• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.1 no.2 s.2
• /
• pp.291-309
• /
• 2001

Let us critique the common notion that ethical examination retards the development of science and technology. First, I shall reformulate such a notion in the following statements: 'To survive the competitive society, we must develop science and technology before others do. It will cost too much time to examine ethically the influence of developing science and technology. Therefore, we cannot but suspend the ethical matters until we have developed science and technology.' I will then show that even if we reconstruct the above argument in a deductively valid form, the second premise is not necessarily true and that we cannot accept the conclusion because the meaning of 'competing for better lives', in the first premise, is diverse. Especially if we are to take into account all the areas of ethics and base them upon the autonomous ethics of democratic societies, it cannot be concluded that ethics is an enemy of developing science and technology. In addition, I will argue that our moral considerations must be based upon autonomous ethics in order to make the development of science and technology contribute to enhancing the desirable science culture. In the midst of making the above argument, it is proposed that the title of the 1aw of bio-ethics be changed, for it has a mistaken implication that acting against ethics results in legal punishments.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.1-31
• /
• 2008

최근 가장 영향력 있는 수학적 실재론과 관련된 논변은 버지스와 로젠의 딜레마이다. 일종의 반-유명론적 논증인 버지스-로젠 딜레마는 유명론자들이 취할 수 있는 제한된 선택지를 제시한 후 그 어느 선택지도 적절하지 못함을 주장하는 것이다. 논자 역시 버지스-로젠 딜레마가 성립한다면 유명론이 가망 없는 전략임에 동의한다. 그러나 논자는 그들의 논의가 유명론 대 실재론이라는 대립구도 대신, 유명론 대 수학 및 과학이라는 잘못된 대립구도를 전제하고 있음을 본 논문을 통해 밝히고자 한다. 간략히 말해, 논자는 버지스-로젠 딜레마는 수학자 및 과학자들의 주장이 글자 그대로 실재론을 함의함을 전제하는데, 이것은 실제 수학 및 과학 활동과 일치하지 않을뿐더러, 이를 입증하기 위해서는 철학적 가정이 개입해야 함을 밝히고, 그 과정에서 유명론의 가능성을 모색하고자 한다. 이러한 논자의 전략은 유명론 진영 안의 특정한 입장을 지지하는 것은 아니다. 버지스-로젠 딜레마는 특정한 유명론의 문제라기보다는 유명론 자체의 가능성과 관련된 것이기 때문이다.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.105
• /
• pp.75-94
• /
• 2008

In philosophy of mind, both reductionism and deflationism claim that the problem of mental causation is overstated, but the reason why they claim that way is quite different. On the one hand, for deflationism, since the problem of mental causation is bogus problem we need to focus on epistemology or scientific explanation rather than metaphysics. On the other hand, although the proponents of nonreductionism seem to think of the principles of causal closure of the physical and causal exclusion proposed by Jaegwon Kim as tenable, they do not go with the reductive approach to the problem of mental causation. Instead they stay with the concept of supervenience to overcome mental causation problem that, reductionists think, leads us to the dilemma situation. Of course, deflationists do not think that supervenience is plausible not as much as supervenience physicalists think that it is. If so, in what way and how do deflationists regard the problem of mental causation as a bogus problem? In this paper, I shall examine the most plausible response to mental causation problem, the contemporary version of mind-body problem by critically discussing and clarifying matters concerning the problem.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Cognitive Science Conference
• /
• 2002.05a
• /
• pp.189-193
• /
• 2002

