Immerse yourself in the "new" humanities, presented in realistic and accessible language.

Kang Shin-joo, author of "Time for Philosophy," is a philosopher who best understands the thirst of general readers.
He has mainly lectured in public academies where he meets and communicates directly with the public, rather than on a university podium. Rather than one-sided, spoon-fed philosophy education on a university podium, he shares and empathizes with his philosophical thoughts with those who seek out philosophy lectures to resolve their own concerns and dissatisfaction with life.
This book is a 'realistic, humanistic, and empathetic essay' that best reflects my experience and know-how.


This book differs from existing classic guidebooks in two ways.
First, rather than introducing conventional philosophical classics, the book is structured around the works of humanists whose motifs can reflect current concerns.
That is why you can freely move between philosophers from the East and the West, past and present, and discover many unfamiliar humanists such as Irigaray, Nagarjuna, Iji, Labeson, and Mathurana, names that you would not find in other classical guidebooks.
The second is that it is easy to read, as if providing readers with realistic philosophical and humanistic advice, and readers can empathize with it, as if receiving psychological counseling.

Part 1: Finding the Lost Me

Epictetus was a philosopher who saw the fate of humans who must live with both a persona and a bare face.
In other words, we must avoid the two extremes of being obsessed with the persona and forgetting the bare face, or being concerned with the bare face and neglecting the persona.
His reflections help us understand where all the suffering and conflict we experience in life comes from.
…But let’s not forget! If there’s no face, there’s no use using a persona.
For us who are overly concerned about our personas, taking care of our bare faces is very important.
If our bare face is healthy, we will gain the power to use various personas.
Unfortunately, if we don't take care of our bare face, we won't be able to shed the persona we wear.
― 'Persona and the Bare Face - From Epictetus' Encheiridion'--- p.38

Whether it's about our hearts or something we've lost, obsession is the main culprit that blocks us from communicating with others.
If, in the pursuit of mental cultivation, we fail to understand and comfort others, what good is the compassion emphasized in Buddhism? Attachment not only causes us to suffer ourselves, but also renders us indifferent to the suffering of others.
The latter aspect is particularly important.
Because when we are engrossed in something, others who need our love and attention may be withering away, neglected.
Isn't this terrifying? ― From "The Wisdom of Liberation - Huineng's Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch" --- p.68

According to Wittgenstein, everyone is born and raised in their own unique life context, following their own unique set of linguistic rules.
These are the people we meet in our daily lives.
…but problems tend to arise when you meet someone who shares the same language or culture.
Although they may appear similar on the surface, they may use language that does not match my context due to region, family, school, major, etc.
To avoid repeating the unpleasantness or rejection that can easily be felt at the sweary old lady's restaurant, we must carefully read the context of the life of the person we are talking to.

― 'Context Beyond Language - Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations' _ --- p.104

Part 2 Between Me and You

In the past, people considered harmony to be the highest ideal, whether in the home, in society, or in the country.
But in any case, the idea of ​​harmony is impossible to achieve unless the members suppress their own desires.
Let's say there is a woman who is proud of her harmonious family.
However, it is very likely that this is just her delusion.
In reality, either she is conforming to her family's desires, or her family is conforming to her desires.
In this way, within the ideology of harmony, the experience of difference with the other cannot arise.
― From the Harmony of the Group to the Responsibility of the Subject - Levinas, Time and the Other --- pp. 127-128

Sometimes I see older people scolding younger people for sitting in the seats reserved for the elderly.
This old man has a certain confidence that young people should not sit in the seats reserved for the elderly.
The old man doesn't even try to consider whether the young man is feeling unwell.
There is absolutely nothing ethical about an old man yelling at someone to get up or a young man leaving as if he is being chased by something.
Because there is no consideration or affection for others between the two people.
… So, how would Confucius, who valued etiquette, have acted when he saw a young man sitting wearily in the seat reserved for the elderly? … For him, without delicate consideration for others, etiquette was of no use.
It is precisely because of this insight that Confucius was able to remain not as a blind follower of etiquette, but as the first Eastern philosopher.
― 'Consideration for Others - Confucius' Analects' --- pp. 140-143

It is our common practice to always choose a counterpart gift of similar value to the original gift after receiving it.
This clearly shows that most of the gifts we give and receive are gifts in name only, and that there is a logic of bribery behind them.
… what we must not forget is that Derrida is not denying the gift itself.
The point he is emphasizing lies elsewhere.
We give a gift to someone.
But for it to truly be a gift, you have to forget the very fact that you gave it.
In fact, it is not easy to give a gift and then completely forget that you gave it.
Derrida is not making such an impossible demand.
He is emphasizing that it is only our willingness to forget that we have given a gift that makes a gift a gift.
― 'The Possibility of a Gift - Derrida's 'Given Time' --- pp. 165-166

Let us think about the affection that the King of No showed to the birds.
Offering delicious drinks, playing court music, feeding delicious meat, etc.
There is no human being who would not be delighted to receive such a favor.
But to the bird, all these things were nothing but painful suffering.
…How could the King of Lu keep his beloved seabird without driving it to its death? First, he had to forget the thought, "If I do this, the seabird will like it."
Only then will the King of Nora have the heart to decipher the delicate codes thrown by the seabirds.

― 'The Wisdom of Love - Zhuangzi, Zhuangzi' --- pp. 192-193

Part 3: Philosophy for Me, You, and Us

Most people believe that fashion is created when consumers collectively prefer and choose certain styles.
But this is looking at cause and effect backwards.
Because trends are not created by consumers, but by industrial capital.
What Lyotard saw was also this physiology of industrial capital.
Industrial capital has a mechanism to tempt consumers to buy new products by releasing 'new' products and making existing products obsolete.
Therefore, it can be said that it is inevitable that industrial capital will dismantle existing values ​​and common sense and create a new world.
In the age of industrial capitalism, we humans have finally acquired a sense of time related to 'newness' or 'oldness'.
― 'The obsession with novelty - Lyotard, 'The Postmodern Condition' --- p.231

Until now, we have mistakenly thought that leisure time was free time free from work.
However, leisure time is never time “liberated” from labor.
Because most of our free time is wasted by being captivated by the spectacle provided by mass media or by buying products.
Ultimately, leisure time is not a time for free creation or leisurely rest, but rather a time designed to tempt us with the products we create.
That is why Guy Debord said that during our leisure time we “surrender” to the fruits of our labor.
― 'An unhappy life robbed of leisure - Debord's 'Society of the Spectacle' --- pp. 252-253

We are now following representative democracy.
We transfer our rights to our representatives for a certain period of time.
But is it really possible to transfer our rights to others? If we do, wouldn't we then be reduced to slaves, people without rights? Of course, we do act as masters for a very short period of time, during which we elect representatives.
…the moment a representative is elected, we are reduced to powerless beings who have ceded all our rights.
Perhaps both the representative and all of us are aware of this fact, consciously or unconsciously.
Rancière accurately points out the blind spots of representative democracy.
It is natural that he is trying to overcome representative democracy and implement direct democracy.

--- 'From Security to Politics - From Rancière's "Ten Theses on Politics"