Making Human Rights Ordinary in the Bio and Nanotech Era

Jose Julian Lopez 서울대학교 사회발전연구소 2011 Journal of Asian Sociology Vol.40 No.1

This paper addresses the issue of science related human rights. It begins by showing how science was central yet paradoxically peripheral to the Universal Declaration of Human rights; this is followed by a discussion of the negligible impact of the Nuremberg Code, and the patient rights therein encoded, in the immediate post war. Two conclusions are drawn from these preliminary explorations. First, the interconnection between human rights and science was mediated via the sacralisation of the latter’s autonomy from social capture, which in turn limited the types of science related human rights claims that could be made. Second, the explanatory gaze of social scientists should be focused on exploring the concrete configuration of social, political, economic and cultural forces that provide human rights with social efficacy. In other words human rights need to be conceptualised as ordinary objects of sociological analysis. These two points are further elaborated through a historical case study of the emergence of patient rights in the US, the most important science related human rights to date. This is followed by a discussion on the prospects for science related human rights in the bio and nano era by showing how the knowledge society, risk, scientific citizenship and ELSIfication (i.e. the development of research programs concerned with eliciting ethical, legal and social implications of genomics, nanotechnology, etc.) have weakened, but by no means done away with science’s once sacred autonomy. This means that there are currently new opportunities for the emergence of science related human rights claims. It is concluded that science related human rights also raise important issues regarding hybridity and the conceptualisation of human vulnerability.

