서양철학과 문학에 나타난 전쟁관: 철학은 호전적이고 문학은 반전적인가? (A Comparative Study on the Difference of War represented in Western Literature and Philosophy)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 국제언어인문학회
· 수록지 정보 : 인문언어 / 21권 / 2호 / 33 ~ 62페이지
· 저자명 : 권석우

초록

This paper aims to briefly differentiate views on war as represented in Western Literature and Philosophy. War was revered in Western Philosophy as “naturally rational and sublime”(Kant), “ethical and necessary”(Hegel), and “instinctive and naturally recurrent”(Nietzsche), to name a few Western philosophers. But Western literature, especially that of World War I expressing each individual’s pain and suffering in its concrete form, has begun to stand apart from the religious and philosophical tradition of “sacred war” or “just war” in the Hobbesian world of “homo homini lupus.” Herein lies the dichotomy of pro-war philosophy vs. anti-war literature, a bit oversimplified and hackneyed topos dating from Plato’s denigration of myth and literature. Literature has not always been anti-war, nor has philosophy always been pro-war. Besides, such a dichotomy is no longer tenable in the 21st century when nuclear warfare implies total annihilation of mankind. Total abnegation of “the other” through nuclear war is in effect the total annihilation of “the self,” thus nuclear war nullifies the concept of war itself. The rise and spread of civilization through war’s side effects, such as scientific discovery and technological development, comes to an end with nuclear war, especially when civilization turns out to be barbarity itself, if we follow Walter Benjamin

영어초록

This paper aims to briefly differentiate views on war as represented in Western Literature and Philosophy. War was revered in Western Philosophy as “naturally rational and sublime”(Kant), “ethical and necessary”(Hegel), and “instinctive and naturally recurrent”(Nietzsche), to name a few Western philosophers. But Western literature, especially that of World War I expressing each individual’s pain and suffering in its concrete form, has begun to stand apart from the religious and philosophical tradition of “sacred war” or “just war” in the Hobbesian world of “homo homini lupus.” Herein lies the dichotomy of pro-war philosophy vs. anti-war literature, a bit oversimplified and hackneyed topos dating from Plato’s denigration of myth and literature. Literature has not always been anti-war, nor has philosophy always been pro-war. Besides, such a dichotomy is no longer tenable in the 21st century when nuclear warfare implies total annihilation of mankind. Total abnegation of “the other” through nuclear war is in effect the total annihilation of “the self,” thus nuclear war nullifies the concept of war itself. The rise and spread of civilization through war’s side effects, such as scientific discovery and technological development, comes to an end with nuclear war, especially when civilization turns out to be barbarity itself, if we follow Walter Benjamin

참고자료

· 없음