1주차: 역사 서술의 흐름과 쟁점

제1주. 역사 서술의 흐름과 쟁점

 

1. 중국 과학사 서술의 흐름

Joseph Needham, “Poverties and Triumphs of the Chinese Scientific Tradition,” Needham, The Grand Titration: Science and Society in East and West (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969), pp. 14-54. (번역본: “중국 과학전통의 결함과 성취,” 김영식 편역, 󰡔중국 전통문화와 과학󰡕 (창작사, 1986), 30-73쪽)

Yung Sik Kim, “Natural Knowledge in a Traditional Culture: Problems in the Study of the History of Chinese Science,” Minerva 20 (1982), 83-104. (번역본: “중국 전통과학 연구의 문제들,” 김영식 편역, 󰡔중국 전통문화와 과학󰡕 (창작사, 1986), 74-106쪽).

Nathan Sivin, “Why the Scientific Revolution Did Not Take Place in China-or Didn’t It?,” Chinese Science 5 (1982), 45-66.

Roger Hart, “Beyond Science and Civilization: A Post-Needham Critique,” EASTM 16 (1999), 88-114.

2. 한국 과학사 서술의 문제: 동아시아 과학사에서 한국의 위치

전상운, 󰡔한국과학기술사󰡕 개정판(정음사, 1976), “서장: 한국과학사의 새로운 이해”, 13-28쪽.

Yung Sik Kim, “The ‘Problem of China’ in the Study of the History of Korean Science: Korean Science, Chinese Science, and East Asian Science,” Gujin lunheng 古今論衡 18(2008), 185-198. (번역본: 󰡔동아시아 과학의 차이󰡕 207-222쪽)

임종태, “과학사 학계는 왜 실학을 저평가해 왔는가” (실학학회 발표문, 2016)

 

<더 읽기>

Joseph Needham, “Author’s Note,” in Needham, Ho Ping-Yü, Lu Gwei-Djen, and Nathan Sivin, Science and Civilisation in China, Vol. 5, Chemistry and Chemical Technology, Part 2, Spagyrical Discovery and Invention: Magisteries of Gold and Immortality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974), pp. xvii-xxxii. 시빈에 대한 니덤의 비판적 태도를 잘 볼 수 있는 글입니다.

Nathan Sivin, “Science and Medicine in Chinese History,” Heritage of China: Contemporary Perspectives on Chinese Civilization (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), pp. 164-196.

Yung Sik Kim, “The ‘Why not’ Questions of Chinese Science: The Scientific Revolution and Traditional Chinese Science,” East Asian Science, Technology and Medicine(EASTM) 22(2004), 96-112. (번역본: “중국 과학에서의 Why not 질문,” 󰡔동아시아 과학의 차이󰡕 (사이언스북스, 2013), 55-73쪽).

金永植, “中國의 傳統科學과 自然觀에 대한 올바른 이해,” 『韓國史 市民講座』 (一潮閣) 제16집 (1995), 203-222.

Gregory Blue, “Joseph Needham, Heterodox Marxism, and Chinese Science,” Science & Society, 62(2) (1998), 195-217.

Marta E. Hanson, “New Direction in the History of Science in East Asia,” EASTM 19 (2002), 107-115.

Jongtae Lim, “Lessons from the Constructed Past: Jeon Sang-woon’s Nationalist Historiography of Science in 1960s Korea” (2010, 미출판 초고)

Kapil Raj, “Rescuing Science from Civilization: On Joseph Needham’s “Asiatic Mode of (Knowledge) Production,” Arun Bala and Prasenjit Duara (eds.), The Bright Dark Ages: Comparative and Connetctive Perspectives (Leiden: Brill, 2016), pp. 255-280.