문화기술과 인문학

한동숭(Dongsoong Han) 인문콘텐츠학회 2012 인문콘텐츠 Vol.0 No.27

스티브 잡스는 2010년 아이패드 발표를 위한 애플 이벤트에서 “애플이 아이패드와 같은 제품을 만들 수 있는 이유는 우리가 언제나 기술과 인문학의 교차점에 있으면서 양쯕의 장점을 얻으려고 하기 때문입니다.” 라고 하였다. 이처럼 인문학은 디지털 사회의 기술 발전에서 빼놓을 수 없는 존재가 되었고, 많은 사람들이 기술과 인문학의 융합만이 앞으로의 기술발전을 선도해 갈 수 있는 길이라고 말하고 있다. 하지만 한국 콘텐츠 산업의 발전과정에서 인문학은 과연 어떠한 역할을 수행하고 있을까?라는 질문에는 여전히 부정적일 수밖에 없다. 이는 아직도 인문학이 디지털 사회에 적절하게 적응하지 못하였기 때문이며, 그 원인은 주로 학문의 방법론적인 측면에서 인문학과 공학이 다르기 때문이다. 하지만 방법론적인 차이가 있음에도 불구하고 문화기술 분야에서는 인문학에 많은 연구 성과를 바라고 있다. 본인이 수행하였던 전통공간의 문화디자인 연구, 재미를 강화하는 창작지원 시스템 개발과 같이 인문학적 연구뿐만 아니라 다 학제간의 융합연구를 요구하는 경우가 많이 있다. 한국의 콘텐츠 기술은 세계적이다. 한국은 전길남 박사에 의해 1982년 세계 최초로 인터넷을 구축한 나라 중 하나였으며, 1995년에 수립된 종합계획에 따라 초고속인터넷망의 개발에 주력하여, 유무선 초고속 네트워크를 선도하고 있다. 하지만 스마트 혁신을 위한 인재의 측면에서는 암울하다. 스마트 시대에 필요한 인재를 육성하기 위해서는 교육환경이 바뀌어야 한다. 문과와 이과의 구별이 없어져야 한다. 대학의 학과에 대한 계열구분이 없어져야 한다. 대학의 학과에서 여러 학문분야의 교수들은 다양한 학문 기반에서 다양한 방법으로 교육하고, 학생들은 새로운 융합된 환경에서 자연과학, 사회과학, 인문 예술학 등을 경계 없이 넘나들면서 자신의 창조력을 키워나갈 수 있어야 한다. 이러한 창조력의 기반이 바로 인문학임에는 틀림이 없다. 또한 한국 콘텐츠 산업의 발전을 바라는 문화기술분야의 연구자로서 인문학자들에게 원하는 것은 아직 세계 어느 곳에서도 그 성과가 크게 나타나지 않았던 인간 감성에 대한 연구, 한류 원형이라 할 수 있는 전통문화적 요소들에 대한 미시적 연구, 콘텐츠 창작자들의 창작 및 기획을 지원할 수 있는 여러 요소들에 대한 연구, 국가적 민족적 문화코드에 대한 연구들을 활성화하는 것이다. 또한 좁은 자신의 학문 영역에서 사고하는 것이 아니라, 통합적인 인류의 지식 네트워크를 완성하려는 관점에서 인문학을 중심으로 제반 학문들과 연계하면서 여러 번의 시행착오를 거치면서 노력할 때, 콘텐츠 강국으로서의 한국이 제 모습을 찾을 것이라 생각한다. When Steve Jobs introduced the iPad in 2010, he said that “The reason that Apple is able to create products like iPad is because we always try to be at the intersection of technology and liberal arts, to be able to get the best of both.” The human science is the presence of this indispensable things in the development of technology of the digital society, the people says that the convergence of technology and the human science is going to lead the development of the technology of the future. Did the Human science have any role in the development of content industry? The answer is negative. Because the methodology of the human science and engineering have the differences, the human science can not adapt appropriately in the digital society. However, despite these methodological differences, we want the more results of research of the human science in the field of culture technology. There are a lot of research fields such that I had performed the culture design of traditional space and the system development of creative support system to enhance the fun that requires interdisciplinary fusion research. Contents technology of Korea is famous throughout the world. Korea was one of the country to build the Internet for the first time in the 1982 by Dr. Jeon gilnam, and was leading the wired and wireless high-speed network by focusing on the development of high-speed internet to a comprehensive plan in 1995. In our nation talent for smart innovation is very small. Education to foster the talent needed in the era of smart environment needs to change. Distinguish between the human science and natural science is dismissed. In the department of the University, professors of various disciplines teach students in a variety of ways from a variety of disciplines, students are to be foster their creativity without boundaries, such as the natural sciences, social sciences, human science and fine arts in the new converged environment. The base of creativity is the human science. As a culture technology researcher who wish the development of the contents industry of Korea, we want to activate the research of the human science such as the research of emotion of man which did not appear somewhere in the world, the microscopic studies on cultural factors of Hallyu, the study of a supporting factor to a contents creator, and the study of cultural code of nation and ethnic. When we are effort with the human science in conjunction with a various disciplinary from the point of view to complete the knowledge network through several trial-and-error rather than narrow thinking in your field of study, I think we will find the Korea’s appearance as a contents powerhouse.

종립사학과 학문의 자유

정재현 한신인문학연구소 2009 종교문화연구 Vol.- No.12

What is science in a general and wider sense, and how should we do it, particularly in relation to religion? This question, though sounding obsolete, must be asked intentionally. For the times have been changed so drastically so that our self-understanding becomes fundamentally different. Especially the relation of religion and science is asked to be reconstituted in a new fashion. Thus, the identity of science and its way of carrying out should be revised and updated to the contemporary spirit, in comparison with its traditional relation to religion. For this purpose, we should pay attention to the relation of the human and religion. Thus far, the human has confined itself to religion at the negligence of 'being human,' though s/he is 'homo religiosus.' As if being human does not need to be examined and reflected upon! However, there was great pitfall in this fainted relation between the human and religion. The human has forgotten his/her own being human in the name of religion. For this reason, there is no reading of religion in the genuine sense. Thus, we need to investigate into the relation of the human and religion. Thereafter, we may go into the sphere of science in order to find out the proper way of studying science. Here we are supposed to look over the evolutionary process of culture by means of genealogical analysis. For if human culture is nothing other than a way of the humans' living in the world, we should take the relation of religion and science into consideration on the basis of cultural history. From this we may draw upon that although both religion and science are for the humans, they cannot but undergo the tension included in the cultural transition from sphere to sphere such as art and myth. And at this point, we may expect to see the dual relation between religion and science. Our discussion thus far eventually arrives at the apex which requires thorough examination of the relation between truth as the aims of both religion and science and freedom either as provided by truth or as required by truth. The relation of truth and freedom, overcoming the ordinary contradiction, constitutes paradoxical unity in such a way that it may serve as the basic framework for both religion and science. And this is the very way in which we may constitute the relation of religion and science for the authenticity of religion-affiliated schools more properly and appropriately.

