• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.225-256
• /
• 2010

The two school $M{\bar{a}}dhyamika$ and $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ act as a representative of $Mah{\bar{a}}y{\bar{a}}na$ Buddhism in India. But the two school disputed with each other insisting ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nyat{\bar{a}}-v{\bar{a}}da$ and $vij{\tilde{n}}aptim{\bar{a}}trav{\bar{a}}da$ separately. To introduce the disputation shortly is as follow. $N{\bar{a}}g{\bar{a}}rjuna$ explained the world and truth by two truth theories(二諦說) which carry out truth of a word and the dimension(spiritual enlightenment) which is absolute(ultimate) to it being lokasaṁvṛtisatya(世俗諦) about the truth which can be expressed verbally, and which is phenomenon-like (everyday) at paramaarthasatya(勝義諦). By the way, lokasaṁvṛtisatya and paramaarthasatya are actually distinction of the recognition which is not an ontological distinction. That is, lokasaṁvṛti(世俗) is paramaartha(勝義) as it is the time of seeing by the eyes of those who have realized. The two truth theories of $N{\bar{a}}g{\bar{a}}rjuna$ was developed logical more precisely by his successors. With an everyday language, the position of Candrakīrti(月稱) that it cannot be expressed as the position of $Bh{\bar{a}}vaviveka$(淸辨) that paramaarthasatya can be expressed logically is opposed to each other, and dissociates by $Sv{\bar{a}}tantrika$(自立論證派) and $P{\bar{a}}rsagika$(歸謬論證派). Confrontation of $Sv{\bar{a}}tantrika$ and $P{\bar{a}}rsagika$ is the dispute about the ability of s which is the highest truth to be proved logically. The $P{\bar{a}}rsaga$ of Candrakirti thinks that people exist truly, and is because it claims not existing in the world where a favorite thing is actually actual. However, $Bh{\bar{a}}vaviveka$ proved Sunyata(空性)을 positively based on the reliance to language and logic. Also the mokṣa of $M{\bar{a}}dhyamika$ is not recovery of original condition of $vij{\tilde{n}}apti$ which is pure in itself as $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ saying, as well as obtaining a thing which is dravya-sat as $Sarv{\bar{a}}stiv{\bar{a}}din$ saying. The mokṣa of $M{\bar{a}}dhyamika$ means a condition of liberated from karma and pains through extinction of $prapa{\tilde{n}}ca$ and discrimination by realizing the real aspect of all dharma which is said by pratītyasamutpāda, $praj{\tilde{n}}apti$, niḥsvabhāva, ${\acute{s}}{\bar{u}}nya$, $madhyam{\bar{a}}pratipad$.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.389-410
• /
• 2010

