Not entirely sure what this dog represents. But I see it on the way to work every morning.
Month: December 2015
Envelope for bribes
Kyobo Books in Gwanghwamun is increasingly not about books at all. The space sells everything from clothing and speakers to food and candles. But this bit of stationary caught my eye today. The envelope you might use for a end-of-the-year letter to a close associate is marked explicitly with the words “bribe!” Some distinct Korean form of humor?
Interview with Ambassador Thomas Lehmann of Denmark @ G Lounge (Arirang TV)
G Lounge
Arirang TV
November 30, 2015
Interview with Ambassador Thomas Lehmann
Danish Embassy in Seoul
Hosted by Emanuel Pastreich
Green Growth in Korea and Denmark
A wide-ranging discussion of the “Green Alliance” between Denmark and Korea and prospects for new approaches to growth post Paris 2015 COP 21.
Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XzyLUucH7k
Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhMqsIFrVQg
Part 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_xsPyuN4vE
“IT 시대, ‘필담’ 전통으로의 회귀가 필요하다” (월간 과학과 기술 2015년 12월 )
월간 과학과 기술
(한국과학기술단체총연협회)
2015년 12월
“IT 시대, ‘필담’ 전통으로의 회귀가 필요하다”
임마누엘 페스트라이쉬
아시아 전역의 전문가들이 국제회의 참석 차 모여 있을 때가 있다. 아마도 정부 장관, 교수나 사업가일 텐데 서로 어색하게 악수하고, 서투른 영어로 가볍게 인사를 나누다가 성급하게 대화를 끊고 서로에게서 떨어진다. 필자는 이런 모습을 목격할 때마다 민망해진다.
심도 있는 정보교환 이끄는 국제회의 환경 필요
이런 전문가들을 집결하는데 필요한 비행기 티켓 값과 호텔 숙박비는 값비싸다. 그런데도 전문가들 사이에 진지한 대화는 거의 오가지 않는다. 공유할 수 있는 엄청난 양의 지식과 경험이 있는데도 말이다. 정부나 산업체에 의해 마련된 비용이 많이 드는 큰 행사임에도 불구하고, 안타깝지만 대부분의 경우, 전문가들은 도착했을 때와 마찬가지로 돌아갈 때도 여전히 서로 전혀 알지 못 한다. 비싼 식사 모임을 갖는다고 해서 추후 협력에 대한 약속으로 이어지거나, 같은 행사에 참석한 다른 전문가의 지혜와 지식을 알게 되는 것도 아니다.
국제 정상회담과 회의에 참석하는 아시아 전역의 대표들에게 시간제한 없이 진지하게 대화할 기회가 생긴다면, 서로에게서 엄청난 양의 지식을 얻을 수 있을 것이다. 예를 들면, 다른 나라의 동료 전문가들이 자국에서 어떤 방식으로 새로운 혁신적 행정 전략을 사용하는지 배우고, 그 방식을 채택해 사용할 수도 있다. 또는 제조업에서 사용되는 새 기술이 어떻게 생산성을 크게 향상시킬 수 있는지 배울 수도 있다.
Interview: Lawrence Wilkerson @ The Diplomat
The Diplomat
Interview: Lawrence Wilkerson
A discussion of tensions in East Asia, and some possible solutions
By Emanuel Pastreich
December 03, 2015
What do you see as the underlying sources for the tensions between China and the United States today?
The tensions between the United States and other ASEAN nations with China over the South China Sea today are extremely serious. The South China Sea and the tensions with Russia over Ukraine are the two greatest sources of possible conflict today and I believe that either problem could lead to war if not properly handled.
The problem is in part one resulting from an American drive to confront China, but it is exacerbated, almost daily, because the Chinese leadership has discovered that nationalism serves as a great replacement for the void in ideology that the death of communism has produced. I fear that as growth slows below 7 percent, the Chinese government will increasingly feel a need to throw nationalist red meat to the Chinese people. I fear that the speculation about a possible military conflict could become a self-fulfilling prophecy and I suggest that America and China, and other nations, take concrete steps to reduce the tension and create a broad dialogue. The United States or China could end up in a situation in which both parties, to avoid a loss of face, are forced to do what they said they would do. In the South China Sea – and in particular around the Spratly Islands – we see the greatest risk of a major confrontation.