Science with a Human Touch : An Urgent Need to Augment Life and Culture

Stephen Jayard 서강대학교 생명문화연구원 2011 생명연구 Vol.19 No.-

과학은 너무나 강력해서 인간의 생명 문화의 형성에도 영향을 미치고 있다. 우리는 과학에 동의할 수도 있고 동의하지 않을 수도 있지만, 과학을 무시할 수는 없다. 불행하게도, 과학의 엄청난 업적에도 불구하고 모든 사람이 현대 과학의 성장에 만족하는 것은 아니다. 과학은 환경, 인간성, 문화의 타락을 야기하고 있다. 과학을 가치중립적이거나 철저하게 합리적인 기획으로 간주하는 것은 아쉽게도 과학에서 인간적인 얼굴을 떼어버리는 것이다. 인간의 생명문화를 확장하기 위해서 과학의 인간적인 터치는 즉시 복구되어야 한다. 왜냐하면 프랜시스 베이컨에 의하면 실제로 근대 과학은 단지 인간의 고통을 완화시키는 것뿐만 아니라 창세기에 나오는 타락 이전의 상태로 인간을 고양시키는 그 무엇으로 의도되었기 때문이다. 이 논문에서 나는, 만일 모든 인간이 생명 문화를 확장하고자 원한다면, 과학은 진지하고 비판적인 고려의 대상이 되어야만 한다는 것을 주장한다. Science is so powerful that it influences even the shaping of human life and culture. One may agree or disagree with science, but one cannot just ignore it. In spite of all its great achievements, unfortunately, all is not well with the growth of modern science. Science has resulted in the degradation of environment, human dignity and culture. Treating science as value­neutral or as a completely rational enterprise has sadly made science lose its human face. Its human touch has to be immediately restored in order to augment human life and culture. For, the modern science was, in fact, intended by Francis Bacon as something, not just to alleviate the sufferings of humanity, but even to raise humanity to the pre­fallen state narrated in the book of Genesis. In this short essay, therefore, I argue that science has to be taken into serious and critical consideration, if at all humanity wants to augment life and culture.

