dann beweisen ließ, falls die in ihm enthaltene Vollständigkeit von → die sich durch das Bestehen eines Deduktionstheorems zeigte, fallen gelassen wurde. Die Grundformeln (13) und (14) mußten wegbleiben. Die Widerspruchsfreiheit des restlichen Systems ließ sich dann durch eine dem System eigentümliche Methode der Beweistransformation zeigen.Diese anschließienden Untersuchungen, die ihrer Zeit nicht mehr veröffentlicht werden konnten, sind inzwischen durch die vorliegenden überholt. Es war das Unbefriedigende bei dem genannten Aufbau, daß hinterher doch wieder eine Einschränkung gemacht werden mußte, die sich nicht aus den zugrunde gelegten Prinzipien ergab, sondern von ihnen aus unvorhergesehen war. Diese Einschränkung bewirkte übrigens, daß keine volle Zahlentheorie in dem System zu gewinnen war. (shrink)

Die vorliegenden Untersuchungen haben sich aus solchen entwickelt, die ich an andrer Stelle früher veröffentlichte. Die Kenntnis dieser früheren Arbeit wird in keiner Weise hier vorausgesetzt und ist für das folgende unwesentlich. Es sei mir jedoch gestattet, für den Kenner der früheren Arbeit einige Bemerkungen voraufzuschicken. In der genannten Arbeit hatte ich, angeregt ursprünglich durch Gedankengänge von Herrn Behmann, ein typenfreies System der Logik aufgebaut, das allein auf dem Gedanken fußte, daß der Definitionsbereich der Prädikate im allgemeinen beschränkt ist, sodaß (...) nur bestimmte Zusammenstellungen von Prädikaten und Dingen sinnvolle, d.h. wahre oder falsche Aussagen ergeben, und das diesen Gesichtspunkt meiner Meinung nach konsequent durchführte. Eine anschließende Arbeit sollte dann die Widerspruchsfreiheit des Systems untersuchen. Diese Untersuchung ist inzwischen geschehen. Es zeigte sich, daß sich die Widerspruchsfreiheit des Systems nur dann beweisen ließ, falls die in ihm enthaltene Vollständigkeit von → die sich durch das Bestehen eines Deduktionstheorems zeigte, fallen gelassen wurde. Die Grundformeln (13) und (14) mußten wegbleiben. Die Widerspruchsfreiheit des restlichen Systems ließ sich dann durch eine dem System eigentümliche Methode der Beweistransformation zeigen.Diese anschließienden Untersuchungen, die ihrer Zeit nicht mehr veröffentlicht werden konnten, sind inzwischen durch die vorliegenden überholt. Es war das Unbefriedigende bei dem genannten Aufbau, daß hinterher doch wieder eine Einschränkung gemacht werden mußte, die sich nicht aus den zugrunde gelegten Prinzipien ergab, sondern von ihnen aus unvorhergesehen war. Diese Einschränkung bewirkte übrigens, daß keine volle Zahlentheorie in dem System zu gewinnen war. (shrink)

I have chosen my topic for this evening with an eye to something rather more than its intrinsic philosophical interest. Modern man, as we are all painfully aware, is facing a crisis of peculiar gravity. Perhaps the odds are not so very heavy against a third world war followed by world collapse into anarchy and barbarism. At such a time the philosopher is bound to ask himself whether there is no contribution which his science can make towards the succour of (...) civilization. (shrink)

It is remarkable that we have to-day a number of philosophers who call themselves subjectivists in moral philosophy. For, although the name “subjectivist” is by no means new, philosophers have reserved it hitherto for their opponents, and usually for imaginary opponents at that. Perhaps the chief cause of the change which has taken place in recent years is the discovery of a distinction between descriptive and emotive meaning. In the past the only form of subjectivism considered by writers on moral (...) philosophy was the suggestion that moral sentences such as “You ought to do that” were statements about the speaker's own attitude; and it was easy to refute this by pointing out that we discuss questions of morals in a way which would be unintelligent, and even unintelligible, if moral judgments were only reports of introspection. But those who now call themselves subjectivists maintain that the peculiarity of moral words is their expressive and evocative power. According to their analysis, a speaker who uses one of these words in an indicative sentence may be stating nothing at all, but is undoubtedly trying to influence others to adopt a certain attitude. This, they say, explains how there can be genuine disagreement about questions of morals and why discussion may produce results. If A tries to evoke one attitude in his hearers and B tries to evoke an incompatible attitude, their utterances are opposed, not indeed like contradictory statements, but rather like the efforts of men engaged in a tug-of-war. (shrink)

