레이몽 부동의 ‘일상적 합리성이론’에 관한 시론

민문홍(Min, Moon-Hong) 한국이론사회학회 2014 사회와 이론 Vol.25 No.-

이 논문은 세계적 석학이고 현대 사회학 이론 분야에 커다란 기여를 한 레이몽 부동의 사회학을 그 후반부 저작들을 중심으로 소개하는 데에 목적이 있다. 부동은 자신의 후반부 저작을 관통하는 생각을 ‘일상적 합리성이론’이라고 부르며 기존의 이론 없는 경험적 사회학과 네오 맑시즘에 대한 이론적 대안으로 제시하고 있다. 여기서 필자가 그의 일상적 합리성 이론에 주목을 하는 이유는, 이 이론이 현대사회의 이념적 양극화와 가치관의 혼란에 대한 긍정적 대안을 제시하고 있을 뿐만 아니라, 경제학의 지배적 패러다임인 합리적 선택이론을 극복하고 새로운 통합 과학적 인문사회학 패러다임을 제시하고 있기 때문이다. 이 논문은 다음과 같은 차례로 기술되었다. 1장은 문제 제기로서 어째서 21세기 이 시점에서 우리가 부동의 일상적 합리성이론을 주목해야 할 필요가 있는지를 알리려 했다. 2장은 부동의 ‘일상적 합리성이론’을 체계적으로 소개하려 했다. 이 이론이 어떤 점에서 경제학의 합리적 선택 이론을 넘어설 수 있는가를 보여줌과 동시에, 일상적 합리성이론의 핵심적 주장들을 살펴보았다. 3장은 ‘일상적 합리성 이론’이 어떤점에서 합리적 선택이론이 처해 있는 논리적 딜레마를 해결하고, 현대 사회학 이론에 새로운 지평을 열어줄 수 있는가를 보여주었다. 4장에서는 일상적 합리성이론이 의회민주주의의 기초인 일상생활 속의 상식을 회복하는 데에 기여할 수 있으며, 이 작업을 통해 후기 현대사회의 가치관회복과 의회민주주의 제도의 정상화에 크게 기여할 수 있다고 보았다. 5장의 맺는말에서는 ‘일상적 합리성이론’이 현대 민주주의의 이념적 기초를 이해하는 데에 도움이 될 뿐만 아니라, 표류하고 있는 인문사회학의 새로운 소명의식을 제공하고 후기 현대사회의 위기 극복에 필요한 사회학의 역할을 가르쳐줄 수 있다고 보았다. The purpose of this article is to describe the main problematics of a great french scholar, Raymond Boudon’s sociology on the basis of his later works. Boudon calls his sociology as a theory of ordinary rationality from about 2005, whose objective is to propose an alternative to the empirical sociology without theoretical problematics and also to the neo-marxist sociology. The main reasons why I pay attention to his theory of ordinary rationality are as follows. Boudon’s theory of rationality has two merits. One is to suggest the contructive alternative to the ideological polarization and the confused value system in late modern society. The other is to propose the integrated paradigm of human sciences against the dominant paradigm of economic science, rational choice theory. This paper is composed of five chapters. Chapter I presents the reasons why we should pay attention to the theory of ordinary rationality of Raymond Boudon in this period of late modernity of 21st century. Chapter II introduces systematically the theory of ordinary rationality of R. Boudon. Examining the main arguments of ordinary rationality theory, I suggest this theory can overcome the logical impasse of rational choice theory. Chapter III tries to show in what way this theory can solve the logical impasse of the rational choice theory and open the new prospects for contemporary sociological theory. Chapter IV argues that ordinary rationality theory can contribute to the restauration of the common sense in our every day life, and this also makes for the recovery of the value system of our society and for the normalization of representative democracy system. Chapter V concludes that the theory of ordinary rationality will help us not only to understand the ideological foundation of modern democracy but also to provide the new sense of calling for the scholars of human sciences to assume the responsibilities of sociologist to overcome the crisis of late modern society.

