• Korean Journal of Cognitive Science
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.1-12
• /
• 1990

Mental represention as an empirical fact raises certain ontological problems regarding both the subject and the object of representation, that is,the existence of the mimd and that of the represented world. Propsitional attitudes, for instance, presuppose the subject of such inguistic representation, as well as the propositional fact reffered. But the ontological status of the reference is an open question. Mental representations as events also present problems of ontology. How mental events interact wiht physical events, how they are related with neural events,and in what way mental events are functionally autonomous,and such are the problems remaining to be answered. The world of mental representation may be seen as a theoretical world,of which the ontological status depends on the progress in the corresponding empirical science,that is,neuroscience. But the problem of realism in the philosophy of science is still an issue of debate. These,then are philosophical issues related to the ontological status of mental representation. Their solutions,or approaches to them,however, must waite for the further progress in cognitive science,which has philosophy as a humble participant among other disciplines.

• Annual Conference on Human and Language Technology
• /
• 2007.10a
• /
• pp.254-260
• /
• 2007

음성은 컴퓨터로 대변되는 기계와 사람 그리고 기계를 매개로 한 사람과 사람의 상호작용에서 가장 쉽고 직관적인 인터페이스로 널리 활용되고 있다. 인간에게 음성정보를 제공하는 음성합성 분야에서는 합성결과의 자연스러움과 인식성이 시스템의 주요 평가요소로 활용되고 있는데 이러한 자연스러움과 인식성은 합성결과의 정확성뿐만 아니라 발화환경이나 발화자의 발화특징 혹은 감정상태 등에 의해 많은 영향을 받게 된다. 담화표지는 문장의 명제 내용에는 직접 관여하지 않으면서 화자의 발화 의도나 심리적 태도를 전달하는 구성 요소를 말하는데 본 논문에서는 담화표지가 포함된 대화 음성 데이터를 수집하여 담화표지의 음성언어적인 특징을 분석하고 분석된 결과를 음성합성 시스템에 활용하는 표현방식에 대해 논의한다.

• Korean Journal of Cognitive Science
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.65-70
• /
• 2003

In this article, I show that the cognitive suicide argument does not succeed in refuting eliminativism. The argument misses an important aspect of eliminativism. In Sec. 3, the last section, I will suggest the aspect of eliminativism and, on the basis of it, will develop my criticism against eliminativism.

• Journal of the korean Society of Automotive Engineers
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.21-26
• /
• 1984

내연기관은 일찍이 군용과 특수용도는 물론, 최근 서민생활에 직결되어 널리 사용되고 있으며, 일상생활의 필수기계가 되어 놀랄만한 수의 엔진이 생산, 사용되기에 이르렀다. 그러나 한편으 로는 그것을 사용함으로서 사람들에게 해를 준다는 문제가 발생하였다. 특히 주위 사람들의 건 강을 해칠 우려가 있는 유해성분을 포함한 가스의 배출, 또는 소음의 발생이 큰 사회적 문제가 되어 그 방지대책이 종래의 성능향상에 대신하여 지상명제로서 연구 개발되고 있다. 이에 대한 대책은 일반적으로 엔진의 가격과 성능을 희생시키는 것은 불가피하지만, 그것은 최근 세계적인 위기로 불리는 에너지와 기타 자원의 절약과 상용할 수 없으므로 이러한 공해와 자원이 양 립할 수 있는 방향으로의 새로운 내연기관 연구가 강력하게 요망되고 있는 것이 현상태이다. 엔진이 인체에 해를 줄 가능성이 있다는 것은 이전부터 알고 있던 바이다. 예를 들면 좁은 실 내나 터널중에서 운전하면 많은 량의 산소를 소비하기 때문에 단시간에 산소가 부족하게 될 뿐만 아니라, 일산화탄소 함유량이 많은 배기를 배출하게 되어 인체에 중대한 해를 준다. 그러나 이와 비슷한 일이 전도시적인 문제가 되어 법규제가 된 것은 최근의 일이고, 배출가스에 대하여서는 미구에 의하여 약 10년 전부터 자동차의 배기규제가 계획되어 금일 진행중이다. 또 소음에 대 하여서는 오히려 극히 초근부터 법규제화가 진행되고 있으나 어느 쪽도 사회의 요구를 완전히 만족시킬만한 대책기술은 용이하지 않다.