In re-opening the case of the authorship of the Hellenica of Oxyrhynchus I am afraid I must state at once that you will find that there is not much in it, at least nothing new. The few pages, recently published by Vittorio Bartoletti, from a papyrus book which evidently contained the same work as P. Oxy. 842 have not changed the state of the problem. They confirm the two primary facts known about the author in question: that he is a (...) continuator of Thucydides—a fact which was inferred at once from the very exceptional use of Thucydides' war-year, and which, incidentally, does not allow of the further inference that he intended merely to complement Thucydides, ending his work with the fall of Athens, as it is often assumed that Xenophon originally did; that he was the main source of Ephoros for the period for which Thucydides was no longer available. But, unfortunately, they do not contain a title-page or subscription; and it does not help that in the remains of col. ii the anonymous author seems to quote Thucydides. Quotations of prose writers by name are extremely rare in the fifth and even in the fourth century, but they do occur: Herodotus quotes Hekataios for a special point, and Thucydides quotes Hellanikos for a special period, though it is worth while mentioning that both quotations are polemical. (shrink)

In re-opening the case of the authorship of the Hellenica of Oxyrhynchus I am afraid I must state at once that you will find that there is not much in it, at least nothing new. The few pages, recently published by Vittorio Bartoletti, from a papyrus book which evidently contained the same work as P. Oxy. 842 have not changed the state of the problem. They confirm the two primary facts known about the author in question: that he is a (...) continuator of Thucydides—a fact which was inferred at once from the very exceptional use of Thucydides' war-year, and which, incidentally, does not allow of the further inference that he intended merely to complement Thucydides, ending his work with the fall of Athens, as it is often assumed that Xenophon originally did; that he was the main source of Ephoros for the period for which Thucydides was no longer available. But, unfortunately, they do not contain a title-page or subscription; and it does not help that in the remains of col. ii the anonymous author seems to quote Thucydides. Quotations of prose writers by name are extremely rare in the fifth and even in the fourth century, but they do occur: Herodotus quotes Hekataios for a special point, and Thucydides quotes Hellanikos for a special period, though it is worth while mentioning that both quotations are polemical. (shrink)

Viel, schwerlich zuviel, wird heute von der Kultur, der Bil dungseinheit des Abendlandes gesprochen. Nicht wenige aller dings empfehlen heute, die ganze überschwer gewordene und wenig versprechende Last abzuwerfen. Wenn aber wirklich der Menschheit der Marsch durch die Eiswüste des Nihilismus beschieden wäre, würde sie den ohne hinreichendes Gepäck überstehen? Zwar kann ihr das bloße "Es war einmal" der Geschichte nichts helfen: Nur was von Kräften gegenwärtig ist, kann uns in die Zukunft tragen. Aber wir werden uns der gegenwärtigen Kräfte (...) und des künftigen Sinnes nicht beV~-"Ußt ohne Rückblick auf unsere Vergangenheit. Wir beleben diese, wenn wir ausstoßen, was verjährt und tot ist. Wir Deutschen sind im gegenwärtigen Verfall versucht, unsere gesamte Vergangenheit zu verurteilen, weil sie uns ins Verderben geführt hat - oder Trost darin zu fühlen, was wir an Wissenschaft und Technik, an Kunst und Philosophie, an Dichtung und Religion Unvergängliches beigetragen haben. Aber eins hat sich heute gezeigt: das, was die Welt heute am meisten braucht, haben wir am wenigsten gefunden -das Maaß. (shrink)

The young rebel -- The start in North America -- London in the twenties -- The crisis in democracy -- War, fascism, and communism -- Cambridge in wartime -- Revolution by consent -- On being suddenly infamous -- No ease in Zion -- The Jewish question -- Harold Laski and American democracy -- The influence of Harold Laski.