새로운 시대 목회후보생 발굴과 양육: Rational-Choice Theory 모티프에 의한 종교사회학적 연구

김근수 한국복음주의신학회 2021 성경과신학 Vol.97 No.-

This research focuses on finding and developing pastoral candidates, which are central to denomination’s project (the General Assembly of Presbyterian Church in Korea, Hapdong) in this present age. Currently, we are facing De-Churchization phenomenon as we also see how new generation do not desire to be pastoral candidates. Millennials and Generation Z’s cause of the phenomenon of de-christianization has two dimensions of hypotheses: the secularization theory of classical paradigm as a religious sociological hypothesis and the theory of “shrink society” as a macroeconomical hypothesis. The secular theory of the classical paradigm has recently been denied by the secular theory of new paradigms. In this interdisciplinary research, I note the claims of Peter Berger, a leader of new paradigm’s secular theory, and pres- ent Rodney Stark and Lawrence Iannaccone’s rational choice theory as an alternative to the phenomenon of de-churchization, and a model of Antonio Gramsci’s organic intellectual model of a 21st-century model of pastoral ministry. 본 논문은 “목회후보생 발굴과 양육”이라는 교단 차원의 가장 중요한 프로젝트 에 대해 현시대의 탈교회화 현상, 특히 목회후보생이 되려고 하는 세대, 즉 ‘밀 레니얼 세대’(Millennials)와 ‘Z세대’(Generation Z)의 탈교회화 현상의 원인을 두 가지 차원의 가설들, 즉 ‘종교사회학적 가설’로서의 고전적 패러다임(S01)의 ‘세 속화(Secularization) 이론’과 ‘거시경제학적 가설’로서의 ‘수축사회’(Shrink Society) 이론으로 나누어 천착하였다. 고전적 패러다임(S01)의 세속화이론은 최근 뉴패 러다임(S02)의 세속화이론에 의해 부정되고 있다. 본고에서 필자는 뉴패러다임 의 세속화이론의 주장자인 피터 버거(Peter Berger)의 주장을 주목하며 로드니 스타크(Rodney Stark)와 로렌스 야나코네(Laurence Iannaccone)의 ‘합리적 선택 이론’(Rational-Choice Theory)을 모티프로 한 종교사회학적 연구를 탈교회화 현 상에 대한 대안으로 제시하였고, 특히 안토니오 그람치(Antonio Gramsci)의 ‘유 기적 지식인’(intellectuale organico) 모델을 21세기형 미래목회사역자의 모델로 제시했다. 본 연구는 간학문적(interdisciplinary)연구로 시도되었다.

합리적 선택 이론의 새로운 지평

구현우(Hyun Woo Koo),이정애(Jung Ae Lee) 서울행정학회 2009 한국사회와 행정연구 Vol.19 No.4

Rational choice theory that came out against over determinism of macro level theory which puts emphasis on structure and system thinks of a phenomenon as a consequence of actor's rational and strategic choice. Rational choice theory can be set a high value in that offers the micro foundation of the social phenomenon in a sophisticated logic. but it was pointed out that it has the several theoretical and methodological limits. In response to this critique. the inner school of rational choice theory has been expanding its horizons in incorporating institution. culture. and history into its theoretical and methodological framework in recent years, and this essay examined into three contexts of rational choice institutionalism, sociological rational choice theory, and analytic narratives.