• The Korean Nurse
• /
• v.15 no.6 s.86
• /
• pp.42-60
• /
• 1976

1.행동특성별 제언 1 기본 지식면 첫째, 간호원리, 법칙에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 둘째, 간호학의 용어, 기호, 단어 및 개념에 대한 지식을 갖게 한다. 셋째, 간호원리, 의견, 활동을 검증하고 판단하는 기준에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 넷째, 간호현상의 과정, 경향, 원인, 순서에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 다섯째, 간호문제 요구를 처리하는데 필요한 수단 형식, 체제, 용법에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 여섯째, 학설에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 일곱째, 간호학 분야에서의 특수한 문제나 현상을 다루는데 쓰이는 탐구방법에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 여덟째, 간호 문제나 자료의 분류에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 아홉째, 특수한 사실의 성질, 특징, 정확성에 관한 지식을 갖게 한다. 제언 2 이해능력면 첫째, 간호문제를 창조적으로 해결하고 연구, 발전 시킬 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 둘째 간호현상을 정확하게 추리하고 검증하여 결론을 추출하며 진술하는 능력을 기른다. 셋째, 간호문제를 해석하고 자료를 재정리, 재배열, 또한 새로운 견지에서 해설하는 능력을 기른다. 넷째, 관찰된 간호현상을 설문화 또는 도표화 하는 능력을 기른다. 제언 3 태도면 첫째, 정서적 안정감을 유지하면서 환자와의 인간 관계를 원만하게 유지할 수 있는 태도를 기른다. 둘째, 확신을 갖고 간호활동에 임하는 태도를 기른다. 셋째, 한국사회가 필요로 하는 간호원의 역할을 스스로 감지 적응하고 간호활동 개선에 이바지하는 태도를 기른다. 넷째, 약품을 신중히 다루는 태도를 기른다. 다섯째, 새로운 직을 배워 개척하고자 하는 의욕을 갖게 한다. 제언 4 기능면 첫째, 환자를 이해하고 안정시킬 수 있는 능력을 갖게 한다. 둘째, 간호를 포괄적으로 수행할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 셋째, 간호문제를 창의적으로 처리할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 넷째, 새로운 간호지식이나 기술에 대해서 자율적으로 연수, 학습할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 다섯째, 간호 문제에 대한 흥미와 호기심을 갖게 한다. 여섯째, 병실기구를 과학적이고 합리적으로 관리하는 기능을 기른다. 일곱째, 의료(진료)기구를 조작할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 제언5 비판능력면 첫째, 간호문제나 현상 방법에 있어서 그 가치를 논리적 또는 주관적 기준에 의해 자료를 평가하는 능력을 기른다. 둘째, 일반적인 이론, 학설, 표준 사실에 입각해서 자료를 평가할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 제언 6 분석능력면 첫째, 요소 및 부분들간의 관련과 상호작용 또는 인간관계를 관찰하고 분석할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 둘째, 복잡한 간호문제를 부문별, 요소별로 분석하는 능력을 기른다. 셋째, 자료의 형태, 구조, 형식의 특징과 조직을 분석하는 능력을 기른다. 제언 7 종합 능력면 첫째, 간호계획 절차를 창안할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 둘째, 자기의 생각을 효율적으로 전달하는 능력을 기른다. 셋째, 특수한 간호 현상이나 기본적 명제에서 어떤 추상적 관계를 연역해 낼 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 제언 8 응용능력면 첫째, 간호문제를 해결하는데 실제로 응용 할 수 있는 교육을 시킨다. 둘째, 간호이론을 구체적인 상황에 효율적으로 응용할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 셋째, 지역사회의 특성에 알맞은 간호기술이나 간호절차를 창안할 수 있는 능력을 기른다. 넷째, 간호방법을 모색하고 이용하는 능력을 기른다. 다섯째, 조사를 통해 합리적이고 논리적인 결론을 내릴 수 있는 능력을 기른다.

• Communications of Mathematical Education
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.85-108
• /
• 2009

The purposes of the study were to develop instructional materials based on Freudenthal's guided reinvention principle for teaching proofs and to investigate how the teaching method based on guided reinvention principle affects on 8th grade students' ability to write proofs and learning attitude toward proofs. Teaching based on guided reinvention principle placed emphasis on providing students opportunities to make a mathematical statement and prove the statement by themselves throughout various activities such as exploring, conjecturing, and testing the conjectures. The study found that students who studied proving with instructional materials developed by guided reinvention principle showed statistically higher mean scores on the posttest than students who studied by a traditional teaching method depending onteacher's explanation. Especially, on the posttest item which requested to prove a whole statement without presenting a picture corresponding to the statement, a big difference among students' responses was found. Many more students in the traditional group did not provide any response on the item. According to the results of the questionnaire regarding students' learning attitudes, the group who studied proving by guided reinvention principle indicated relatively more positive attitudes toward learning proofs than the counterparts.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.2 no.2 s.4
• /
• pp.25-54
• /
• 2002

