융합, 인문학의 살 길인가 (Convergence, A Survival Package for the Humanities?)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 영미문학연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 안과밖:영미문학연구 / 41호 / 12 ~ 34페이지
· 저자명 : 박찬길

초록

This paper is a critical examination of the idea of “convergence” in the humanities, particularly in the context of the government funding project specially designed for the humanities. The Ministry of Education (MOE) of Korea has recently launched a new funding program called CORE (The initiative for college of humanities’ research and education) which gives out 5400 million US dollars annually to a select group of colleges of humanities for three years on a competitive basis. The CORE requires the applying colleges to choose from the five models of curriculum innovation: the regional studies on a global scale, the studies of the humanities based convergence, the intensive studies of the traditional disciplines, the transition into a general education unit, and the college’s own innovative model. Apart from “the intensive studies of the traditional disciplines,” all the other models strongly require the applying colleges to “innovate” their existing curriculums to the effect that the employability of their graduates would be enhanced. The government funding initiatives that interfere with the educational curriculums are always counter-productive, but “the humanities based convergence” model seems particularly pernicious because the “convergence” they recommend virulently deteriorates the current humanistic disciplines which have already been “in crisis.” IT industry was the first proponent of a convergence in Korea. This convergence, basically a technological convergence, is very much industry oriented, well supported by a successful case like iPhone. MOE’s idea of “the humanities based convergence,” I argue, is no more than an extension of such technological innovation. The “humanities based” convergence, in fact, does not have any other theoretical ground than the technology convergence propagated by IT specialists such as Steve Jobs. The humanities, as an academic discipline, should bear a fair share of burden in the problem solving process of our society. But that does not necessarily mean that it should function exactly like the other practically oriented disciplines. The idea of convergence enforced upon the humanistic studies by MOE is not only an unjust bureaucratic interference but a counter-productive imposition. The liberal education, properly offered by the colleges of humanities, does serve our society by growing global citizens with a moral sensibility and a historical awareness. MOE should stop interfering with the university curriculums with the grant money. As Humboldt said, the government should support the universities, but with no interference whatsoever.

영어초록

This paper is a critical examination of the idea of “convergence” in the humanities, particularly in the context of the government funding project specially designed for the humanities. The Ministry of Education (MOE) of Korea has recently launched a new funding program called CORE (The initiative for college of humanities’ research and education) which gives out 5400 million US dollars annually to a select group of colleges of humanities for three years on a competitive basis. The CORE requires the applying colleges to choose from the five models of curriculum innovation: the regional studies on a global scale, the studies of the humanities based convergence, the intensive studies of the traditional disciplines, the transition into a general education unit, and the college’s own innovative model. Apart from “the intensive studies of the traditional disciplines,” all the other models strongly require the applying colleges to “innovate” their existing curriculums to the effect that the employability of their graduates would be enhanced. The government funding initiatives that interfere with the educational curriculums are always counter-productive, but “the humanities based convergence” model seems particularly pernicious because the “convergence” they recommend virulently deteriorates the current humanistic disciplines which have already been “in crisis.” IT industry was the first proponent of a convergence in Korea. This convergence, basically a technological convergence, is very much industry oriented, well supported by a successful case like iPhone. MOE’s idea of “the humanities based convergence,” I argue, is no more than an extension of such technological innovation. The “humanities based” convergence, in fact, does not have any other theoretical ground than the technology convergence propagated by IT specialists such as Steve Jobs. The humanities, as an academic discipline, should bear a fair share of burden in the problem solving process of our society. But that does not necessarily mean that it should function exactly like the other practically oriented disciplines. The idea of convergence enforced upon the humanistic studies by MOE is not only an unjust bureaucratic interference but a counter-productive imposition. The liberal education, properly offered by the colleges of humanities, does serve our society by growing global citizens with a moral sensibility and a historical awareness. MOE should stop interfering with the university curriculums with the grant money. As Humboldt said, the government should support the universities, but with no interference whatsoever.

참고자료

· 없음