인터넷사기의 동향 및 원인에 관한 연구

정승민(Jeong, Seung Min) 한국범죄심리학회 2008 한국범죄심리연구 Vol.4 No.2

오늘날 사이버공간이 확산되면서 많은 새로운 유형의 범죄와 일탈이 가상공간으로 옮겨져 발생하고 있다. 특히 사이버공간은 여러 사기 범죄가 발생하기에 좋은 환경을 제공해주고 있어 문제가 더욱 심각하다. 따라서 이 연구에서는 인터넷사기의 원인을 설명해 줄 수 있는 범죄학이론을 살펴보고, 합리적 선택이론, 억제이론, 기타 관련 이론 등을 적용하여 인터넷사기에 관한 통합모형을 제시하고자 한다. 이와 같은 통합모형을 통해 인터넷사기의 대책을 마련해볼 수 있을 것이다. 먼저 합리적 선택이론과 억제이론의 핵심적 논점을 통해 인터넷사기의 원인을 찾을 수 있다. 인터넷사기는 철저한 경제적 이익에 대한 기대로 인해 범죄를 저지르게 되는 것으로 이득과 손실을 합리적으로 계산하여 범죄행위를 한다는 합리적 선택이론으로 설명되어질 수 있다. 그리고 인터넷사기범은 사이버공간상의 익명성이란 특성으로 인해 발각의 우려가 적으므로 공식기관으로부터의 처벌에 대해 두려움을 느끼지 않는다. 이와 같이 인터넷사기는 공식기관의 처벌여하에 따라 범죄를 결정하게 된다는 억제이론으로 설명할 수 있다. 둘째, 인터넷사기는 다른 범죄에 비해 고도의 지능적인 범죄로 피해자의 심리적 취약성을 이용한 범죄라 할 수 있다. 또한 Gottfredson과 Hirschi(1990)의 일반이론에서 말하는 낮은 자기통제력으로 인해 인터넷사기를 설명할 수도 있다. 이외에도 상대피해인식의 정도, 자기행위의 정당화, 사회통제요소 등을 원인으로 들 수 있다. 무엇보다 각각의 이론들의 타당성뿐만 아니라 이론들간의 통합적인 논의를 고려해야 한다. 즉 물질적 이득을 인터넷사기의 주요 원인으로 보고, 처벌에 대한 인식, 사이버윤리의식, 자기통제력, 상대피해 인식의 정도 등과의 상호작용효과를 살펴볼 수 있다. 향후에는 이 연구에서 제시된 가설을 검증하기 위한 실증적 연구가 이루어져야 할것이며, 이를 토대로 대책이 마련되어야 할 것이다. Today, with the expansion of cyber space, many new types of crimes and deviances are proliferating in cyber space. The problem is quite serious particularly because cyber space provides an environment favorable for various forms of frauds. Thus, the present study purposed to review criminological theories that can explain the causes of Internet frauds, and to suggest an integrated model on Internet frauds by applying the rational choice theory, the deterrence theory and other related theories. The proposed integrated model is expected to contribute to measures against Internet frauds. First, the causes of Internet frauds can be found in the key points of the rational choice theory and the deterrence theory. An Internet fraud can be explained by the rational choice theory, which maintains that a crime is committed purely by an expectation of economic benefits based on rational calculation of profits and losses expected from the crime. In addition, Internet frauds do not fear punishment by the authority because their crimes are less likely to be detected thanks to anonymity in cyber space. This can be explained by the deterrence theory, which maintains that the commitment of a crime is decided by punishment by the authority. Second, an Internet fraud is highly intelligent compared to other types of crimes, taking advantage of the victim’s psychological vulnerability. In addition, Internet frauds can be explained by low self‐control mentioned in the general theory of Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990). Besides, we may consider causes such as the degree of perception of the victim’s loss, the criminal’s justification of his behavior, and the elements of social control. Most of all, we need not only discussions on the validity of each theory but also integrated discussions comprehending several theories. That is, we may regard material profit as a major cause of Internet frauds and examine its interaction with awareness of punishment, cyber moral sense, cyber ethics, self-control, the degree of perception of the victim’s loss, etc. Empirical research is required in order to test the hypotheses suggested in this study, and based on the results, measures should be developed against Internet frauds.

Amartya Sen의 정의론의 방법과 구조

김대근 한국법철학회 2011 법철학연구 Vol.14 No.1

In this Article, Amartya Sen’s theory of justice is introduced as a alternative theory of justice. Sen has criticized Rawls’ theory of justice as a, transcendental institutionalism in that it is based on social contract and it has an arrangement-focused conception which emphasizes on constructing just institution. Instead, Sen stressed on realization-focused understanding as a approach to justice. In that way, Sen criticizes Rawls’ the two principles of justice and difference principle, which is founded on hypothetic conception such as original position and veil of ignorance. In contrast with Rawls, Sen has developed his justice theory on the assumption that human is diverse. The premise of human diversity enables us to consider that person’s capabilities play more important role in achieving individual well-being than distributing of primary goods, because distribution of primary goods depends on person’s own condition and capability. And adapting Adam Smith’s conception of “impartial spectator” which is any other fair and impartial spectator, Sen suggests open impartiality instead of 'justice as fairness’ as closed impartiality. Sen also notes that equality is important in dealing with justice. Especially, he moves questions of equality from ‘why equality’ to ‘equality of what’. It means that actually every theory of justice treats and highlights equality in different space. The fact equality and inequality coexists in different spaces implicates human diversity. Therefore what is important is not to distribute primary goods, but to convert them to person’s capabilities to achieve actual freedom. As freedom has both opportunity perspective and process perspective, it is important to have capability as achievement of freedom and it can be called development as actual freedom. Of course, Sen’s theory of justice has some limits like other political theories. However, it not only functions as an alternative theory of justice, but also suggests useful way to understand the nature of justice in this world. In this Article, Amartya Sen’s theory of justice is introduced as a alternative theory of justice. Sen has criticized Rawls’ theory of justice as a, transcendental institutionalism in that it is based on social contract and it has an arrangement-focused conception which emphasizes on constructing just institution. Instead, Sen stressed on realization-focused understanding as a approach to justice. In that way, Sen criticizes Rawls’ the two principles of justice and difference principle, which is founded on hypothetic conception such as original position and veil of ignorance. In contrast with Rawls, Sen has developed his justice theory on the assumption that human is diverse. The premise of human diversity enables us to consider that person’s capabilities play more important role in achieving individual well-being than distributing of primary goods, because distribution of primary goods depends on person’s own condition and capability. And adapting Adam Smith’s conception of “impartial spectator” which is any other fair and impartial spectator, Sen suggests open impartiality instead of 'justice as fairness’ as closed impartiality. Sen also notes that equality is important in dealing with justice. Especially, he moves questions of equality from ‘why equality’ to ‘equality of what’. It means that actually every theory of justice treats and highlights equality in different space. The fact equality and inequality coexists in different spaces implicates human diversity. Therefore what is important is not to distribute primary goods, but to convert them to person’s capabilities to achieve actual freedom. As freedom has both opportunity perspective and process perspective, it is important to have capability as achievement of freedom and it can be called development as actual freedom. Of course, Sen’s theory of justice has some limits like other political theories. However, it not only functions as an alternative theory of justice, but also suggests useful way to understand the nature of justice in this world.

