“IT 시대, ‘필담’ 전통으로의 회귀가 필요하다” (월간 과학과 기술 2015년 12월 )

by

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.

Read more

Interview: Lawrence Wilkerson @ The Diplomat

by

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.”

Read more

“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)

by

搜狐：文化

“最受欢迎的哈佛教授谈东亚教育的得与失”

 

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。

Read more

“Law in Contemporary Korea and Prospects for the Future” Lecture at Judicial Research Training Institute

by

“Law in Contemporary Korea and Prospects for the Future”

A visit to the Judicial Research Training Institute

 

Emanuel Pastreich

 

It was a pleasant walk from the subway stop to the Judicial Research Training Institute on a sunny autumn morning and I felt oddly inspired by this rare opportunity I had been granted to speak before a group of senior judges and engage them in a frank and open about the challenges that face Korea, and the world, today.

Although I did not think deeply about the significance of speaking before judges when I started drafting my short remarks, I could not help thinking about my aunt Jeanne Rouff, who passed away last year, as I struggled to articulate my perspective concerning the future of law in Korea.

Jeanne Rouff, my mother’s older sister, spent her entire career in Luxembourg, and was not as talented in English as my mother who went off to study in the United States and never returned. Aunt Jeanne served as the first women lawyer, the first woman judge and the first women member of the supreme court of Luxembourg.

Read more

“Virtue is not solitary” (Emanuel’s lecture to public officials)

by

“Virtue is not solitary”

My search for Korea’s future in its ancient tradition of ethical government

Emanuel Pastreich

 

I was rushing to a meeting around 11 AM on August 4th when a rather odd message from a friend showed up on my smart phone: “The President talked about your book!” I had no idea what the note referred to, or why President Park Geun-hye (I assumed that President Obama was unlikely to have read any of my books in Korean) would have mentioned me. It would be another two hours before I learned that President Park not only referred to my book “Another Korea That Only Koreans Don’t About” at her first cabinet meeting after her summer vacation, but that she made it the centerpiece of an argument for the next phase of her “creative economy” project, stating,

“Depending on what we do now, Korea can or cannot take the leap and become a No. 1 nation, create value in the international community and lead not only in the global economy but also in the arts and society.”

It was an honor for me to be recognized at such a high level in the Korean government and I was deeply impressed that Korea takes someone like me, a scholar of classical literature and Confucian philosophy, that seriously in the field of policy. I have always dreamed of a world in which an intellectual trained in literature could play a major role the policy debate as was the case in traditional Korea and China. Although the United States has many tremendous qualities that we still do not find in Korea, I can say definitively that it would be absolutely impossible for a scholar of classical literature to play such a role in my country.

But the most exciting result of that brief comment by President Park at the cabinet meeting was an invitation from the Minister Lee Geunmyeon, Director of the Agency of Personnel Management, to deliver a series of four lectures for high-ranking civil servants at the Central Officials Training Institute (중앙공무원교육원) starting the following week. I had delivered talks at Central Officials Training Institute, but this time was different. I was directed to talk with them about the value of Korea’s past for helping us chart a path for the future, about the deep truths to be found in the writings of scholars from past dynasties.

Read more

“서울 프로세스: 한•중•일 간의 외교적인 협력을 위한 혁신적인 제언” (셰계시민 2015년 11월 1일)

by

셰계시민

“서울 프로세스: 한•중•일 간의 외교적인 협력을 위한 혁신적인 제언”

2015년 11월 1일

 

임마누엘 페스트라이쉬

 

한·중·일 정상회의가 앞으로 계속 열리고, 거기서 어떤 역할을 펴느냐에 따라 한국은 전 세계에서 선도적인 외교 강국으로 자리 매김할 수 있는 결정적인 기회를 맞을 수도 있다. 이를 위해 한국은 외교 분야에서 혁신적인 주도권을 장악해야 한다.

현재 외교분야는예전에 비해 의식적인 절차와 수사로 말미암아 점차 생명력을 상실하고 있다. 이를 극복하고 적극적인 참여를 선도하기 위해서 ‘서울 프로세스(The Seoul Process)’라고 부를 수 있는 외교의 새로운 접근법을 나는 제안하고자 한다.

서울 프로세스는 미래에 전 세계적 차원의 문제들을 해결하는 데 필요한 모델의 역할을 할 수 있을 것이다. 한·중·일 정상회의에서 강력한 인상을 남길 수 있다면 서울은 외교와 국제관계의 중심으로 입지를 확고히 할 수 있을 것이다. 지난 50여년 동안 제네바가 수행해온 역할에 상응하는 입지를 맡는 것이다.

서울 프로세스에 영감을 주는 모델은 1975년의 헬싱키 협정을 낳은 역사적인 헬싱키 프로세스다. 헬싱키 협정은 공산 국가들과 자본주의 국가들 간의 긴장을 완화시켰으며, 유럽 통합에 기여했다. 만일 서울 프로세스가 성공적으로 정립된다면 국제관계의 난제들을 해결하는 효과적인 수단으로 활용되고, 기능할 것이다. 다양한 분야의 전문가들이 참여해 창의적인 해결을 고무하는 일련의 다차원적인 참여(engagement)를 통해서다.

Read more

“美军有一群危险的好战派” (环球日报 2015年 11月 24日)

by

环球日报

“美军有一群危险的好战派”

2015年  11月  24日

 

贝一明

 

亚洲与欧洲有着截然不同的经历：欧洲经历了两次世界大战，而亚洲只经历过一次。两次世界大战给欧洲造成巨大破坏，某种程度上也促使欧洲人在上世纪50年代解决了领土问题，创造了一体化的经济和政治体系。随着现在亚太地区岛屿争端的升温，许多人质疑：亚洲是否会像一战前的欧洲那样滑向大规模冲突呢？

二者之间确有一些明显相似之处。比如，中国、日本、韩国、重返亚太的美国以及东南亚诸国在生产、贸易和金融等领域相互交融。但同时，围绕领土和历史问题的紧张局势却在逐渐升级。军力扩张带来的巨大收益，促使相关各方，尤其是美国无视后果，以鲁莽和挑衅性姿态继续向前推进军力扩张。

中国在南海扩建岛礁成为各方关注的焦点。尽管中国的确寻求提升在东南亚地区的影响力，但鉴于中国从未试图干涉航运，美国采取目前这种咄咄逼人的姿态似乎有着并未言明的重要意义。引人关注的是，美国批评中国违反联合国海洋法公约，但美国从未加入该条约。另外，貌似中国扩建人工岛礁问题引起最多的关注，但实际上该地区其他国家也在开展类似建设。

Read more

“韓国産業のマンネリズム危機” （中央日報 2015年 11月 23日）

by

中央日報

“韓国産業のマンネリズム危機”

2015年 11月 23日

 

ﾊﾟｽﾄﾘｯﾁ　エマニュエル

 

新しい需要に対応し粘り強く未知の領域に進む時、新しい産業の発展が可能だ。特にこのところ世界は急激に変わっている。パラダイムが完全に変わっている。これ以上韓国の成功神話が通用するという保障もない。これからは韓国の本当に天才性はより良いスマートフォンを作る能力ではなく、まだ存在していない何かを想像しそれを現実に作ろうとする挑戦精神から出なければならない。

このところこれがうまくできない理由は、韓国の技術水準は発展し続けてもその過程でより根本的な「なぜ？」という問題意識が消えたためかもしれない。なぜ私たちが新しい製品を作るべきで、そのような製品が私たちの時代の挑戦に対応するのにどのように寄与するのかという問題だ。毎日驚くべき製品を生産しながらもこの根本的な質問にこたえられる韓国人は何人いるだろうか。

これは学問的次元の問題ではない。韓国は地球温暖化と人口の急速な高齢化で途轍もない挑戦に直面することになるだろう。こうした問題の解決は革新的な新技術を要する。それなら生の様式と都市空間を画期的に変える方法を模索しなければならない。既存製品を改善するところからもう一歩踏み出してまったく新しいシステムを開発しなければならない。

江戸時代の日本の儒教学者荻生徂徠はこのように話した。「碁を打つ方法には２種類がある。ひとつは囲碁の規則を熟知し本能的に失敗なく置くことができる人で、もうひとつは囲碁の規則自体を作る人だ」。

Read more

“韩国产业的矫饰主义危机” (中央日报 2015年 11月 23日)

by

中央日报

“韩国产业的矫饰主义危机”

2015年 11月 23日

贝一明

 

韩国的科学技术水平和韩国产品的质量总是令人叹为观止，事实上，韩国人正不断通过设计与制作的精致商品在世界市场广受欢迎。笔者曾亲眼检证过这一系列的生产过程。

但另一方面，笔者也禁不住感到担忧，那就是韩国产业中阻碍新产业开拓的根深蒂固的矫饰主义作风（ 矫饰主义：按照固有方式墨守成规的态度，丧失了独创性和新鲜感。）。如果继续置之不理，这种作风很可能会对韩国此前实现的惊人技术发展造成严重阻碍。

这里所说的矫饰主义不是文艺复兴时代的高尚艺术流派，而是指紧盯着某一特定流派一心只想改变其形式外观的作风习惯，指那种不关注为充满希望的未来产业勾画远大蓝图，只偏执于改变现存作品细节的倾向。这样下去，很可能会导致目光短浅的思维和严重的文化停滞。如果过度关注特定产品的细节，忽视该产品所拥有的更大的社会经济意义，这种情况很可能会发生。

产业涉及领域表现出的新型矫饰主义倾向可以从智能手机产品中窥见一斑。最近韩国无数工程师都在整日绞尽脑汁开发拥有新功能的智能手机，但研究结果只是为手机添加了些微细小的功能而已，根本不足以开拓出一个全新的领域。

比如说，市场上出现了液晶画面可以扭曲或者附加光学传感器、可以响应用户手部和眼部动作的智能手机，汽车领域也通过NVS（噪音、震动、坚固性）分析技术提高了驾驶员乘车体验、提高了引擎效率、减少了汽车底盘碰撞时受到的冲击。

Read more