의식에 관한 가장 흥미 있는 최근의 과학적 작업들 중 철학적으로 문제가 되는 다수는 시각으로부터 나왔으며 그 중 특히 맹시 현상은 심리철학에 있어서 의식, 지각, 그리고 지향성의 개념에 문제를 제기한다. 맹시 환자들은 후두엽 피질의 두뇌 손상으로 인하여 생긴 암점(Scotoma) 때문에 현상적으로 의식적인 과정을 경험할 수 없으면서도 그들의 보이지 않는시야 영역에 대하여 보통 시각을 가진 사람들과 상당히 비슷하게 기능을 발휘한다. 이러한현상은 의식이 행동을 제어하는 데에 과연 인과적 역할을 하는지에 대한 문제들, 심리철학에서 뿌리깊게 논의되어왔던 의식의 기능과 부현상론에 대한 문제를 제기한다. 즉, 맹시 현상은 현상적 의식이 실재하지 않는 것이거나, 존재하더라도 어떤 인과적 효력을 가지지 않는 부수현상적인 것이라는 견해를 강하게 지지하는 것 같다. 이와 함께 인간과 동일한 물리적 구성과 행동을 가지지만 의식적 경험을 결여하는 피조물인 좀비(zombie)의 이론적 가능성이 제기된다. 이를 지지하기 위해서 초맹시(super-blindsight)의 개념과 사례가 제안된다. 이 논문은 맹시 현상을 통해서 현상적 의식의 실재성을 부정하려는 논변들을 반박하고, 의식은 행위의 수행에 관련될 뿐만 아니라 인지에 있어서 중요한 역할을 한다고 논한다. 따라서, 역설적으로 맹시 사례가 오히려 현상적 의식이 인과적 역할을 가진다는 감각질 실재론의 견해를 지지할 수 있다고 논증할 것이다.

• Korean Journal of Cognitive Science
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.175-192
• /
• 1989

The main problems of artificial intelligence (AI)which are vividly being discussed today are not only scientific but also involve serious philosophical dimension.The purpose of this paper is to analyze the computer scientist's definitions of AI and by this method uncober and examine the controversial arguments and problems.The result is to clarify the meaning of AI-research program. It can be said that we can clssify the definitions of AI in various types according to the interest and purpose of AI-reasearchers or the strength of their arguments.But this leaves much to be considered.We have also to consider and analyze the following related problems: Understanding how we grasp human intelligence,what relations there are between intelligence and the brain,and what the logical structure of simulating and copying is with the computer. In this respect,the key problem in AI-research is not the matter of it's use and experience such as computer technonolgy,rather it is the philosophical problem of the a priori such as logic,analysis of the concept.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.146
• /
• pp.307-328
• /
• 2018

The use of thought experiments has a long history in many disciplines including science. In the field of philosophy, thought experiments have frequently appeared in the pre-existing literature on the contemporary Analytic Philosophy. A thought experiment refers to a synthetic environment where the designer of the experiment-with his or her intuition and imagination-tests common-sense knowledge. It can be understood as a conceptual tool for testing the validity of the common understanding of an issue or a phenomenon. However, we are not certain about the usefulness or efficacy of a thought experiment in knowledge production. The design of a thought experiment is meant to lure readers into believing as intended by the experiment itself. Thus, regardless of the purpose of a thought experiment, many readers who encounter the experiment could feel deceived. In this paper, to analyze the logic of thought experiments and to seek the source of uneasiness the readers and critics may feel about thought experiments, I draw lessons from three renowned thought-experiments: Thomson's 'ailing violinist', Putnam's 'brain in a vat', and Searle's 'Chinese room'. Imaginative thought experiments are usually constructed around a gap between the reality and the knowledge/information at hand. From the three experiments, several lessons can be learned. First, the evidence of the existence of a gap provided via thought experiments can serve as arguments for counterfactual situations. At the same time, the credibility and efficacy of the thought experiments can be damaged as soon as the thought-experiments are carried out with inappropriate and/or murky directions regarding the procedures of the experiment or the background of the study. According to D. R. Hofstadter and D. C. Dennett(1981), the 'knob setting' in a thought experiment can be altered in the middle of a simulation of the experimental condition, and then the implications of the thought experiment change altogether, indicating that an entirely different conclusion can be deduced from thought experiment. Lastly, some pre-suppositions and bias of the experiment designers play a considerable role in the validity and the chances of success of a thought experiment; thus, it is recommended that the experiment-designers refrain from exercising too much of their imagination in order to avoid contaminating the design of the experiment and/or wrongly accepting preconceived/misguided conclusions.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.307-320
• /
• 2019