Augustin wurde sozusagen von der Rhetorik zum Christentum bekehrt. Der einstmalige Rhetorikprofessor (bis 386) distanziert sich von seiner $fr{\ddot{u}}heren$ Kunst. Aber er $kn{\ddot{u}}pft$ als Bischof im vierten Buch seiner weniger bekannten Schrift "De doctrina Christiana" (DDC; abgef. 427) wieder an die antike Rhetorik, speziell an Cicero, an. So wird die augustinische $Sp{\ddot{a}}tschrift$ $f{\ddot{u}}r$ eine antike Rhetorik in christlicher Verwendung gehalten. Es stellt nun die Frage, was Augustin zur $R{\ddot{u}}ckkehr$ zu seiner $fr{\ddot{u}}heren$ Kunst bewegte. Neuere Forschungen sehen in Augustins Werk eine Grundlage der mittelalterlichen Predigttheorie oder einen $blo{\ss}en$ Versuch, die Rhetorik vom Makel des Sophistischen zu befreien. Gewiss ist seine Einstellung zur "leeren Beredsamkeit" der Sophistik eindeutig, aber dies war eine Haltung, die letztlich von allen seinen christlichen Zeitgenossen geteilt wurde und folglich eines geringen Beweises bedurfte. Die Aufmerksamkeit, die Augustins $sp{\ddot{a}}terem$ Einfluss und seiner Ablehnung der Zweiten Sophistik geschenkt wird, kann den Blick $tr{\ddot{u}}ben$ $f{\ddot{u}}r$ seine Rolle bei der $L{\ddot{o}}sung$ eines christlichen Dilemmas aus dem vierten Jahrhundert. Augustin sah die Gefahren einer entgegengesetzten rhetorischen $H{\ddot{a}}resie$. Die $S{\ddot{u}}nde$ des Sophisten besteht darin, dass er die Notwendigkeit des Inhalts verneint und glaubt, nur die forma alleine sei $w{\ddot{u}}nschenswert$. Der gegenteilige Fehler, dem Geschichtsschreiber der Rhetorik niemals einen Namen gegeben haben, beruht auf dem Glauben, dass derjenige, der im Besitz der Wahrheit ist, auch ipso facto in der Lage ist, die Wahrheit anderen zu ${\ddot{u}}bermitteln$. Es handelt sich um eine $ausschlie{\ss}liche$ $Abh{\ddot{a}}ngigkeit$ von der materia. Augustin erkannte eine Gefahr und benutzte DDC dazu, eine Verbindung von Inhalt und Form in der christlichen Predigt voranzutreiben. Nur wenn man daher das Buch als einen Teil der $gro{\ss}en$ Debatte des vierten Jahrhunderts ansieht, tritt seine historische Bedeutung klar hervor. Der Leser ist beeindruckt davon, dass der Autor darauf insistiert, es sei eine Torheit, dem Feind ein $n{\ddot{u}}tzliches$ Instrument zu ${\ddot{u}}berlassen$. Augustin $erkl{\ddot{a}}rt$, dass die Kunst der Beredsamkeit rege in Gebrauch genommen und nicht kurzerhand abgelehnt werden solle, weil sie mit dem Makel des Heidentums behaftet sei. Kurz gesagt, geplant ist das vierte Buch von DDC als eine ratio eloquentiae Christianae.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.141
• /
• pp.43-62
• /
• 2017

The main purpose of this paper is to survey the debates between Searle and Smith over the problem of "freestanding Y terms" in Searle's conception of social reality, and offer a viable solution, drawing on the experientialist conception of symbolic experience. Smith raises the problem of "freestanding Y term" against Searle's formula "X counts as Y in C" that there may be some cases where we cannot identify an X term to which an Y term refers. In case of an abstract concept such as equity, we may not find exactly what it stands for. That is, we cannot identify exactly what(X term) counts as equity. If there is nothing like an X for Y term, we can regard anything as equity, which may disrupt Searle's formula. Understandably, Smith does not say that the problem dismantles Searle's whole conception of social reality. Instead, Smith intends to show that Searle's formula is neither complete nor specific enough. Apparently, Searle admits that there may be freestanding Y terms and tries to articulate it within his formula, which does not seem to work. I suggest that the experientialist account of symbolic experience may serve to dissolve Smith's challenge, without modifying Searle's original formula. According to the experientialist conception of symbolization, we symbolically map some portion of our experience onto a physical object, which serves as a signifier, and we then understand and experience the signifier "in terms of" the mapped portion of experience. Thus, we experience certain buildings and some relevant people, say students, staffs, and professors in terms of "university." The status functions of university have been created by means of symbolic mappings, which change the way we understand and experience the buildings and people. In this picture, there need not be any notions such as "one-to-one correspondence" between X terms and Y terms. In this way, Searle may maintain his original formula, while dissolving, not answering, Smith's challenge. What Searle needs is a more appropriate theory of symbolization, part of which has been articulated by the experientialist account of symbolic experience.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.121-156
• /
• 2015