What is it that leads the author to take up the particular problems which he studies in this book? The topics do not of themselves fit into a structure. The author would dissent from this statement. For instance he says that the book ultimately attempts to clarify the relation between mind and body. With all respect, I suggest that the book could be more suitably entitled "Problems of philosophy in which I have been interested and which I have discussed with (...) myself or with friends on various occasions." The author succeeds in communicating his own zest and interest to the reader. The unity of the book lies rather in its attitude--which I will describe as a combination of empirical analysis with commonsense. But the word "analysis" should not mislead the reader into supposing that the author is a member of the Oxford Group. I am using the word "analysis" in its old-fashioned sense to mean "clear and distinct ideas and definitions." The author would prefer to speak of an analysis of the meaning of words; yet essentially his quest is not different from that of Socrates who aimed to clarify ideas, nor from that of Descartes with his insistence on clear and distinct ideas. But as against the latter at least, the author would insist that philosophical analysis should have empirical roots and an empirical reference. By speaking of commonsense as a component of the author's attitude I mean something more than his addiction to empiricism. I mean his espousal of commonsense categories like, for instance, substance and property, and his preference for commonsense usages. For example, Professor Ducasse rejects behaviorism for the professed reason that the commonsense usage of the word "observation" includes introspection as well as external perception. But I will try to show that the alliance between clarity and commonsense in the author's mind often dissolves into an undeclared and a cold war between them, in which commonsense has the worst of it. (shrink)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR George Hunt Williamson served with the Army Air Corps during World War II as Radio Director for the Army Air Forces Technical Training..

This work analyses the complex and contentious issues of mutual affection and codependency in relationships between Korean ‘comfort women’ and Japanese soldiers during World War II. Drawing on a combination of interviews and published resources, it explores the groups’ perceptions of one another within the framework of ‘traumatic bonding’. Despite traumatic violence and stark inequalities, this article finds nuanced contributions from the parties involved. For the soldiers, the relationships provided a form of emotional relief from the violence of war (...) and from the oppression they themselves were subjected to by those of superior rank within the military hierarchy, while the women often sought kindness and protection from the military men with whom they had formed relationships. However, underneath the yearning for human connection, these relationships were highly complex and deeply affected by the overarching power dynamics of gender and the racialised colonial hierarchy. (shrink)

This study examines the character and imagery of the apocalyptic visions of a rural evangelist in Korea at the end of the Second World War. Pak Tonggi, a charismatic figure who founded a millennarian movement called the Empire of Mount Sion, experienced five major visions which shaped both his ministry and his understanding of world history. This article examines these visions and compares them with the form and motifs of apocalyptic visions recorded in the Old and New Testaments. While Pak’s (...) visions owe much to the ethos of the Biblical visions, their precise content and imagery are seen to be very ‘local’. (shrink)

During the Asian and Pacific War, the Japanese government mobilized approximately 200,000 Asian women to military brothels to sexually serve Japanese soldiers. The majority of these victims were unmarried young women from Korea, Japan’s colony at that time. In the early 1990s, Korean feminist leaders helped more than 200 Korean survivors of Japanese military sexual slavery to come forward to tell the truth, which has further accelerated the redress movement for the women. One major issue in the redress (...) movement and research relating to the so-called “comfort women” issue is whether Japan’s colonization of Korea or gender hierarchy was a more fundamental cause of the Korean women’s suffering. Using an intersectional perspective, this article analyzes how colonial power, gender hierarchy, and class were inseparably tied together to make the victims’ lives miserable. By doing so, it shows that a one-sided emphasis on colonization or gender hierarchy will misrepresent the feminist political issue and misinterpret the “comfort women’s” experiences. (shrink)