This study explores how an elementary school homeroom teacher who continued to lecture, can use diversified science teaching methods for learner-centered instruction. Using an auto-ethnographic approach over the course of a year, self-memory data, facebook diaries, class diaries, and interview data of an elementary teacher's day-to-day preparations and practice of elementary science, in the context of a Korean elementary school, were collected. The data was analyzed through cultural historical activity theory, examining how the interplay of key elements (i.e., the subject as a homeroom teacher with instructional expertise, norms, community, division of labor, tools, and goals) was characterized within and across distinct two-activity systems, and how these elements shaped the teacher's teaching methods into either lecture format or diversified teaching. The study revealed that a non-cooperative community, lack of division of labor, and norms that neglect preparation for science class were the elements that perpetuated the lecture format, and that a contradiction between goals and tools occurred in the activity system. However, these elements were able to be transformed into a cooperative community, shared labor, and norms that saved preparation time for both science class and diversified teaching methods, and those changed elements facilitated the teacher in using diversified teaching methods (e.g., experiments, subject-integrated classes, field work), thereby mitigating the contradiction. This study also discusses that diversified teaching methods can be facilitated when dealing with norms, community, and division of labor elements in an elementary school context as well as improving individual teachers' instructional expertise.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.5
• /
• pp.791-804
• /
• 2015

This study aims to investigate the definition of and factors in decision on socio-scientific issues and to analyze the standards for the quality of decision-making, based on the review of studies in socio-scientific issues. This study analyzed 147 articles published in journals of the social science citation index, and the research method was followed by taxonomy analysis and analytic induction. The results showed that many of the studies did not explicitly articulate the decision-making and only dealt with a specific element of the process, not as a whole. Decision-making was categorized into the steps of identification, option, criteria, information, survey, choice, and review. In terms of the factors, the literature tackled diverse things: science knowledge, nature of science, type of issue, discussion type, belief & values, and culture. This study examined the relationship between the factors and each element of decision-making. Among the relationships, only six kinds were shown as relevant and most of factors were connected to survey. With regard to the standards, the literature relied upon balance, justification and multiplicity since many of the studies made use of Toulmin-based argumentation. This study gives some implications for standards for decision-making regarding the nature of risk and uncertainty.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.33 no.6
• /
• pp.1119-1138
• /
• 2013

It has been a decade since argument and argumentation were introduced in science education literature in South Korea. The word "argument" has been translated into three different Korean terms in literature. The purpose of this study was to clarify those translated terms by examining how the terms were defined and used in Korean education research literature. From a philosophical perspective on the diversity of translation, we examined definitions of argument and argumentation, research topics in papers published in major international journals on science education, and reviewed relevant science education papers published in South Korean journals. We reviewed 79 papers published since the year 2000 in major international journals on science education, whose titles have terms argument and/or argumentation and 37 Korean science education papers whose titles have terms translated from the two English words. Findings showed that Korean researchers defined argument and argumentation either in a general sense or in a specific sense such as science investigation or group work aspects, depending on research contexts. Researchers in Korea rarely mentioned the diversity of translation. If they mentioned it, justification for a specific translation of the term was not provided except for in one case. When the same foreign literature was reviewed to define "argument" or "argumentation, different Korean words were used to translate the same two terms. This indicated to the researchers that the translation of the terms was not related to their definitions of them. On the other hand, each research group used a certain translation of the term consistently, indicating that translations might be based on research tradition. Based on the findings, a position on translation of the term is proposed in terms of professionalism and communication between research groups.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.805-822
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to explore the patterns of group model development about blood flow in the heart and reasoning process by small group interaction. The subjects were 14, 8th graders in a Science Gifted Center. The group discussion was made possible by using triggering questions that can be answered based on experiences of hands-on activities such as a siphon pump analogy model activity and a dissection of pigs' hearts. Despite participating in same activities, the groups showed different model development patterns: unchanged, persuasive, and elaborated. Due to the critical revising, the group's explanatory model was elaborated and developed in the added and elaborated pattern. As critical revising is a core element of the developing model, it is important to promote a group interaction so that students become critical and receptive. The pedagogical analogy model and conflict situation enabled students to present elaborated reasoning. The Inquiry activity with the pedagogical analogy model promote students' spontaneous reasoning in relation to direct experience. Therefore offering a pedagogical analogy model will help students evaluate, revise and develop their models of concerned phenomena in science classroom. Conflict situation by rebuttal enable students to justify more solid and elaborate a model close to the target model. Therefore, teachers need to facilitate a group atmosphere for spontaneous conflict situation.