어떤 대상을 볼 때 눈에 보이는 부분을 표면, 눈에 안 보이는 부분을 이면이라고 합니다. 이면을 보기 위해서는 통찰력이 필요한 데 그 통찰력으로 표면을 관통하여 이면을 볼 수 있습니다. 예를 들어 사이코패스 성향을 가진 사람은 겉으로 보기엔 멀쩡하지만 특정 계기가 생기면 그 본성이 드러나죠. 하지만 그가 본성을 드러내기 전에 표면적 특징들을 통해 그가 사이코패스 임을 추론할 수도 있습니다. 동물을 괴롭히거나 거리낌없이 죽이는 등의 모습을 통해서 말이죠.

표면을 대표하는 표현으로는 surface, external, outside, surrounding

이면을 대표하는 표현으로는 deep, internal, inside, inner 등이 있으며

Paradox는 표면과 이면 대립을 나타내는 대표적인 개념입니다. 겉으로 보이기엔 모순이지만 속에는 전달하고자 하는 본심이 담겨있죠.

표면과 이면 개념이 나타난 대표적인 기출문제를 보겠습니다.

2017년도 수능 21번 주제

The precision of the lines on the map, the consistency with which symbols are used, the grid and/or projection system, the apparent certainty with which place names are written and placed, and the legend and scale information all give the map an aura of scientific accuracy and objectivity. Although subjective interpretation goes into the construction of these cartographic elements, the finished map appears to express an authoritative truth about the world, separate from any interests and influences. The very trust that this apparent objectivity inspires is what makes maps such powerful carriers of ideology. However unnoticeably, maps do indeed reflect the world views of either their makers or, more probably, the supporters of their makers, in addition to the political and social conditions under which they were made. Some of the simple ideological messages that maps can convey include: This land is and has long been ours; here is the center of the universe; if we do not claim this land, the enemies you most fear will.

정답 선지는 ideologies lying beneath the objectivity of maps 입니다.

표면은 precision, apparent certainty, authoritative truth, objectivity

이면은 ideology

눈으로 보이는 지도의 정확성이 이면의 이데올로기를 감추고 있다는 것이 핵심입니다.

18년도 6평 34번

Since life began in the oceans, most life, including freshwater life, has a chemical composition more like the ocean than fresh water. It appears that most freshwater life did not originate in fresh water, but is secondarily adapted, having passed from ocean to land and then back again to fresh water. As improbable as this may seem, the bodily fluids of aquatic animals show a strong similarity to oceans, and indeed, most studies of ion balance in freshwater physiology document the complex regulatory mechanisms by which fish, amphibians and invertebrates attempt to maintain an inner ocean in spite of surrounding fresh water. It is these sorts of unexpected complexities and apparent contradictions that make ecology so interesting. The idea of a fish in a freshwater lake struggling to accumulate salts inside its body to mimic the ocean reminds one of the other great contradiction of the biosphere: plants are bathed in an atmosphere composed of roughly three-quarters nitrogen, yet their growth is frequently restricted by lack of nitrogen.

표면은 surrounding fresh water

이면은 inner ocean

해당 지문은 민물에 살고 있는 해양생물들이 내부에 바다를 유지하고 있다는 내용입니다. 이것이 contradiction처럼 보인다는 걸 언급하고 있죠.

그 다음으로 최근에 치러진 6평을 보겠습니다.

21년도 6평 34번 빈칸추론

A large part of what we see is what we expect to see. This explains why we “see” faces and figures in a flickering campfire, or in moving clouds. This is why Leonardo da Vinci advised artists to discover their motifs by staring at patches on a blank wall. A fire provides a constant flickering change in visual information that never integrates into anything solid and thereby allows the brain to engage in a play of hypotheses. On the other hand, the wall does not present us with very much in the way of visual clues, and so the brain begins to make more and more hypotheses and desperately searches for confirmation. A crack in the wall looks a little like the profile of a nose and suddenly a whole face appears, or a leaping horse, or a dancing figure. In cases like these the brain’s visual strategies are projecting images from within the mind out onto the world.

표면은 out onto the world

이면은 within the mind

눈으로 보이는 것과 뇌가 받아들이는 것이 다르다고 합니다. 표면과 이면 대립이 두드러지게 나타나고 있죠.

정리해보면

표면과 이면 대립의 키워드 inner, external 등을 지문에서 발견하면 그 두 개를 대립시켜서 지문을 읽어가야 문제를 쉽게 풀 수 있습니다.

표면 이면대립 연습용으로 17년 9평 34번 문제를 풀어보세요.

Even if it is correct to say that we express and represent our thoughts in language, it may be a big mistake to suppose that there are structural similarities between what is doing the representing and what is represented. Robert Stalnaker, in his book Inquiry, suggests an analogy with the representation of numbers: The number 9 can be represented as ‘12—3’ but it does not follow that 12, 3, or subtraction are constituents of the number 9. We could compare a thought and its verbal expression with toothpaste and its ‘expression’ from a tube. That the result of expressing toothpaste is a long, thin, cylinder does not entail that toothpaste itself is long, thin, or cylindrical. Similarly, a thought might get expressed out loud in a statement with a particular linguistic structure. It does not follow that ____________________. Suppose, for example, that I look at a fruit bowl, and think that there is an apple and an orange in that bowl. The objects in front of my eyes include some pieces of fruit and a bowl, but no object corresponding to the word ‘and’ exists either in the world or in my visual image. [3점] * subtraction: 빼기 ** entail: 의미(함의)하다

① the thought itself has such a structure

② linguistic analysis of a thought is unlikely

③ the language in mind lacks a logical structure

④ a thought and its verbal expression are distinct

⑤ the sentence structurally differs from the thought

다음 칼럼에서는 '창의성'에 대해 다뤄보겠습니다.