Forecasts predicting the reunification of the Korean Peninsula were common throughout the 1990s. Since then, enthusiasm for such predictions has dampened, and though the fundamental assumption of reunification remains, predictions of when and how this will happen have been more restrained. Reunification leaves two unresolved yet interdependent issues: reunification itself, which is the urgent challenge; and the strategic issues that emerge from reunification, which have the potential to fundamentally transform strategic relations in the region of Northeast Asia. Within this (...) context, this paper examines the prospects of Korean reunification against the background of the interstate relations. Initially, it will establish the framework from which such scenarios will emerge: the historical background of the division, the extreme differences between the two states, the role played by the North Korean nuclear threats and the impact of the September 11, 2001 on the interstate relations, and finally general situation and relations in the East Asian region. Then, three possible scenarios of the unification will be developed: through peaceful integration, through the fall of North Korea or through a war. Summing up, even the death of Kim Jong Il will not bring change in the domestic and foreign policy of North Korea which is going to continue an aggressive approach toward the South. In the short-term reunification is definitely not in the interest of the current ROK administration, and the South has no intention of encouraging it. None of the considered scenarios envisions early reunification, and it seems that for the future, the status quo on the Korean Peninsula will remain. (shrink)

This anthology is the most ambitious, comprehensive, and authoritative English-language sourcebook of Korean civilization ever assembled. Encompassing social intellectual, religious, and literary traditions from ancient times through World War II, this collection reveals the grand corpus of thought, beliefs, and customs unique to the Korean people. Volume I features three major periods of Korean history: the Three Kingdoms and Unified Silla (57 B.C.-935), Koryo (918-1392), and Early Choson (1392-1600). Each section begins with a broad historical introduction to (...) provide context and perspective, and contains representative writings from the era, with commentary, background, and analysis. (shrink)

이 글에서는 전쟁이 갖는 의미와 역할에 대해 논구했던 대표적인 서양근대 사상가들의 전쟁관을 고찰한다. 다수의 서양 근대사상가들은 전쟁 현상을 적극적으로 부정하거나 거부하지 않았고 오히려 국가운영과 정치활동에서 불가피하게 겪어야 하는 하나의 필요악으로 간주하였다. 이 글에서 다룬 마키아벨리, 홉스, 클라우제비츠, 헤겔 등도 예외가 아니다. 그럼에도 우리는 서양 주류학자들의 이른바 승전론(勝戰論)이나 낙관적인 전쟁해석을 맹목적으로 따를 것이 아니라, 오히려 역사 속에서 정의와 공존의 이상에 기초해서 평화의 가치를 역설한 인물들을 기억하고 그 이념을 계승하도록 노력해야 할 것이다. 우리는 일차적으로 선별된 서양근대 사상가들의 전쟁론에 내포되어 있는 이념적 특성과 (...) 그것의 한계를 분석할 것이다. 나아가 우리는 이를 바탕으로 해방이후 서구사상의 수용과 해석에 치중함으로써 사상적, 현실적 차원에서 그로부터 막대한 영향을 받아 왔지만, 냉철한 현실인식과 독자적인 가치판단에 따른 전쟁과 평화관을 제시하지 못한 채 여전히 분단과 휴전 상태에 머물고 있는 우리 한국사회에 시사하는 바가 무엇인지 음미할 것이다. (shrink)

Dominant normative theories of armed conflict orientate themselves around the ultimate goal of peace. Yet the deployment of these theories in the international sphere appears to have failed in advancing toward this goal. In this paper, we argue that one major reason for this failure is these theories’ use of essentially contested concepts—that is, concepts whose internally complex character results in no principled way of adjudicating between rival interpretations of them. This renders the theories susceptible to manipulation by international actors (...) who are able to pursue bellicose policies under the cover of nominally pacific frameworks, and we show how this happened historically in a case study of the Korean War of 1950–1953. In order to better serve the goals of peace, we suggest, the rules of war should be reframed to simpler, but more restrictive, normative principles. (shrink)

It is widely acknowledged that a fair tax system is one of the most crucial foundations for any country to pursue stable development and human values. So how does a country accomplish tax fairness? This article argues that war finance and domestic economic inequality are two critical conditions. Historically, wars usually create opportunities for countries to enact progressive tax reforms. However, countries’ war finance choices are conditioned by domestic economic inequality. When inequality is low, the political leadership is more likely (...) to secure a consensus of ‘equality of fiscal sacrifice’ between domestic wealthy elites and ordinary citizens. As a result, the leadership can more successfully enact progressive taxation, money creation and non-military spending cuts to pay for the war. Conversely, when inequality is high, the societal redistributive conflict could be more serious. Unable to strike a bargain of fiscal sacrifices without severe social instability, the leadership is expected to resort to a debt-financing strategy, which stifles tax progressivity and fairness. This article compares the United States’ war finance in the Korean and Vietnam Wars and finds supportive evidence. This article has important implications for the pursuits of tax fairness, democratic accountability, and the prospect for peace. (shrink)