All sides should recognize that we have a dangerous situation. Such confrontation is not in the interest of the United States, China or the region.
I am not interested in defending China regarding the South China Sea, but there are those who have argued that although some see Chinese activities in the South China Sea as excessive, or arrogant, China’s actions are certainly not worse than American interference in South America in the 1960s and 1970s and that there is no justification for the United States to get involved in what is essentially a regional problem. What are your thoughts?
The argument regarding the United States’ meddling is a fair one to make. I would rather want to focus on the need to start a broader and more level-headed discussion about territory in the South China Sea that moves beyond an emotional and nationalist fight between the claimants such as Vietnam and the Philippines, and China. Let us also bring in countries like Indonesia who have a stake in the region. I think the best way to address what I personally think is a mistake on the Chinese part is to have other voices say, “Listen China, these claims are causing an unnecessary problem. You are making claims that are far beyond what any international law would codify and approve.”
There are laws and processes that can be invoked to deal with these claims without escalating military tensions. The United States should pull back and not try to make itself the center of attention.
The United States could say, but currently is not saying, “Let’s resolve this dispute in a way that benefits everyone and sets a positive precedent for the future.”
“最受欢迎的哈佛教授谈东亚教育的得与失” (搜狐：文化 2015年 11月 18日)
搜狐：文化
2015年 11月 18日
赫芬顿邮报网站11月4日登载了活跃在韩国的美国学者贝一明（Emanuel Pastreich）对哈佛大学东亚系中国历史教授迈克尔·普鸣（Michael Puett）的访谈，内容围绕东亚教育今天遇到的问题、东亚教育传统中值得学习的价值、当下的教育改革如何汲取传统中的精华以及现代仪式等方面展开。
普鸣是获得哈佛大学杰出教学教席的五位教授之一，他开设的一门“中国课”——《古代中国伦理与政治理论》——是哈佛大学当下最受学生欢迎的三门通识类选修课之一。
贝一明目前执教于韩国庆熙大学国际问题研究学院，并担任智库“亚洲研究所”执行官。
传统东亚教育重视后天训练而非天赋
贝一明指出当前对于亚洲教育存在两种相互矛盾的看法。一方面，亚洲文明对于教育的重视令人称道， 一些美国家长甚至想要模仿这种学习方法；另一方面，很多亚洲人却觉得他们的教育体系已经失控了，学生被各种考试和证书压得喘不过气。中、日、韩的精英政治被一些大的考试把持，这些考试和背后的备考产业联系紧密，这些产业从考试系统中获利，所以也有动力维持这一体系。
普鸣认为这两方面的观点都有其合理性。一方面，东亚确实有重视教育的传统。当前东亚经济的发展跟文化传统中对教育的重视是直接相关的。另一方面，东亚目前这种用考试来衡量教育并把所有社会成就都跟考试联系起来的趋势是具有破坏性的。从定义上来说，现在的学校的教育目的就是让学生能在考试中取得好的成绩，而这些考试实际考察的都是天赋。比如说，一些考试是专门用来测试学生数学方面的造诣。如果一个学生在某个方面特别出色，那么就会被朝着这个方向培养。与这种教育方法相联系的是东亚过去把教育和社会服务联系在一起的观念，尤其是精英政治的理念。
普鸣指出，中国古代设计这些考试的初衷是希望创造一种能够系统地培养人才的教育体系，在这个体系中学习优异的人就能在政府中担任高官。普鸣认为这个理念是很了不起的，不应把眼下的考试狂热和传统的亚洲教育混为一谈，后者包含了一些值得我们学习的价值。在古代中国，尽管考试也和学习联系在一起，但学习还存在另一个重要维度。传统教育中有一种强烈的“修身”的愿望，就是必须通过学习把自己训练成为更好的人。