上世紀70年代初，西方社會正式開始探討多元文化主義之概念。其中，查爾斯．泰勒和威爾．金裏卡是最先進行多元文化主義爭論的哲學家。二位學者雖都是為了發展改善和修正彌補自由民主主義而提出了多元文化主義理論，但他們對多元文化主義的立場卻截然不同。泰勒傾向於共同體主義，金裏卡則傾向於自由主義和平等主義。他們的理論雖受到了大力歡迎和贊同，但也引起了各種批判。本稿所要關注的是其理論的盲區，即對實體論性文化論的局限。並將其歸結為多元文化主義之「複數單一文化的共存」。相反，霍米．巴巴在雜合性理論體系上解釋了多元文化主義。他強調了單位文化的本質雜合性和交流性，並更加深化了個人認同感形成性的問題。韓國學術界若欲發展可以打破單一民族文化神話的多元文化主義理論，則十分有必要關注巴巴的理論。韓國社會各階層的固有文化並非孤立存在，而是相互接聯和混用的。故而，文化的雜合性和交流性才是常態。這樣的認識在全球化的當下，就更加需要我們不斷地加以深化和擴大。

It was in the early 1970s when the concept of multiculturalism started to be discussed in earnest, and Taylor and Kymlicka were considered the most prominent pioneers in generating theories in a heated debate over multiculturalism. These two theorists tried to develop multiculturalism theories that could improve and supplement liberal democracy, but they showed differences from one another as Taylor focused on communalism, whereas Kymlicka took on a liberalistic-equalitarian approach. The two philosophers not only enjoyed a warm reception and support but also had to face a variety of criticism. The author of this thesis mainly focuses on the perspective of substantialist cultural theory. Based on this viewpoint, multiculturalism could be concluded as the “co-existence of multiple mono-cultures.” Unlike this view, multiculturalism from Bhabha’s hybridity theory is estimated to be in a state where multiple pieces of heterogeneous knowledge that orchestrate various forms of life simultaneously operate within the practices executed by the same subject. Such a theory holds a progressive aspects in that it highlights fundamental hybridity and the significance of networking and sheds light on the identity issue of an individual. Academic circles in Korea need to pay heed to Bhabha’s theory in order to develop multiculturalism theories that can overcome the cultural myths of a homogeneous ethnic group. Each unique culture is a product of contact and convergence rather than of isolation, and the notion that hybridity and networking of cultures are normal needs to be widespread further.