• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.79
• /
• pp.121-168
• /
• 2024

Record & archives management is at the heart of archival science. We must be faithful to record & archives management. However, isn't there a paradox that arises the more faithful we are to record & archives management? The paradox is that 'being a responsible manager and efficiently managing records' is rather reduces the interest in the social existence of humans who create and use such records. Why do humans produce and use records? It may be because human beings have been living with the concept of records. The concept is 'the same as the design of thoughts'. There is no need to doubt this direction because as record & archives management develops, more valuable records are preserved more systematically, and they are been served with wider scope and appropriateness. However, if we observe this situation from a human point of view rather than record & archives management, we find that humans appearing in record & archives management are limited to the object of using records. If humans are perceived differently based on the hypothesis of reviewing from the ground up, we can encounter a unique context about the relationship between humans and records or between records and humans. If it reaches the norm that human beings have dignity that cannot be transferred to anyone, have the right to pursue happiness, and must live by enjoying freedom, equality, and social basic rights, in short, if human beings are recognized from a constitutional point of view, we can newly recognize the social role and direction of records. The constitution and international human rights norms document basic human rights as the final norm and clarify that it is the duty of the state to guarantee and practice them. The social role of records from a constitutional point of view is the practice of records that proliferate basic human rights. The practice of archiving, which multiplies basic human rights, may also be a civic consciousness required of experts, but on the other hand, it can be a professional way for archival studies. If record management is a two-lane round trip, it can be said that the interaction between record management and record practice, which multiplies basic human rights, is a pioneering four-lane round trip. This article examines the practice of archiving, which has been developed in and out of record & archives management, by clearly grasping the constitutional perspective from the perspective of archival studies, and examines the social role of archival studies in this context. The social role of archival studies is to provide new linguistic rules for archiving.