제한된 합리성과 재범통제정책

손지영(Son, Ji-Young) 숭실대학교 법학연구소 2013 法學論叢 Vol.30 No.-

본 논문은 그 간의 중형주의·엄벌주의 범죄통제 정책에서 한 걸음 나아간 과학적·치료적·복지적 관점의 재범통제정책 수립 필요성을 범죄원인론적 차원에서 제안해 보고자 한다. 범죄에 대한 현재의 엄벌주의·중형주의 형사정책은 18세기 고전학파의 형사정책 방향과 궤를 같이 한다. 즉, 인간을 “자유의지(비결정론)”에 따른 “합리적 판단”이 가능한 존재로 개념정의 하면서, 형벌의 상향은 범죄에 대한 중요한 예방책이 된다고 보고 있다. 합리적 선택이론에 기초한 엄벌주의 형사정책은 2002년 노벨경제학상을 받은 인지심리학자 다니엘 카네만의 “제한적 합리성 이론”에 의해 재고의 여지가 있다. 카네만의 노벨상 수상 연구결과와 같이 인간의 판단과 의사결정이 합리성에 기초하지 않는다는 전제를 경제학이 아닌 형법상 전제로 받아들일 경우, 인간 합리성에 기초한 중형주의ㆍ엄벌주의 형사정책은 수정이 불가피하며, 불확실성과 제한된 합리성에 기초한 재범통제정책이 새롭게 고려되어져야 하는 당위성이 힘을 얻게 된다. 본 논문에서는 인간의 판단과 의사결정의 “합리성” 관점의 중형주의 형사정책의 문제점과 “제한적 합리성”에 기초한 형사정책의 방향성을 제시하고자 한다. 또한 이와 연계하여 재범통제기관의 전문화 필요성 또한 중요하게 부각되어지는데, 강력범죄와 그 재범을 방지하기 위한 대응책으로 법무부의 실질적 재범통제기 관인 범죄예방정책국 보호관찰과 및 법무보호복지공단의 역할에 대해 생각해 본다. In this paper, I will discuss the need of advanced control policy of second conviction from severe punishment policy in a scientific, therapeutic, welfare perspective to review theories of crime. The current criminal policy of the severe punishment followed out that of classical school in 18th century. That is, human being is defined as a rational person of their own free will. Therefore, we need more severe punishment for crime prevention. Rational choice theory based criminal policy of the severe punishment should be reconsidered with bounded rationality theory of Daniel Kahneman who won the Nobel prize in economic sciences in 2002. He denied that humans are rational actors in traditional economics. How about accepting bounded rationality theory to criminal law? It is necessary that rationality based criminal policy must be modified. Therefore, it is reconsidered “uncertainty and bounded rationality” based control policy of second conviction. In this paper, I will review problems of “rationality” based criminal policy of the severe punishment and propose “bounded rationality” based new criminal policy. As the specialization of control agency of second conviction becomes important, it is also necessary to consider the role of Ministry of Justice as crime control agency for violent crime prevention.