생명과학과 인문학의 생명윤리정책에 관한 의사소통의 시론적 분석

최준호,박기묵 영남대학교 인문과학연구소 2008 人文硏究 Vol.- No.54

Life science extends its domain transcending natural science to the field of health security, bioethics and morality based on remarkable performance in genetic modification, animal clone, stem cell and so on. As a result of that, life science has been risen in concern and the bioethics matters of animal clone and human clone has brought up big and heat controversies among scientists, ethicists and religious men. At this point, Korea is also under the circumstances of being risen pros and cons about bioethics and approving human clone and its hazard. With such discussion we can recognize that today's life science could be no more a part of natural science but a field of transcending natural science and having influence on the fields of ethics and philosophy. This study is focusing on life science's development and mutual interaction with human science. Therefore, this research suggests the necessity of communication between life science and human science and the utilization of human science in life science and the role of human science in bioethics matters. 생명과학은 최근 유전자 조작, 동물복제, 줄기세포 등과 같은 연 구에서 상당한 성과를 거두면서 단순한 자연과학의 영역을 초월하여 국민의 안전문제, 생명윤리나 도덕 문제의 분야까지 확장되었다. 따라서 오늘날은 생명과학(공학)의 시대로 불릴 정도로 이 분야에 관한 관심이 높아지고 있으며 특히 동물복제와 인간복제에 대한 생명윤리문제는 과학자, 윤리학자, 종교인들 사이에 커다란 논쟁을 불러일으키고 있다. 이에 따라 우리나라에서도 생명윤리와 인간복제의 허용 및 위험성 여부에 대한 찬성과 반대가 끊임없이 제기되고 있는 상황이다. 이러한 논의를 통해 우리는 오늘날의 생명과학은 인제 단순히 자연과학이라는 연구 분야를 초월하여 윤리 및 철학분야까지 미칠 수 있는 학문이라는 것을 인지할 수 있다. 따라서 이 연구는 생명과학의 발전을 위한 인문학과의 의사소통의 필요성과 생명과학 분야에서의 인문학의 활용, 생명윤리 문제에서의 인문학의 역할과 관련된 논의 등을 제시함으로써 생명과학의 발전과 인문학과의 상호연관성에 초점을 맞추고 있다.

과학소설에 나타난 인조인간의 의미와 그 교육적 유용성 -<프랑켄슈타인>과 <2058 제너시스>를 중심으로-

김정숙,하병학 한국사고와표현학회 2021 사고와표현 Vol.14 No.1

이 연구는 과학소설 속에 나타난 인조인간의 의미와 그 교육적 유용성을 밝히는 데 목적을 둔다. 이를 위해 200여 년 정도 집필 시차가 있는 두 작품, 프랑켄슈타인과 2058 제너시스를 선정하여, 인조인간의 의미를 중심으로 작품을 분석하고 종합적인 시사점을 찾아 유의미한 교육적 논의로 나아가고자 한다. 프랑켄슈타인은 과학의 발전이 융성하던 시기에 쓰인 작품으로 창조주가 되고자 하는 인간의 욕망과 사회적 존재가 되고 싶은 괴물의 갈등 및 그것이 낳은 두려운 결과를 그려낸다. 2058 제너시스는 인간과 인공지능의 철학적 담론을 통해 두 존재의 차이를 사유하도록 하고 기계가 결코 흉내 낼 수 없는 인간다움을 암시한다. 그 인간다움은 타자에 대한 공감과 연대감이다. 두 작품은 과학기술의 발달이 인간상(관)과 사회상(관)에 큰 변화를 가져올 수 있다는 점을 보여준다. 작품은 또한 불안한 미래 사회를 초래할 수도 있는 잠재적 요인들로 완전성을 향한 인간의 욕망과 지적 호기심, 사회적 불평등, 과학기술의 자본화, 국가 간 갈등, 인문적 가치의 부재를 지적한다. 4차 산업혁명이 거센 지금, 본 연구는 대학의 교양과목을 중심으로 과학소설에 나타난 인조인간의 의미와 그 교육적 유용성을 제시한다. 과학소설은 인공지능 시대에 필요한 비판적 리터러시 함양교육, 인간의 의미와 가치를 살피는 교육, 과학소설의 학제적 특성을 살리는 융합 교육의 콘텐츠로서 유용하다. This study aims to reveal the meaning of artificial humans in science fiction and its educational usefulness. To this end, two works with parallax in writing for about 200 years, Frankenstein and 2058 Genesis, were selected to analyze the works centering on the meanings of artificial human, and seek comprehensive implications to proceed to meaningful educational discussion. Frankenstein was written in a period when the development of science flourished, and depicts the human desire to become a creator, the conflict between a monster wanting to become a social being, and the terrifying consequence of it. 2058 Genesis allows us to think about the difference between the two beings through the philosophical discourse between humans and artificial intelligence, and shows humanity that machines can never imitate. That humanity is empathy and solidarity with others. Both works show that the development of science and technology can bring about a great change in the human character (human-view) and the social aspect(a view of society). The work also points out human desire for perfection and intellectual curiosity, social inequality, capitalization of science and technology, conflict between countries, and the absence of humanistic values as potential factors that may lead to an unstable future society. Now that the Fourth Industrial Revolution is intensifying, this study presents the meaning of artificial humans in science fiction and its educational usefulness centering on the liberal education of universities. Science fiction is useful as a content for cultivating critical literacy required in the age of artificial intelligence, education that examines the meaning and value of humans, and fusion education that makes use of the interdisciplinary characteristics of science fiction.