Without much communication, large-scale surveys of public knowledge of, and attitudes to, science (quantitative PUS) and case-study analyses of the public's understandings of science in particular (constructivist PUS) have dominated in the public understanding of science (PUS) area. Not only methodological preference but also a strong antipathy against value-orientations that each approach presumed to have and support has been barriers for quantitative PUS and constructivist PUS to benefit each other. In order to overcome such barriers, this paper demonstrates that value orientations guiding quantitative PUS have been much more diverse than what constructivist PUS researchers might think, and that quantitative PUS has indeed yielded the results consistent with and complementary to constructivist PUS. Finally this paper proposes that (1)quantitative PUS should test propositions provided by constructivist PUS, so that it can contribute much to the construction of more generalizable PUS theories and policies, and (2)constructivist PUS uses the outcome of quantitative PUS to develop more complex case studies which consider heterogeneous publics, trends of public evaluations of science, and how public attitudes to science in the abstract and public attitudes to science in particular in a specific context have effect on each other.

• Education of Primary School Mathematics
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.123-145
• /
• 2013

This study was expected to yield the meaningful conclusions from the experimental group who took lessons based on inductive activities using GeoGebra at the beginning of proof learning and the comparison one who took traditional expository lessons based on deductive activities. The purpose of this study is to give some helpful suggestions for teaching proof to mathematically gifted elementary students. To attain the purpose, two research questions are established as follows. 1. Is there a significant difference in proof abilities between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? 2. Is there a significant difference in proof attitudes between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? To solve the above two research questions, they were divided into two groups, an experimental group of 10 students and a comparison group of 10 students, considering the results of gift and aptitude test, and the computer literacy among 20 elementary students that took lessons at some education institute for the gifted students located in K province after being selected in the mathematics. Special lesson based on the researcher's own lesson plan was treated to the experimental group while explanation-centered class based on the usual 8th grader's textbook was put into the comparison one. Four kinds of tests were used such as previous proof ability test, previous proof attitude test, subsequent proof ability test, and subsequent proof attitude test. One questionnaire survey was used only for experimental group. In the case of attitude toward proof test, the score of questions was calculated by 5-point Likert scale, and in the case of proof ability test was calculated by proper rating standard. The analysis of materials were performed with t-test using the SPSS V.18 statistical program. The following results have been drawn. First, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in proof ability than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Second, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in the belief and attitude toward proof than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Third, the survey about 'the effect of inductive activities using GeoGebra on the proof' shows that 100% of the students said that the activities were helpful for proof learning and that 60% of the reasons were 'because GeoGebra can help verify processes visually'. That means it gives positive effects on proof learning that students research constant character and make proposition by themselves justifying assumption and conclusion by changing figures through the function of estimation and drag in investigative software GeoGebra. In conclusion, this study may provide helpful suggestions in improving geometry education, through leading students to learn positive and active proof, connecting the learning processes such as induction based on activity using GeoGebra, simple deduction from induction(i.e. creating a proposition to distinguish between assumptions and conclusions), and formal deduction(i.e. proving).