Humans are one of the most cooperative and altruistic species on the planet. At the same time, humans have a long history of violent and deadly intergroup conflicts, i.e. wars. Recently, contemporary evolutionary theorists have revived Charles Darwin’s idea that human in-group altruism and out-group hostility might have co-evolved. Groups with more cooperatively aggressive men, they suggest, were more likely to prevail in the frequent lethal quarrels of human pre-history, and these men, therefore, more likely to have passed on their (...) genes. After a short introduction to evolutionary perspectives on war heroism, we describe selected characteristics of 988 modern war heroes, the US-American Medal of Honor recipients of WWI, WWII, the Korean and the Vietnam War, and discuss whether an evolutionary perspective can help us understand why these men risked their lives ‘beyond the call of duty’. (shrink)

Korea is one of the most complex, critical, and yet understudied of Japan's foreign policy relationships. While much attention in US policy and academic circles has focused on Japan's future relations with China as the key variable for regional stability in the twenty first century, an integral part of the security dynamic in East Asia has been driven by the JapanRepublic of Korea (ROK) axis facilitated the American presence as an Asia-Pacific power and security guarantor. And in the post-cold war (...) era, outcomes in the Japangrand strategy’ regarding the peninsula? (shrink)

This article aims to refute the “incompatibility thesis” that nationalism is incompatible with transnational feminist solidarity, as it fosters exclusionary practices, xenophobia, and racism among feminists with conflicting nationalist aspirations. I examine the plausibility of the incompatibility thesis by focusing on the controversy regarding just reparation for Second World War “comfort women,” which is still unresolved. The Korean Council at the center of this controversy, which advocates for the rights of Korean former comfort women, has been criticized for (...) its strident nationalism and held responsible for the stalemate. Consequently, the case of comfort women has been thought to exemplify the incompatibility thesis. I argue against this common feminist perception in three ways: first, those who subscribe to the incompatibility thesis have misinterpreted facts surrounding the issue; second, the Korean Council's nationalism is a version of “polycentric nationalism,” which avoids the problems of essentialist nationalism at the center of feminist concerns; and, third, transnational feminist solidarity is predicated on the idea of oppressed/marginalized women's epistemic privilege and enjoins that feminists respect oppressed/marginalized women's epistemic privilege. To the extent that oppressed/marginalized women's voices are expressed in nationalist terms, I argue that feminists committed to transnational feminist solidarity must accommodate their nationalism. (shrink)

Abstract:This essay addresses the largely unrecognized art of a former comfort woman, Duk-kyung Kang (1929–1997). Comfort women were forced sexual slaves for the Imperial Japanese Army during the Second World War. By analyzing how both postcolonial and decolonial aesthetics are embodied in her paintings, the potential of her art to challenge colonialism becomes pronounced.

This paper investigates microcultural imperialism upon Eastern cultural heritage. In particular, it exposes the loss of Korean cultural artifacts during wars, and also during imperial cultural expeditions, visits of scholarly research groups, and diplomatic encournters. The paper argues that imperialist domination is sometimes concealed in the name of Oriental Studies projects and the assumed superiority of certain nations in terms of knowledge and technology.

Americans are greatly concerned about the number of our troops killed in battle--100,000 dead in World War I; 300,000 in World War II; 33,000 in the Korean War; 58,000 in Vietnam; 4,500 in Iraq; over 1,000 in Afghanistan--and rightly so. But why are we so indifferent, often oblivious, to the far greater number of casualties suffered by those we fight and those we fight for? This is the compelling, largely unasked question John Tirman answers in The Deaths of Others. (...) Between six and seven million people died in Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq alone, the majority of them civilians. And yet Americans devote little attention to these deaths. Other countries, however, do pay attention, and Tirman argues that if we want to understand why there is so much anti-Americanism around the world, the first place to look is how we conduct war. We understandably strive to protect our own troops, but our rules of engagement with the enemy are another matter. From atomic weapons and carpet bombing in World War II to napalm and daisy cutters in Vietnam and beyond, we have used our weapons intentionally to kill large numbers of civilians and terrorize our adversaries into surrender. Americans, however, are mostly ignorant of these facts, believing that American wars are essentially just, necessary, and "good." Tirman investigates the history of casualties caused by American forces in order to explain why America remains so unpopular and why US armed forces operate the way they do. Trenchant and passionate, The Deaths of Others forces readers to consider the tragic consequences of American military action not just for Americans, but especially for those we fight. (shrink)