Memorials in Joseon Dynasty created a arena where the intellectual and political power met. This thesis traces the process of a certain political faction's rebuilding of the political structure of the elite groups by leading the intellectual controversies through memorials, especially those about the evaluations of Pak Setang(朴世堂) and I Gyeongseok(李景奭). This is what happened: Song Siyeol(宋時烈) submitted a memorial which disputed I Gyeongseok's petition, which provoked complete controversies around the memorials between Noron(老論) and Soron(少論). This led to the academic censorship against Sabyeonrok written by Pak Setang. The analysis of act of writing and submission of memorials by Noron and the role of the Kim Family of An-dong(安東 金門) specifically is the main topic here. The members of Soron ceaselessly criticized Song Siyeol, while the Kim Family strongly defended him. The trigger of the strife was a letter written by Kim Chang-Heup(金昌翕), a member of the Kim Family and the Kims played a significant role in the background during the process of political fights using memorials. The series of memorials criticized or supported certain political figure or his writings, but the opinions of Noron and Soron were directly opposite to each other. Even though the expressed difference was the result of the existing political factions, however, it also caused the new power structure of elite groups. The expressions and logics used in the arguments also have its significance. The Noron's memorials evaluated the contemporary people and their writings based on Chu-Hsi and Song Siyeol, who was regarded as a identical figure of Chu-Hsi. The arguments and writing strategies in this regard gained political strength enough to reorganize the intellectual society by changing alignment of political parties, and this led to the rebuilding of academic environment afterward.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.103-128
• /
• 2008

King Jeongjo had lost his father, Sado-Seja(Prince Sado) by Noron(Older Faction). Especially those who tried to kill Sado-Seja and king Jeongjo consisted of king's family-in-law of king Youngjo and Sado-Seja. Therefore king Jeongjo's first goal was to strengthen his kingship than other things because he could gain the throne overcoming the strong hinderance of Noron and king's family-in-law. King Jeongjo requested his subjects to be "Kukbyon-In"(國邊人: a person for king) pointing out the harm of the king's family-in-law and "Tangpyong-Dang"(蕩平黨: the strongest faction consisted under the rule of king Youngjo). For the purpose, king Jeongjo built up "Gyujang-Gak". Gyujang-Gak was spoken to contain and protect the writings of earlier kings superficially, but in reality, it was an apparatus to gain and train the friendly subjects for king Jeongjo. Like that, it was the most important for king Jeongjo to suppress the king's family-in-low and to win Neo-Confucian lterati over to himself's side. Until now, the politics of Joseon Dynasty had been mainly explained on the point of view of "Seonghak-Non"(聖學論). "Seonghak-Non" means that Neo-Confucian lterati were treated as real hero, not kings in the political space of Joseon Dynasty and the role of factions were recognized important. But king Jeongjo denied these ideological stream and tried to change that political system. King Jeongjo wanted to strengthen the throne through the method which insisted the king as a hero in politics. For the purpose, king Jeongjo criticized the Neo-Confucian literati's viewpoint about politics and learning at that time and anticipated to be sole leader of politics and learning on that critique. King Jeongjo aimed to destroy the dignity of "Salim"(山林: Neo-Confucian Sages) with attacking their wrong behaviors. King Jeongjo also criticized the period of king Injo when the regime of "Sarim"(士林: pure Neo-Confucian lterati) faction fully appeared as the starting period when the factional harms were getting worse. King Jeongjo wanted to previously block the oppositions to win subjects over to himself's side with criticizing the period of king Injo and to take away the initiative from his opponents with insisting "Salim-Muyongnon"(山林無用論: a theory ignoring Neo-Confucian Sages). King Jeongjo's critique was not limited just on the system of factional politics. "Seonghak-Non" eventually took root in Neo-Confucianism. Therefore king Jeongjo criticized Neo-Confucianism. He insisted that the essence of Chinese Classics was pragmatical learning, not Neo-Confucianism. Through that critique, king Jeongjo aimed to destroy the ideological base of his opponents. However, king Jeongjo failed to be a sole leader of his subjects in the both boundaries of politics and learning even though he criticized the Neo-Confucian lterati's viewpoint about politics and learning. Because he abruptly died leaving his reformational scheme behind as well as his loyal subjects guarding himself against Noron Byeok-Pa(老論 ?派: the opposing party in Older Faction) were gone behind himself. The politics of Joseon Dynasty returned to more powerful politics for king's family-in-law after king Jeongjo's death.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.54 no.2
• /
• pp.154-169
• /
• 2021

