태권도철학함의 한계 규정

Definition of the Limitations of Philosophizing Taekwondo

The purpose of this study is to explore academic directions for taekwondo studies by applying dialectical reasoning to them based on earlier studies that examined the identity of taekwondo and taekwondo studies. The dialectical method selected in this study is suitable to identify contradictions in research theories or antinomic logic, and the following results were obtained. First, earlier studies examined what taekwondo is by critically reflecting on discussions on the identity of taekwondo based on the concept of “art and extension,” which seemed to be a reasonable approach. However, they were not developed as an academic study, but led to arguments without any demonstration. They developed arguments only with the one-sided opinions of researchers, without prerequisites for academic studies - demonstrations and discussions on the identity of taekwondo. Second, earlier studies criticized, without any demonstration, the philosophy of taekwondo that researches and provides education on matters of existence, perception and value, and the metaphysical discussions of taekwondo that ignore voices from the field. In addition, both ontology and metaphysical philosophy that are discussed in most studies are used to define the root of studies, but the earlier studies reviewed in this study developed arguments ignoring the embracement of study fields that show no difference. They emphasized and highlighted the diversity of taekwondo philosophy, but their arguments were developed only in a unilateral way instead of embracing the diversity. In conclusion, ‘philosophizing taekwondo philosophy’ was viewed in earlier studies as a study that reflects discussions on the identity of taekwondo from a critical point of view and as an in-depth act of seeking the metaphysical root of taekwondo, but they were filled with superficial, unfocused and empty arguments on sociological understanding, instead of the arguments and demonstrations that were attained based on profound reasoning.