게임이론, 합리적 선택이론, 그리고 죄수의 딜레마에대한 해명

정훈 ( Hun Chung ) 한국과학철학회 2014 과학철학 Vol.17 No.3

There seems to be critics who think that game theory can provide very littleinsights in doing empirical social scientific research or normative politicaltheory/political philosophy. This is because these people tend to think thatgame theory is committed to some highly contestable theory of humanpsychology; namely, that human beings either are or should be primarilymotivated by their own exclusive self-interest. From this, critics tend to thinkthat game theory is defective both as a normative theory of action as well asa descriptive theory of action. After explaining the basics of game theory, Iwill try to show that such criticisms are mostly based on a generalmisunderstanding of game theory. In the end, I will argue that game theory issimply a mathematical tool that could be used to model any strategicinteraction for many different purposes, and is not committed to anysubstantial theories of human nature.

과학적 합리성에서의 쿤적 전환

조인래 ( Cho In-rae ) 한국과학철학회 2017 과학철학 Vol.20 No.2

It is well-known that Kuhn opted for a procedure of theory choice based on scientific values, as an alternative to the once-mainstream formal approaches to theory evaluation. However, his value-based view of theory choice faces two unresolved problems, that is, the problem of excessive methodological permissivism and the problem of consensus formation. So I propose and argue for a revisionary version of Kuhn`s value-based view on theory choice. In my revisionary version, I suggest that the strategies of methodological divergence or convergence and their associated tactics of adjusting the weights of scientific values need to be adopted in due time as methodological constraints, and further argue that those strategies and tactics will contribute to resolving the problem of excessive methodological permissivism and that of consensus formation, while maintaining the advantage of Kuhn`s original view in handling the problem of producing rational disagreement in theory choice. Then I lay out two important implications such revisionary version seems to have on the nature of scientific rationality and in turn of scientific methodology. One is that the rationality of scientific community in theory choice is prior to that of individual scientists. And the other is that what I call soft methodology results from my revisionary proposal.

합리적 선택이론을 활용한 올림픽 개최도시 선정에 관한 연구

이충미(Lee, Chung-Mi),조성식(Cho, Seong-Sik) 한국체육과학회 2016 한국체육과학회지 Vol.25 No.2

Since it has been believed that Olympic Games brought many benefits and profits to hosting cities, there has been an intense competition between candidates cities for hosting the Olympic Games. The purpose of this study is to indicate that the Olympic host city selection process through the Rational Choice Theory which is one of the traditional selection theories. This paper consists of four parts. First part describes the research background, main purpose, and statement of problem, second part explains the methodological framework of this study. Third, it analyzes Olympic host city selection process and the factors of that decision to use the factors of Rational Choice Theory, and finally puts in order the results of the analyses and makes a conclusion. This study finds the factors to decide the host city, qualification of candidates city and evaluation of past event as hierarchy of preferences factor, lobbying and corruption as opportunity cost factor, and continental distribution rule and method of vote as institutional constraints.

테러행위의 경제학적 분석과 정책적 함의 -합리적 선택이론의 응용-

박기홍 ( Park Kihong ) 한일군사문화학회 2021 한일군사문화연구 Vol.33 No.-

While research in the topic of terrorism has increased dramatically in recent years, there is a limited economic analysis of terrorism and anti-terrorism policies. This paper makes an attempt to analyze terrorist behavior based on assumptions/concepts of conventional economic theory based on the assumptions of rational choice theory and provides implications for designing counter- terrorism policies. Rational choice theory in general helps understand and predict economic and social behaviors under uncertainty in terms of individual actions as explained through rationality. In this regards, terrorism in reality can sometimes be regard as rational. Thus, this analysis assumes that terrorists make choices that result in the optimal level of expected utilities (or specific political benefits) for them, constrained by their budget constraint. They also would rather take optimal actions that political benefits them versus actions that are neutral or harm them. This study makes a significant contribution to the interesting literature on the economics of terrorism. It presents a useful analysis that explains terrorists decision making, especially in the context of economics. It also suggests important counter-terrorism policies by analyzing how such policies affect terrorism prevention. Especially, deterrence strategies seek to reduce the ability of terrorist group by raising the cost of undertaking terrorism the terrorists by defending potential targets, attacking terrorist training center, and so on. Proactive measures that are aimed at preventing terrorism by destroying the resources (such as funds) available to terrorist organizations. This paper also suggests another effective way to fight terrorism which is to increase of the opportunity costs of terrorist activities. This approach differs fundamentally from the deterrence approach seeking to raise the material cost to potential terrorists. Such a strategy is based on political decentralization in decision-making power.