포스트휴먼 진화-사이언스 픽션을 통해 본 인간과 인공 피조물과의 진화적 관계

송호림 ( Ho Rim Song ) 21세기영어영문학회 2013 영어영문학21 Vol.26 No.3

Taking advantage of selective science fiction texts, this essay attempts to establish a genealogical link of artificial creatures that have made human beings anxious about a future with them and show how the posthuman view of co-evolution with the creatures can be articulated in such a genealogical flow. The essay assumes that human beings desire for God`s capability of creating intelligent creatures and also worry about God`s punishment for the desire. Yet in the posthuman genealogy of artificial creatures, it is the artificial creatures, not the God, who punish the human desire for creation. This thought reflects human beings come to face a new stage of evolution, symbiotic evolution with artificial beings. The golem in Jewish legends and Frankenstein`s monster have contributed to spreading the idea that artificial creatures would be a competitor of humans in their evolution. Science fictions since the two creatures have striven to configure the direction of human evolution in terms of the competition, which would get more serious as technoscience blurs the boundary between humans and non-humans: science fictions stage the question of "what it means to be human" by foregrounding humanized machines and machinized humans. Some texts anxiously depict artificial creatures` win over humans in the evolutionary competition to warn humans against the thoughtless development of technoscience, and others suggest the co-evolution of the human and machine to affirm the impossibility of changing the evolutionary direction in our technoscience. The essay argues that the claims of superhuman witnessed in recent science fictions and cultural studies are the affirmation of the co-evolution of humans and artificial beings-or, technoscience in general. Indeed, it is the posthuman attitude toward evolution.

포스트 코로나 시대의 생명정치와 인간의 안전보장

김영근 성신여자대학교 동아시아연구소 2022 국가와 정치 Vol.28 No.1

The purpose of this research is to identify the necessity of the origin and social demands of bio-politics under the scope of life science technology. In addition to ‘agricultural revolution,’ ‘science technology revolution’, and ‘information revolution,’ the research also focuses on ‘cognitive revolution’, or ‘human(life) science revolution’. Seeking on the birth of life science from this research would provide meaningful results as it discusses the importance of bio-politics. Chapter II discusses origins and the history of bio-politics which is closely related to the history of eugenics and genetic politics those emerged throughout the human evolution. The research assesses the efficiency of political science in a life(Human)-centric process and seeks to become a pioneer of new academic field and to provide a new theoretic frame such as bio-sociology, biopolitical science, and life-politics. Chapter III provides analysis on a current status of ‘transhumanism,’ and ‘life science technology’. It clarifies a process and mechanism of bio-politics in daily lives of the modern society. Chapter IV discusses ‘human security’, under the scope of the human rights, of the humanity living in the post bio-tech era. The research focuses to clarify a process that secures safety and capability of individuals through a risk management at the level of national security. In conclusion, the research reviews the role and limitations of ‘Humart(Human+Smart Power) bio-politics’ and provides insights of Biopolitics with the eyes of political technology for an improvement. 본 논문의 목적은 최근 관심이 증가하고 있는 생명과학 · 생명기술학 관점에서 바이오정치학의 기원 및 필요성(사회적 수요)을 규명하는 데 있다. 특히 지금껏 인류를진화시켜 온 ‘농업혁명’, ‘과학기술혁명’, ‘정보혁명’에 더하여 ‘인지혁명’이나 ‘인간(생명)과학혁명’에 주목하고자 한다. 무엇보다도 인류역사상 가장 오랫동안 주목받아 온 ‘생명과학의 탄생’에 관해 고찰함으로써 생명정치 논의의 유용성을 도출하고자 한다. 제II장에서는 인간이 진화하는 과정에서 대두된 우생학이나 유전자 정치의 역사와도 밀접하게 관련되어 있는 ‘바이오 정치학’에 관한 기원과 전개를 고찰한다. 생명을중시하는 과정에서 정치학의 효용성을 살펴보고, 나아가 생물사회학, 생물정치학, 생명정치학 등 다양한 개념들과 연계하여 새로운 학문분야의 개척하고 걸맞은 이론적 틀을 마련하고자 한다. 제III장은 ‘트랜스휴머니즘’과 ‘생명과학기술’의 현재에 관한 분석이다. 현대인의생활 속에 상존해 있는 ‘바이오정치’ 프로세스 및 메커니즘을 규명한다. 제IV장에서는 포스트 바이오테크 시대를 살아가는 인류에 있어서 ‘인권’과 관련한 ‘인간의 안전보장(인간안보)’에 관해 논한다. 특히 ‘안전국가론’의 차원(관점)에서 바이오 리스크를 관리함으로써 개개인의 안전 · 안심생활을 영위하고 능력이 발휘될 수있도록 보장하는 일련의 프로세스를 규명하고자 한다. 결론적으로 인간 중심의 ‘휴마트(Humanity+Smart Power) 생명정치학의 역할 및한계를 점검하고 향후 인간을 위한 생명과학의 정치공학적 관점에서 개선 과제를제시한다.