The establishment of the Bronze Age is one of the most important achievements suggested by Korean archaeology shortly after liberation. There is no doubt that Moo-Byung Yoon is the representative figure, who refuted the ambiguous Eneolithic age (金石倂用期) created by Japanese scholars and settled the concept of the Bronze Age. In this article, the author takes a new look at Yoon's institutional role in studying the Bronze Age in Korea. Until now, Yoon's representative achievement has been his typology of the Slender dagger of the Korean Peninsula. However, it is not less important that Yoon also established the Bronze Age concept with the excavation of a dolmen and a Bronze Age subterranean dwelling in Oksok-ni, Paju during the 1960s. Of course, it was not a personal assignment for Yoon. He was aided by Prof. Kim Won-Yong's work, who had introduced newly excavated materials from North Korea and China; these materials gave some insight for establishing the Bronze Age concepts in the 1960 and 1970s. Kim's suggestion about the possibility of a Korean Bronze Age led to Yoon's refined typological study on Korea's bronze wares. However, Yoon's excessive schematic classification of artifacts and reliance on the Japanese chronology became an obstacle for making the Korean Bronze Age isolated from East Asia. As a result, it is regrettable that his research led to the "cultural lag" phenomenon of Bronze Age research. Meanwhile, Japanese archaeology, which had influenced Yoon, also faced a major change. In 2003, the Japanese archaeological community revised the Yayoi culture's beginning around the 1,000 BC. This means a shift in the perception that we should understand Japan's Bronze Age in the context of the East Asian continent. Of course, it is not appropriate to reevaluate or denigrate Yoon's research from the current view. Rather, it is necessary to recognize the limitations of Yoon's time and present a new path to research by combining the archaeological tradition of refining research on the relics he maintained with a new chronological view and a macro view of East Asian archaeology. This is why we should take a new glimpse into Yoon's research.

• Journal of Popular Narrative
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.9-37
• /
• 2020

The present study examines the transnational "Hallyu" (the Korean wave) phenomenon after the 1990s in the context of a solidarity movement of East Asian women. It also focuses on the passion for the world stage given the cultural industry was supported by the government as a "chimney-less factory" during the IMF financial crisis. Over the past twenty years and through Hallyu 1.0, Hallyu 2.0, and Hallyu 3.0, "K-entertainment" has been advocated, as a concept that encompasses K-drama, K-pop, etc. in the cultural industry. Furthermore, everything Korean, through K-culture, is being put at the forefront. However, there is insufficient discussion regarding the actions of the women who led the Korean wave. This paper examines the female fans and girl groups who played leading roles in the rise of popular culture and its transnational prominence within the context of the female agency and female labor involved. The lack of acknowledgment of their roles is linked to the current erasure of the discussion on the female youth. Discussion on "woman" is still limited to the domain of reproduction in the generational discussion that has replaced the existing nation-state or class led discussions in the current era of neoliberalism. However, since The reboot or the popularity of feminism in recent years, the interest in the female narrative, in works such as 'Kim Ji-young, Born 1982' has been expanding beyond East Asia to the rest of the world. Just as Hallyu was created by women in the beginning, there is a new trend in which women across national borders are joining in solidarity. As such, the present study attempts to prove that the female fan, girl group, and female youths must be one meta-narrative through a feminist reading, rather than individuals with separate identities.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.51 no.2
• /
• pp.94-102
• /
• 2023

