• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.79-110
• /
• 2010

In this paper I will consider the Rousseauistic origin of Knat's theory of Freedom. Kant's autonomous freedom which is the main theme of the Critique of practical Reason have three characteristic elements, namely spontaneity, self-lawmaking and universal validity. Rousseau mentions three kinds of freedom in his works. Natural freedom which is treated in Discourse on the origin of inequality is freedom which a man in natural state have. I proved that natural freedom is the origin of Kant's theory of spontaneity that is a essential part of autonomous freedom. Social freedom which is treated in Social contract is deeply connected with general will. General will is the power of self-lawmaking. We can easily conclude that Rousseau's social freedom is the origin of Kant's theory of self-legislation which is another essential part of autonomous freedom. The last essential part of Kant's autonomous freedom is universality that is inseparably connected with Rousseau's moral freedom which is largely mentioned in Emlie.

• The Korean Journal of Malacology
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.17-26
• /
• 1993

한국 해산 중복족류에 대한 분류학적 연구의 일환으로 1965년 5월 부터 1992년 5월까지 전국 해안 64개 지점으로부터 채집된 총알고둥 상과, 갑옷고둥 상과, 루소고둥 상과, 짜부락고둥 상과에 속하는 표본들을 동정, 분류한 결과 다음과 같은 7종의 한국 미기록종을 얻었기에 이들에 대한 도판과 함께 재기재를 하였다: Stenoris smithi(Pilsbry, 1895), Peasiella infracostata(Issel, 1869), Pseudoliotia micans A. Adams, 1850, Alvania concinna (A. Adams, 1861), Barleeia trifasciata(Habe, 1960), Cerithiopsis subreticulata(Dunker, 1861), Cerithiopsis spongicola Habe, 1960.

• Journal of Christian Education in Korea
• /
• v.71
• /
• pp.97-120
• /
• 2022

Korean churches and theology of today are experiencing a decline in reliability and a lack of communication from the Korean society due to the absence of proper reflection. Moreover, with the COVID-19 Pandemic, the church is led to a situation where the problem of survival has become a concern. In addition, churches and theology failed to restore the public nature of faith from civil society, and how these beliefs could be developed in terms of Christian education has become an important theological task. The restoration of the public nature of the church brings interest in public theology, and if education is an important area of the public forum, we pay attention to educational philosophers who provided the basis for publicness and civil democracy education philosophy in Christian education. Rousseau, as an educationalist who opened the modern philosophy of education is opening up the civil society through discovering the existence of children with the proposition "Return to Nature" in the 18th century. This study aims to use Rousseau's educational philosophy in his books Emil, The Theory of Inequality Origins, and Social Contract Theory as the basis of educational theory that opened the foundation of the public domain and civil society.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.126
• /
• pp.403-422
• /
• 2013

유사배(劉師培)는 '반청(反淸)'에서 반전통의 '무정부주의'로, 그리고 '친청(親淸)'으로 변절하는 파란만장한 삶을 살았다. "중국민약정의(中國民約精義)"는 유사배(劉師培)가 무정부운동을 하기 전, 즉 1903년에 완성한 저서다. 1903년은 유사배(劉師培)가 고향을 떠나 상해(上海)에서 반만(反滿) 운동을 시작했던 시기이고, 1907년 일본으로 유학가기 전 4년 여 동안 유사배(劉師培)는 반청(反淸) 운동에 적극적이었다. 따라서 "중국민약정의(中國民約精義)"는 무정부주의자들의 이념인 '반전통(反傳統)'의 관점에서 저술된 것이 아님을 알 수 있다. "중국민약정의(中國民約精義)" 서문은 다음과 같은 중요한 의미를 내포하고 있다. 첫째, 유사배(劉師培)가 참조한 루소의 "민약론"은 양정동(楊廷棟)이 일본어판을 보고 중국어로 번역한 "민약론"이다. 둘째, "민약론"의 내용은 널리 알려지지 않았다. 셋째, 원고는 1903년 이전에 완성되었고, 책은 1904년에 출판되었다. 유사배(劉師培)는 "주역"을 통해서는 '군민(君民)의 일체(一體)'를, "상서"를 통해서는 '군민(君民)이 국가의 공동주인'임을 밝혔다. "시"는 '민의(民意)의 표현'이라고 했으며, "춘추"를 통해 군주세습제와 민권(民權) 그리고 민의(民意)에 의해 관료 등용 등을 주장했다. "논어"를 통해서는 군신(君臣)의 대등 관계와 군민의 일체를 다시 강조하고, "맹자"와 "순자"를 통해 군주가 신성불가침의 영역이 아니기 때문에 민의(民意)를 근거로 군주도 바꿀 수 있다고 했다. 유사배(劉師培)의 이러한 주장만 놓고 보면, 중국은 비록 전제군주체제에 있었지만, 사람들은(人民) 민주제도를 향유한 것 같다. 그러나 실제로는 이와는 정반대의 길을 걸었던 것이 중국이다. 문제는 유사배(劉師培)의 주장처럼 루소의 "민약론"에 버금가는 사상과 역사적 사실이 있었음에도 불구하고, 그것을 제도화된 적이 없다는 점이다. 유사배(劉師培)가 "중국민약정의(中國民約精義)"에서 서술한 '민약(民約)'은 치도(治道) 방면과 비슷하다. 그러나 정도(政道) 방면에 대해서는 거의 언급이 없다. 게다가 서술된 '민약'의 내용이 한 번도 제도화된 적이 없다는 점에 대해 아무런 언급이 없다. 결국 비록 "중국민약정의(中國民約精義)"가 중국 전통사상에서 서구의 '민주' 개념을 모색했다는 점에서 높이 평가할 수 있으나, 그것을 제도화하지 못하고 또 치도(治道)에만 치중해 서술한 점이 "중국민약정의(中國民約精義)"의 약점이다.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.54 no.4
• /
• pp.483-509
• /
• 2008