과학기술 및 정보화기술 시대의 스포츠 세계에서 휴머니즘에 대한 전망

박현우,김도형 한국체육철학회 2017 움직임의철학 : 한국체육철학회지 Vol.25 No.4

Sports and humanism have a deep relationship in the history of human being. The athletic nature of the sport was a symbolic expression of the origin of the ancient Greek era, symbolizing its ability to do best as human. And they used sports as an educational tool for the formation of a harmonious human being. However, in the industrial society, humanism is gradually declining by science and technology, putting aside other values. In the future of science and technology, it is predicted that the dominance of humanism and the use of humanism will be weaker. First, as the subject participating in the sport is Cyborg or Robo Sapiens, as a human-machine mixed race, the subject of sports act becomes a mechanical person, so humanity, humanism can not be found from this scientific technical Sports environment. Second, in the era of science and technology and information technology, sports games based on science and technology will be developed. Robot aviation machinery tournaments, and artificial intelligence devices, the instruments and tools will not find human personality as machines. Thirdly, cyber sports will spread widely. It predicted that media and cyber games will be developed through the development of various media. Humanoidism can not be found in the human being of human life as the derivation reality that becomes the sporting environment, not the reality. The derivative game of cyborg robot, ball game, fighting game, war game are expanded. In this future science and technology and information technology society, the nature of humanism will be disappeared in the fundamental structure of sports. 스포츠와 휴머니즘은 태생적으로 깊은 관계를 갖고 있다. 스포츠의 휴머니즘적 본성은 고대 그리스시대 제전경기에서 그 연원을 찾을 수 있는데 인간으로서 최선을 다하는 모습의 상징적 표현이었다. 그리고 스포츠를 정신과 신체의 조화적 인간형성을 위한 교육적 수단으로 활용하였다. 그러나 산업사회에 들어와 휴머니즘은 과학과 기술에 의해 점차 위축되면서 다른 가치에 의해 뒷전으로 물러나고 있다. 미래의 과학기술 및 정보화기술 사회에서는 스포츠에 내재된 휴머니즘의 위세와 소용가치가 갈수록 약해질 것으로 예견된다. 첫째, 스포츠 참여주체가 사이보그 혹은 로보 사피엔스로 인간–기계 혼합족이스포츠의 행위 주체가 되면서 인간적 성격을 찾아볼 수 없게 될 것이다. 둘째, 과학기술과 정보화기술을 배경으로 하는 스포츠경기들이 개발될 것이다. 로봇 경기대회, 항공기계장치 경기대회, 인공지능 장치를 장착한 기계들의 경기로서 인간적 성격을 찾아볼 수 없을 것이다. 셋째, 미래 스포츠세계에는 사이버 스포츠가 크게 확산될 것이다. 다양한 미디어를 통한 게임들이 개발될 것으로 예견된다. 사이버상의 로봇경기, 구기 경기, 격투기경기, 전쟁경기 등의 보들리야르가 말한 이미지화된 파생실재의 경기들이 확장되면서 현실이 아니라 파생실재가 스포츠 환경이 되면서 인간적 가치로서 휴머니즘은 찾아볼 수 없을 것이다. 이러한 미래의 과학기술과 정보화기술 사회에서 스포츠의 휴머니즘적 성격은 크게 위축될 것으로 예견된다.

