COMMunication
RESearch.NET

User Tools

Site Tools

You are here: index » theories
Trace:
theories

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
theories [2020/03/23 15:05] – hkimsciltheories [2024/03/21 10:24] (current) – [Edmund Husserl] hkimscil
Line 99: Line 99:
  
 ====== Conjunctive approach ====== ====== Conjunctive approach ======
-  * Putting weigh on the society (the world, the world, the structure, the institutes).+  * Putting weigh on the society (the world, the whole, the structure, the institutes).
   * Assumption: The approach suggests that somehow the whole governs people in how to think; how to act; and how to interact with each other.    * Assumption: The approach suggests that somehow the whole governs people in how to think; how to act; and how to interact with each other. 
     * Structuralism     * Structuralism
Line 145: Line 145:
   * <del>[[http://kr.blog.yahoo.com/psy_jjanga/1456963.html|왜 우리는 현실보다 거짓을 선택하는가? : 인지부조화 이론]]</del>   * <del>[[http://kr.blog.yahoo.com/psy_jjanga/1456963.html|왜 우리는 현실보다 거짓을 선택하는가? : 인지부조화 이론]]</del>
 <WRAP clear /> <WRAP clear />
-====== Situated approach ======+====== Situation based approach ====== 
 <code>The thing (existence) -- the thing in my mind (knolwedge) <code>The thing (existence) -- the thing in my mind (knolwedge)
                         |                         |
Line 156: Line 157:
  
 <WRAP clear /> <WRAP clear />
 +===== Edmund Husserl =====
 [[:Edmund Husserl]]:  [[:Edmund Husserl]]: 
 <blockquote> <blockquote>
-19세기에서 20세기에 걸쳐 급속하게 발전한 과학과 기술은 전통적으로 철학의 영역이라 여겨지고 있었던 분야들을 자신의 범주로 포함시켰다. 특히 심리학의 형성과 발전은 인지, 정신과 같은 철학 본원의 영역으로 인정 받던 분야 역시 과학의 탐구 대상에서 제외될 수 없음을 보여주었다. 이렇게 과학의 거센 도전을 맞은 철학은 영국, 미국의 철학과 같이 보다 과학쪽으로 다가가거나, 리케르트와 같은 신칸트주의에서 처럼 과학과 철학을 별개의 학문으로 분리하려는 움직임이 있었다. 후설은 앞의 움직임과는 다른 방향에서 과학을 바라보았다. 그는 과학의 근간을 이루는 실증주의를 공격하여 그것이 참된 의미의 객관이 될 수 있는지 물었다. 이러한 실증주의 비판을 통해 후설이 제창한 철학을 현상학이라 한다. - https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/에드문트_후설+19세기에서 20세기에 걸쳐 급속하게 발전한 과학과 기술은 전통적으로 철학의 영역이라 여겨지고 있었던 분야들을 자신의 범주로 포함시켰다. 특히 심리학의 형성과 발전은 인지, 정신과 같은 철학 본원의 영역으로 인정 받던 분야 역시 과학의 탐구 대상에서 제외될 수 없음을 보여주었다. 이렇게 과학의 거센 도전을 맞은 철학은 영국, 미국의 철학과 같이 보다 과학쪽으로 다가가거나, 리케르트와 같은 신칸트주의에서 처럼 과학과 철학을 별개의 학문으로 분리하려는 움직임이 있었다. 후설은 앞의 움직임과는 다른 방향에서 과학을 바라보았다. 그는 과학의 근간을 이루는 실증주의를 공격하여 그것이 참된 의미의 객관이 될 수 있는지 물었다. 이러한 실증주의 비판을 통해 후설이 제창한 철학을 현상학이라 한다. - [[https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%97%90%EB%93%9C%EB%AC%B8%ED%8A%B8_%ED%9B%84%EC%84%A4|Edmund Husserl]] Wikipedi Kr.
 </blockquote> </blockquote>
  
-^ ^ ^ ^ +see [[https://brunch.co.kr/@minnation/2300|brunch.co.kr 글]] 
-| {{YoungOldWoman01.jpg?152x200}}  | {{YoungOldWoman02.jpg?152x200}}  | {{YoungOldWoman03.jpg?152x200}}  |+
 Information (from the object to your brain + something else)  Information (from the object to your brain + something else) 
   * something else = consciousness ?   * something else = consciousness ?
Line 176: Line 177:
   * + something else -> social and cultural order + individual consciousness ?   * + something else -> social and cultural order + individual consciousness ?
  