When the Japanese invaded Joseon at the end of the sixteenth century, a Spanish Jesuit priest, Gregorio de Céspedes, S.J. , stayed in the Japanese fortress in Ungcheon with Japanese soldiers. While Céspedes is celebrated as the first European who allegedly came with an evangelical vision of proselytizing the native Koreans, previous scholarship has inadequately acknowledged Céspedes’ role without consideration of his concrete actions in the Japanese fortress and of the broader context of sixteenth–century Spanish colonial expansion. An examination of (...) the Jesuit mission to sixteenth-century Japan, the role of the Spanish chaplains and their activities in foreign expeditions, and Céspedes’ activities in Joseon indicate that Céspedes was not a missionary sent to Korea, but rather an active chaplain who played a role in the larger development of church and state collaboration under Spanish colonialism. (shrink)

호메로스가 살던 사회는 끊임없는 전쟁이 벌어지는 사회였고 그 사회에서 요구되는 아레테는 전투 능력이 출중한 전쟁영웅들이 갖던 전투 기술이었다. 따라서 그 사회에서 아레테를 강조하면 강조할수록 전쟁을 수행해야할 명분들이 축척되는 결과들을 초래하게 된다. 왜냐하면 한 사람이 아레테를 획득하여 전쟁 영웅이 되기 위해서는 반드시 전쟁이 일어나야만 하기 때문이다. 이 때문에 아킬레우스나 헥토르도 자신의 죽음을 미리 예견하고 있었지만 기꺼이 전투에 참여하게 된다. 이처럼 호메로스 시대에 아레테는 전투 기계들을 생산해내는 이데올로기로 작용했다. 그리고 이 아레테 개념을 뒷받침해주는 것이 임전무퇴를 죄악시하는 aidōs 개념이다. 그렇다면 오직 이런 전투기술의 (...) 숭상을 도모하기 위해서 호메로스의 작품들이 기획되었을까? 연구자는 호메로스의 의도는 그것이 아니라고 생각한다. 그는 전쟁옹호자도 아니고 전쟁 아레테의 찬미론자도 아니다.BR 연구자는 일반적인 aidōs 개념과 상충하고 있는 3가지 사례들을 살펴본다. 첫 번째는 네스토르가 이야기한 ‘다른 사람들’과 관련해서 그것은 전쟁 영웅이 돌볼 의무가 있는 가족이다. 안드로마케나 헤카베의 요청처럼 헥토르는 전투에 참여해서 자신의 명예나 가족 외의 사람들로부터 비난을 듣지 않는 것도 중요하지만 자신이 죽고 난 후 험한 일을 당할 자신의 처자식에 대한 돌봄을 소홀히 해서는 안 된다. 두 번째 사례는 전쟁은 신들의 기획이라는 점이다. 신들이 짜놓은 체스판에 인간은 꼭두각시 역할을 할 수도 있다. 그래서 아가멤논이나 이도메네우스 또는 메넬라오스는 제우스의 도움을 받고 있는 헥토르와의 전투를 피하려고 노력한다. 마지막 사례는 파리스의 태만이다. 그는 한 사람의 명성은 현재 벌어지고 있는 전투에 의해서 평가되는 것이 아니라 그가 살아온 삶의 이력에 의해서 평가되어져야 함을 보여준다. 그는 자발적 태만을 통해서 다른 사람들이 던지는 aidōs에 전혀 흔들리는 모습을 보여주지 않는다. 이런 3가지 사례들에 비추어 볼 때, 전쟁 수행을 통한 명예나 수치심에 중심을 두는 아레테 사회에 호메로스는 다른 견해를 제시해주고 있다. (shrink)