페미니스트 과학의 새로운 객관성 -수평관계와 무위(無爲)의 전망-

최자영 ( Choe Ja Yeong ) 대구사학회 2003 대구사학 Vol.73 No.-

Modem European science is based on rationality, neutrality and objectivity of knowledge. From the end of the 1970’s and the beginning of the 1980’s, however, various theories of feminist science are an effort to revise and supplement the modern science, which has come to be regarded as androcentric. Then, in the middle of the 1980’s, people began to doubt the validity of gender as well as the dualism of sex and gender. Rejecting the dualism of nature and culture, or that of sex and gender, they came to emphasize gender as the cognitive subject of social experience, making much of various situations of women according to races, social classes, etc. The oppressed women has much more cognitive priviledge in comparision to men, to see the world objectively and to revise the distorted androcentric culture. S. Harding suggests a common solidarity of women as ‘the oppressed’. Being placed in different situations, she says, women nevertheless could find common politics, owing to gender division of labour which brings undue pressure upon them. And objectivity does not refer to the neutrality of modem science, but the ethical and political engagement for liberation. Thus, the concept of objectivity is tranferred from epetemology to practical ethics. On the other hand, Harding insists that the feminine principle should not supersede that of the masculine, but correct and supplement the distortion of it. I agree with Harding’s suggestion of objectivity to benefit practical morality. However, being different from Harding’s view, I beleive, the feminine principle has to substitute the masculine one, as the domination of the latter does not get along with female reciprocity. Furthermore, women’s liberation politics to pursue liberation from men could be easily on the line of the same logic of power men follow, paying no attention to any possibility of reflexion or modification to existing practices. It easily falls to the relativism of value without any point of reference. Thus, the alternative of the logic of power, I think, must be mutual communion of so called feminine feature. The important point is a difference of principles, and not of definite cognitive subjects, such as women and men, as there can be no such identity. Furthermore, the communion should be extended to the relations between human and nature, which offers a criterion to women’s liberation politics. Nature does not refer to an essence, but to an object of human practice. There are two facets : the historical and concrete situations of culture on the one hand, and the objective and tans-historical value of nature on the other. The principles of communion in equality apply to the human relation, and the logic of nature imparts an objective standard to those principles. Violating the logic of nature leads to self-arrogance, and the destruction of nature and alienation of humanity. The difference of opinion between E.F. Keller and B. McClintock on the issue of gender proves, I think, how the objectivity of science and the feminist science come in contact with each other. ‘The feeling for the organism’ with which McClintock supports the objectivity of science and the feminist science Keller tried to infer from it can be replaced to a nature not influenced by human power, that is, to the nature of human inactivity. Incidentally, women’s proper characteristics again get significance. It is more reasonable than the liberal or radical feminism in that it attaches importance to the feminine values of reciprocity which refers to denial of human power. and not to the struggle for equality between men and women. The new feminism makes the feminine values as a more comprehensive and reasonable objectivity not confront but apply to the masculine ones, extending not only to men but to science. Then, the communion in equality between humankind themselves, as well as between nature and humankind, comes to be. The communion in equality refers anyway not just to protection,