 +
 +Phenomenology in philosoph (Edmund Husserl)
 +  * {{youtube>d5geMLe5tbM}}
 +  * {{youtube>h95vUgnFdbk?start=144}}
 +  * Cartesian reality doesn't exist. . . .
 +  * {{:pasted:20240321-102401.jpeg?300}}
 +    * (In the first video), The nature of being and existence = the reality 
 +    * The reality could be grasped by and through the structure of conscioussness
 +    * logics and empiricism (Cartesian knowledge) obtain the knowledge of "real."
 +    * affected by "intentionality" or sort of "subjectivity"
 +  * It goes 
 +    * into Martine Heideger, 
 +      * couscioussness is a product of the historical constext from which it arises and, in turn, one can never approach an object of study in a presuppositionless form. 
 +      * In other words, "intentionality" is not an object that can be scructinized or studied alone. 
 +      * Reality and conscioussness are co-creations of the two. 
 +      * Rabbit-like thing (reality) and rabit created by the person are inseparable from each other. . . . .
 +    * (in the second), Meaning (of the world around us) only comes into existence ina relationship with out own senses, emotions and conscioussness. Therefore the world around us is what interpreation of the world around us actually mean. 
 +    * Jean-Paul Sartre 
 +    * . . . . 
 +  * [[:Post Modernism]]
 +    * {{youtube>5D86_ptqd8I?start=42}} 
 +  * In sociology, phenomenology in sociology 혹은 sociological phenomenology (Alfred Schutz)
 +
 +
 +
 +===== Alfred Schutz =====
 +
 +===== Erving Gofffman =====
 [{{:Erving_Goffman.jpg?172|Erving Goffman }}] [[wp>Erving_Goffman|E. Goffman]] [{{:Erving_Goffman.jpg?172|Erving Goffman }}] [[wp>Erving_Goffman|E. Goffman]]
   * Dramaturgy or dramaturgical perspective   * Dramaturgy or dramaturgical perspective
Line 184: Line 213:
 <WRAP clear />  <WRAP clear /> 
  
 +===== Harold Garfinkel =====
 [{{:Garfinkel09.jpg?172|Harold Garfinkel }}] [[wp>Harold_Garfinkel|H. Garfinkel]]  [{{:Garfinkel09.jpg?172|Harold Garfinkel }}] [[wp>Harold_Garfinkel|H. Garfinkel]] 
   * How come people are not confused about what they refer to?   * How come people are not confused about what they refer to?
Line 192: Line 222:
  
 <WRAP clear /> <WRAP clear />
 +
 +===== Clifford Geertz =====
  
 [{{:geertz05.jpg?172|Clifford Geertz }}] [[wp>Geertz ]] <WRAP box 50%> Geertz states that we must proceed interpreting a culture’s web of symbols by isolating its elements, specifying the internal relationships among those elements and characterize the whole system in some general way?according to the core symbols around which it is organized, the underlying structures of which it is a surface expression, or the ideological principles upon which it is based. Culture is public because “meaning is,” and systems of meanings are what produce culture, they are the collective property of a particular people [{{:geertz05.jpg?172|Clifford Geertz }}] [[wp>Geertz ]] <WRAP box 50%> Geertz states that we must proceed interpreting a culture’s web of symbols by isolating its elements, specifying the internal relationships among those elements and characterize the whole system in some general way?according to the core symbols around which it is organized, the underlying structures of which it is a surface expression, or the ideological principles upon which it is based. Culture is public because “meaning is,” and systems of meanings are what produce culture, they are the collective property of a particular people
theories.1584943521.txt.gz · Last modified: 2020/03/23 15:05 by hkimscil
Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki