¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ ¿Ü±³Çаú À±¿µ°ü ±³¼öÀÇ È¨ÆäÀÌÁö¿¡ ¿À½Å °ÍÀ» ȯ¿µÇÕ´Ï´Ù


 
   
 



  °ü¸®ÀÚ 
  ÁöÀû ޱ¸ ÀÛ¾÷ÀÇ ±æÀâÀÌ - ½Ã´ëÀû ´ë¾ÈÀ» ã¾Æ¼­ (2012/2/5)

ÁöÀû ޱ¸ ÀÛ¾÷ÀÇ ±æÀâÀÌ - ½Ã´ëÀû ´ë¾ÈÀ» ã¾Æ¼­


Çѱ¹ÀÇ Á¤Ä¡°æÁ¦°¡ È¥¶õ ¼Ó¿¡ ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.  ±âÁ¸ Á¤Ä¡±ÇÀÌ ±¹¹Îµé·ÎºÎÅÍ ±ØµµÀÇ ºÒ½ÅÀ» ¹Þ¾Æ »ýÁ¸ÀÌ À§Çù¿¡ óÇÏÀÚ ½º½º·Î ´Ù½Ã ž°íÀÚ °³ÇõÀÇ ¸öºÎ¸²À» Ä¡°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.  ±â¼ºÁ¤Ä¡±Ç Àλ簡 ¾Æ´Ï¶ó ½Ã¹Î¿îµ¿°¡°¡ ½ÃÀå¿¡ ´ç¼±µÇ°í À¯·ÂÇÑ ÀáÀçÀû ´ë¼±Èĺ¸ÀÚÁß ÇÑ»ç¶÷ÀÌ Á¤Ä¡¿Í °Å¸®°¡ ¸Ö¾ú´ø ÀλçÀÎ °Íµµ ±â¼º Á¤Ä¡±Ç¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±¹¹ÎµéÀÇ ºÒ½ÅÀ» µå·¯³»ÁÝ´Ï´Ù. 


±×·±µ¥ ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ±â¼º Á¤Ä¡±ÇÀÇ À§±â´Â ±×µ¿¾È À̵éÀÌ ÀÇÁ¸Çß´ø °æÁ¦¿î¿ë öÇÐÀÇ ÇѰ迡¼­ ºñ·ÔµË´Ï´Ù.  1980³â´ë ÃʺÎÅÍ ½ÃÀÛµÈ ½ÅÀÚÀ¯ÁÖÀÇÀû ½ÃÀ常´ÉÁÖÀÇ Ã¶ÇÐÀÌ 2008³â ¼¼°è°æÁ¦À§±â·Î ±× È¿¿ë¼ºÀ» ´ÙÇÑ µí º¸À̱⠶§¹®ÀÔ´Ï´Ù.  ¼¼°èÈ­ ¼Ó¿¡ ÁøÇàµÈ ºóºÎ°ÝÂ÷ÀÇ È®´ë¿Í °í¿ë ¾ø´Â ¼ºÀå, ±ÝÀ¶ºÎ¹®ÀÇ ¹æ¸¸°ú µµ´öÀû ÇØÀÌ °°Àº ¹®Á¦µéÀ» ÇØ°áÇϴµ¥ ±âÁ¸ÀÇ Á¤Ä¡°æÁ¦ öÇп¡ ±â¹Ý Çß´ø Á¦µµ¿Í Á¤Ä¡¼¼·ÂµéÀÌ ¹«´ÉÇÏ´Ù°í ÆÇ´ÜµÈ °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù.


¹®Á¦´Â ±×·³ ¿©±â¼­ ¾îµð·Î °¡¾ßÇÏ´À³Ä ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù.  ´ë¾ÈÀÌ ¹«¾ùÀΰ¡ ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù.  ´ë¾ÈÀû Á¤Ä¡°æÁ¦ öÇаú Á¦µµ°¡ ¹«¾ùÀ̳Ä?  ¿¹¸¦ µé¾î ½ÅÀÚÀ¯ÁÖÀǰ¡ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó¸é, ÇÏÀÌ¿¡Å©µµ ÄÉÀÎÁîµµ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó¸é, ¾îµð·Î °¡¾ßÇϳª?  »õ·Î¿î ÆÐ·¯´ÙÀÓÀ» ¾î¶»°Ô Ãß±¸ÇØ¾ß ÇÒ °ÍÀΰ¡?  ÀÌ·± ±Ùº»ÀûÀÎ Áú¹®µéÀÌ ³ª¿À°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.


»õ·Î¿î ´ë¾ÈÀ» ã´Â ÀÛ¾÷Àº ÁöÀû(ò±îÜ)ÀΠâÁ¶ ÀÛ¾÷ÀÔ´Ï´Ù.  ±×·¸±â¿¡ ±âÁ¸ÀÇ »ç°í¿Í ±×¿¡ ÀÇÁ¸ÇÑ Á¦µµ¸¦ ºÎÁ¤Çϴµ¥¼­ Ãâ¹ßÇØ¾ßÇÕ´Ï´Ù.  ´Ù½Ã ¸»ÇØ Ã¢Á¶ÀûÀÌ°í µ¶Ã¢ÀûÀÎ »ç°í°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÕ´Ï´Ù.  ±×·¡¼­ Çлýµé¿¡°Ô °¡¸£Ä¡¸é¼­ Á¾Á¾ µ¶¸³Àû »ç°íÀÇ Á߿伺, ºñÆÇÀû »ç°íÀÇ Á߿伺À» À̾߱âÇÕ´Ï´Ù.  ±×·¯³ª ÇлýµéÀº Èûµé¾îÇÕ´Ï´Ù.  µµ´ëü ¾î¶»°Ô »õ·Î¿î ´ë¾ÈÀû »ç°í¸¦ Ç϶õ ¸»Àΰ¡, ³ª´Â ¾ÆÁ÷ Dz³»±â ´ëÇлý¿¡ ºÒ°úÇѵ¥...


±×·±µ¥ ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ °í¹ÎÀº ¿ì¸®¸¸ÀÇ °í¹ÎÀÌ ¾Æ´Ñ µíÇÕ´Ï´Ù.  ¿Ö³Ä¸é ¿ì¸® Çѱ¹»çȸ°¡ ´ç¸éÇÑ °úÁ¦´Â ¼¼°èÈ­¶ó´Â ¸Æ¶ô°ú ´ê¾ÆÀÖ°í ±×·¡¼­ ¹Ì±¹ °°Àº ¸¹Àº ¼­±¸ »çȸ°¡ °øÀ¯Çϰí Àֱ⠶§¹®ÀÔ´Ï´Ù.  ³»°¡ Áñ°Ü Àд ´º¿åŸÀÓ½º Ä÷³´Ï½ºÆ® ºê·è½º(David Brooks)ÀÇ ´ÙÀ½ Ä÷³Àº ÀýÀýÇÑ ±×ÀÇ °í¹ÎÀÎ µ¿½Ã¿¡ Áö±Ý Çѱ¹¿¡ »ç´Â ÀþÀºÀ̵éÀÇ °í¹ÎÀ» ´ëº¯ÇØÁ־ Âü °ø°¨ÀÌ °©´Ï´Ù.  ±×°¡ Á¦½ÃÇÑ ÇØ¹ýÀÌ ¹«¾ùÀÎÁö Àо¼¼¿ä.  ±×¸®°í ÀÌ ½Ã´ëÀÇ °í¹ÎÀ» ³²ÀÇ À̾߱Ⱑ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó Àڱ⠰ÍÀ¸·Î »ï°í, ÁøÁöÇÏ°Ô °í¹ÎÇÏ´Â ¿©·¯ºÐ ´ëÇÐÁö¼ºÀÎÀÇ ÁöÀû ޱ¸¿©ÇàÀÇ ±æÀâÀÌ·Î »ï¾Æº¸¼¼¿ä. 


(Ǫ¸¥ Çϴÿ¡ ´«ºÎ½Å žç°ú Àεµ¾çÀÌ ³»·Á´Ùº¸ÀÌ´Â ¹ß¸® ¾î´À È£ÅÚ¿¡¼­ ¿À·£¸¸ÀÇ ¸ÁÁßÇÑÀ» Áñ±â¸é¼­, 2012³â 2¿ù 5ÀÏ.)



The New York Times, February 2, 2012, p.7.


(http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/03/opinion/brooks-how-to-fight-the-man.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=How%20to%20fight%20the%20Man&st=cse)


February 2, 2012


How to Fight the Man
By DAVID BROOKS


A few weeks ago, a 22-year-old man named Jefferson Bethke produced a video called ¡°Why I Hate
Religion, but Love Jesus.¡± The video shows Bethke standing in a courtyard rhyming about the purity of the teachings of Jesus and the hypocrisy of the church. Jesus preaches healing, surrender and
love, he argues, but religion is rigid, phony and stale. ¡°Jesus came to abolish religion,¡± Bethke
insists. ¡°Religion puts you in bondage, but Jesus sets you free.¡±


The video went viral. As of Thursday, it had acquired more than 18 million hits on YouTube. It
speaks for many young believers who feel close to God but not to the church. It represents the
passionate voice of those who think their institutions lack integrity - not just the religious ones, but
the political and corporate ones, too.


Right away, many older theologians began critiquing Bethke¡¯s statements. A blogger named Kevin DeYoung pointed out, for example, that it is biblically inaccurate to say that Jesus hated religion. In
fact, Jesus preached a religious doctrine, prescribed rituals and worshiped in a temple.


Bethke responded in a way that was humble, earnest and gracious, and that generally spoke well of his character. He also basically folded.


¡°I wanted to say I really appreciate your article man,¡± Bethke wrote to DeYoung in an online
exchange. ¡°It hit me hard. I¡¯ll even be honest and say I agree 100 percent.¡±


Bethke watched a panel discussion in which some theologians lamented young people¡¯s disdain of
organized religion. ¡°Right when I heard that,¡± he told The Christian Post, ¡°it just convicted me, and God used it as one of those Spirit moments where it¡¯s just, ¡®Man, he¡¯s right.¡¯ I realized a lot of my
views and treatments of the church were not Scripture-based; they were very experience based.¡±


Bethke¡¯s passionate polemic and subsequent retreat are symptomatic of a lot of the protest cries we hear these days. This seems to be a moment when many people ? in religion, economics and
politics are disgusted by current institutions, but then they are vague about what sorts of
institutions should replace them.


This seems to be a moment of fervent protest movements that are ultimately vague and ineffectual.


We can all theorize why the intense desire for change has so far produced relatively few coherent
recipes for change. Maybe people today are simply too deferential. Raised to get college
recommendations, maybe they lack the oppositional mentality necessary for revolt. Maybe
people are too distracted.


My own theory revolves around a single bad idea. For generations people have been told: Think for
yourself; come up with your own independent worldview. Unless your name is Nietzsche, that¡¯s
probably a bad idea. Very few people have the genius or time to come up with a comprehensive
and rigorous worldview.


If you go out there armed only with your own observations and sentiments, you will surely find
yourself on very weak ground. You¡¯ll lack the arguments, convictions and the coherent view of
reality that you¡¯ll need when challenged by a self-confident opposition. This is more or less what
happened to Jefferson Bethke.


The paradox of reform movements is that, if you want to defy authority, you probably shouldn¡¯t
think entirely for yourself. You should attach yourself to a counter-tradition and school of thought
that has been developed over the centuries and that seems true.


The old leftists had dialectical materialism and the Marxist view of history. Libertarians have Hayek and von Mises. Various spiritual movements have drawn from Transcendentalism, Stoicism, Gnosticism,
Thomism, Augustine, Tolstoy, or the Catholic social teaching that inspired Dorothy Day.


These belief systems helped people envision alternate realities. They helped people explain why the things society values are not the things that should be valued. They gave movements a set of
organizing principles. Joining a tradition doesn¡¯t mean suppressing your individuality. Applying an
ancient tradition to a new situation is a creative, stimulating and empowering act. Without a
tradition, everything is impermanence and flux.


Most professors would like their students to be more rebellious and argumentative. But rebellion without a rigorous alternative vision is just a feeble spasm.


If I could offer advice to a young rebel, it would be to rummage the past for a body of thought that helps you understand and address the shortcomings you see. Give yourself a label. If your college hasn¡¯t provided you with a good knowledge of countercultural viewpoints - ranging from Thoreau to
Maritain - then your college has failed you and you should try to remedy that ignorance.


Effective rebellion isn¡¯t just expressing your personal feelings. It means replacing one set of
authorities and institutions with a better set of authorities and institutions. Authorities and
institutions don¡¯t repress the passions of the heart, the way some young people now suppose.
They give them focus and a means to turn passion into change.



 


PREV  »ç´Â À̾߱⠼Ұ³   °ü¸®ÀÚ
NEXT  ±¹Á¦±â±¸¿¡¼­ ÀÏÇϱâ - ±¹Á¦Àû½ÊÀÚÀ§¿øÈ¸ÀÇ °æ¿ì (2012/2/5)   °ü¸®ÀÚ


Copyright 1999-2021 Zeroboard / skin by AMICK