For the last decades, criticism on Frankenstein has tried to make a link between Victor's Creature and Rousseaurean "man in a state of nature." Like the Rousseaurean savage in a state of animal, the monster has only basic instincts least needed for his survival, i.e. self-preservation, but turns into a civilized man after learning language. Most critics argue that, despite the monster's acquisition of language, his failure in entry into a cultural and linguistic community is the outcome of a lack of sympathy for him by others, which displays the stark existence of epistemological barriers between them. That is to say, the monster imagines his being the same as others in the pre-linguistic stage but, in the linguistic stage, he realizes that he is different from others. Interpreting the Rousseaurean idea of language, which appears in his writings, as much more focused on emotion than many critics think, I read the dispute between Victor and his Creature as a variation of parent-offspring conflict. Shelley criticizes Rousseau's parental negligence in putting his children into a foundling hospital and leaving them dying there. The monster's revenge on uncaring Victor parallels the likely retaliation Rousseau's displaced children would perform against Rousseau, which Shelley imaginatively reproduces in her novel. The conflict between the monster and Victor is due to a disrupted attachment between parent and child in terms of Darwinian developmental psychology. Affective asynchrony between parent and child, which refers to a state of lack of mutual favorable feelings, accounts for numerous dysfunctional families. This paper shifts a focus from a semiotics-oriented perspective on the monster's social isolation to a Darwinian perspective, drawing attention to emotional problems transpiring in familial interactions. In doing so, it finds that language is a means of communicating one's internal emotions to others along with other means such as facial expressions and body movements. It also demonstrates that how to promote emotional well-being in either familial or social relationships entirely depends on the way in which one employs language that can entail either pleasure or anger on hearers' part.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.123
• /
• pp.1-26
• /
• 2012

Ist der Emotivismus eine $mi{\ss}lungene$ Theorie? Nach der Meinung von Jesse Prinz ist es nicht so. Auf der Humeschen Tradition stehend behauptet er, $da{\ss}$ ein moralisches Urteil ohne das Sentiment von Billigung oder $Mi{\ss}billigung$ nicht zustandekommen kann. Ihm zufolge ist Emotion nicht allein mit moralischen Urteilen verbunden, sondern auch eine notwendige und hinreichende Bedingung $daf{\ddot{u}}r$. Der Grund dessen, warum der Emotivisums nicht ${\ddot{u}}berzeugend$ erschien, liegt darin, $da{\ss}$ $f{\ddot{u}}r$ diesen die Verbindung von Emotion und Moral nur auf den $Gef{\ddot{u}}hlsausdruck$ $beschr{\ddot{a}}nkt$ bleibt. Zwar stellt das moralische Urteil Sentiment dar, aber das bleibt eben nicht als ein $blo{\ss}$ $Gef{\ddot{u}}hlsausdruckendes$. Denn die $Moralit{\ddot{a}}t$ ist nicht die einfache Projektion eines subjektiven Zustandes, vielmehr konstruiert die emotionale Reaktion von Billigung oder $Mi{\ss}billigung$ das moralische Urteil. Daher muss der projektistische Gesichtspunkt des expressionistischen Emotivismus modifiziert werden, so $da{\ss}$ der oft dem Emotivismus kritisch zugeschriebene moralische Nihilismus zu ${\ddot{u}}berwinden$ ist. In diesem Zusammenhang $schl{\ddot{a}}g$ Prinz den konstruktiven Sentimentalismus vor, der als eine hybride Theorie des Moralbegriffs von 'biologiscehn Tatsachen' und 'sozialer Konstruktion' darauf zielt, im moralischen Leben eine Stelle auszumanchen, wo Evolution und Kutur zueinander zusammentreffen $k{\ddot{o}}nnen$.