• Lingua Humanitatis
• /
• v.8
• /
• pp.39-58
• /
• 2006

In Hegels Wissenschaft der Logik wird die Idee als Leben des Begriffes, objektive Vollendung und Einheit von Subjekt und Objekt bezeichnet. Die Idee ist die Einheit von Begriff und dessen Existenz und des weiteren die "allgemeine Bedeutung des wahren Seins". Die Idee ist nicht die Namensgebung einer Abstraktion der Sache als abstrakte Sache oder einer reinen Form, sondern 'das Werden zum Diesem' oder 'das Diese' des konkreten und realistischen Objektes 'Dies hier und jetzt'. Auf einer solchen logischen Bestimmung beruhend, behauptet Hegel in seiner ${\ddot{A}}sthetik$ die Gleichheit zwischen "$Sch{\ddot{o}}nheit$" selbst und der "Idee der $Sch{\ddot{o}}nheit$". "Das $Sch{\ddot{o}}ne$ selbst" ist gleichzusetzen mit der "Idee der $Sch{\ddot{o}}nheit$" und wenn die Idee in einer bestimmte Form hineinpasst, wird dies das Ideale genannt. Hier liegt der Grund, weshalb wir die Idee als Begriff, Begriff des Daseins oder Einheit des Objektes bezeichnen $k{\ddot{o}}nnen$. Die Idee ist die Einheit von Begriff und dessen $Realit{\ddot{a}}t$, jedoch ist die dominierende Kraft der Einheit der Begriff. Die Idee ist die $Totalit{\ddot{a}}t$ der subjektiven Bestimmung und nur das Werk dass mit dem Begriff passend Einheit und $Objektivit{\ddot{a}}t$ hervorbringt, ist wirklich $sch{\ddot{o}}n$. Umgekehrt gesagt bedeutet diese Aussage, dass etwas wirklich $sch{\ddot{o}}n$ ist, wenn dies zu dem Begriff passt, und dass das genau zum Begriff passende ist mit dem Begriff gleichzusetzen ist. Wie bereits $bewu{\beta}t$, hat Kant die $f{\ddot{u}}r$ den kognitiven Begriff verantwortliche bestimmende Urteilskraft und das ${\ddot{a}}sthetische$ Urteil treffende reflektierende Urteilskraft, differenziert. Im Gegensatz dazu $erkl{\ddot{a}}rt$ Hegel die Beziehung zwischen Sein und Denken, Dasein und Begriff, Begriff und Idee mit dem Blickpunkt dass das $Verm{\ddot{o}}gen$ und die Funktion der Urteilskraft selbst eine grundliegend auf Reflektion beruhende Bestimmung ist und eine auf Bestimmung beruhende Reflektion ist. Nach dieser Logik entsprechend $f{\ddot{u}}hrt$ er die Beziehung zwischen der $sch{\dodt{o}}nen$ Sache und $Sch{\ddot{o}}nheit$ zusammen. In dieser $Erkl{\ddot{a}}rung$ verwirft Hegel Kants Begriffe wie Urteilskraft und Geschmack, und verwendet vorwiegend die von seiner Lehre vom Begriff auftauchende Begriffe. Die Zielsetzung dieser Arbeit ist, den Satz in Hegels ${\ddot{A}sthetik$ "Das $Sch{\ddot{o}}ne$ ist die Idee des $Sch{\ddot{o}}nen$" auf den Grund zu gehen. Um dieses Ziel zu verfolgen, wird das epistemologische $Verh{\ddot{a}}ltnis$ zwischen Dasein und Begriff, das logische $Verh{\ddot{a}}ltnisas$ zwischen Begriff und Idee betrachtet.

• (The) Research of the performance art and culture
• /
• no.36
• /
• pp.415-440
• /
• 2018

On September 23, 2015, the Ministry of Education announced the 2015 revision of educational curriculum which aimed at 'cultivating creative talents' based on the Article 23, Section 2 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Law. As a result, music curriculum have also been partially revised, which seems to maintain the 2009 revision of music curriculum. Although Jeongganbo 井間譜 is already exposed in the music curriculum for the third and forth grades of elementary school, the learning content about how to read Jeongganbo and how to express the pitch and length of sound including the origin of its name and the background of its invention are dealt with specifically in the fifth and sixth grades. Jeongganbo is known as the oldest mensural notation in the Orient created by King Sejong of the Joseon Dynasty in the middle of the $15^{th}$ century, and it was used for the first time in Sejong sillok akbo 世宗實錄樂譜 (Scores in the Annals of King Sejong), the oldest musical score still in existence. However, in the music textbooks as well as the most of specialized books related to the Korean traditional music, it is uncritically accepted without providing clear grounds that Sejong invented Jeongganbo himself. If so, it is necessary to investigate on which grounds it is claimed that Sejong invented Jeongganbo. This paper first examined the grounds of the proposition that "Sejong invented Jeongganbo," which is introduced in the music textbooks for the fifth and sixth grades of elementary school, by separating it into Sejong's creation of Sinak 新樂 (new music), Sejo's invention of Jeongganbo and Sejong's invention of Hangeul. Next, this paper examined how the subject of the invention of Jeongganbo has been described in the textbooks for the fifth and sixth grades in elementary school based on the 2009 revision of music curriculum, and suggested the direction of a desirable music education by pointing out the related problems. According to historical records and circumstances such as Sejong's creation of Sinak, Sejo's invention of Jeongganbo with 16 Jeonggan (square) in one vertical line, Sejong's invention of Hangeul and so on, it seems to be the most reasonable that Sejong is the subject of the invention of Jeongganbo as of now. However, the attitude of the musical academy to accept and educate the unclear thing as if it is a fact does not seem desirable. Therefore, I suggest that it should be described "Jeongganbo was invented in the period of Sejong" or "it is supposed that Jeongganbo was invented by Sejong" rather than presenting "Sejong made Jeongganbo" or "created" until revealing the clear evidence about the subject of Jeongganbo.