The Florence Charter, established in 1981 by the ICOMOS-IFLA International Commission on Historic Gardens, considered the historic garden as a plant-dominated architectural composition, a perpetual balance between the artist and the artisan's desire to remain unaltered in perpetuity. Trees, the main component of the garden, require continuous management as they repeat their creation and calling according to the cycle of the seasons and accordingly, it is suggested that management to maintain the appearance of trees in Korean palaces was an indispensable element. Although it is an important matter to historically verify the tree management techniques of the palaces of the past, research has been difficult due to the absence of historical records and the disconnection of life due to the Japanese colonial period. In addition, according to the view that trees were not generally managed in the palace, research on palace tree management techniques has not been conducted so far. Therefore, this study aimed to examine whether or not the tree management of the palaces was performed in the past through expert interviews based on photographs taken in modern times. With the identification of tree species and pruning through in-depth interviews with experts using photographs taken in the modern period, the results are as follows. First, it was found that the shapes of trees and leaves could be identified through photographs and by observing the phenomena caused by planting and pruning, it was possible to estimate whether or not the tree management was implemented in the modern palace. Second, as a result of in-depth interviews with 8 experts in 4 fields, it was possible to determine the tree species and pruning status, purpose, and method. There was no significant difference in opinions between groups, and the evidence was clearly presented. Third, the type of management of trees in the palace was mainly found to be determination of the types of tree, removal of hazardous factors of trees, and management of lower vegetation and through the photographs of Jondeokjeong and Gwanwanjeong, it was confirmed that the trees were managed even before the Japanese colonial era, considering the time of filming. Based on the photographs taken, it was possible to estimate whether the trees were managed before the Japanese colonial period through expert interviews. However, it could not be clarified due to lack of historical materials as to whether it was carried out on its own according to the circumstances of the times or by the Japanese Empire. Still, in this study, evidence was obtained to refute the view that trees of the palace were not managed in the past through the collected data. Expert opinions supporting this view were collected to make the conclusion. In addition, based on the general theory of pruning, an empirical review of expert opinions was conducted to secure the reliability of the research results.

• Journal of Popular Narrative
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.429-462
• /
• 2019

This paper argues how the concept of melodrama can be articulated with the Affect Theory and Posthumanism in relation to animal or environment representation which have emerged as the new topics of the recent era. The argument will be made through the discussion of Agustin Zarzosa's book, Refiguring Melodrama in Film and Television: Captitve Affects, Elastic Sufferings, Vicarious Objects. Using a genealogical approach, the book revisits the notion of mode, affect, suffering (hysteria), and excess which have been dealt with in the existing studies of melodrama. In chapter one, he broadens the concept of melodrama as a mode into the means of redistribution of suffering across the whole society in the mechanism of the duo of evil and virtue. It is the opposition of Brooks's argument in which melodrama functions as the means of proving the distinction between evil and virtue. Chapter two focuses on the fact that melodrama is an elastic system of specification rather than a system of signification, with the perspective of Deleuzian metaphysics. Through the analysis of Home from the Hill (Vincente Minnelli, 1959), this chapter pays attention to an 'affect' generated by the encounters between the bodies and the Mise-en-Scène as a flow not of a meaning but of an affect. Chapter three argues that melodrama should reveal an unloved (woman's) suffering, opposing the discussion on the role of melodrama as the recovery of moral order. Safe (Todd Haynes, 1995), dealing with female suffering caused by the industrial and social environment, elaborates on the arguments on melodrama in relation to female hysteria with ecocritical standpoints. The rest of the two chapters discusses the role of melodrama for the limitation and extension of the notion of the human through 'animal' and 'posthuman' melodrama. It argues that the concept of melodrama as 'excess' and 'sacrifice' blurs the boundary between human and inhuman. In summary, although the author Zarzosa partly agrees with Peter Brook's notion of mode, affect and sufferings,he elaborates the concept of melodrama, by articulating philosophical arguments such as Deleuzianism, feminism, and posthumanism (Akira Lippit and Carry Wolf) with the melodrama. Thefore, Zarzosa challenges the concepts of melodrama led by Brooks, which had been canonical in the field.

• Journal of Ethics
• /
• no.77
• /
• pp.73-112
• /
• 2010

This study aims to explore the character and problem of multicultural society in Korea in terms of the concept of moral panics. Its major issues are dealt with as follows: Firstly, this essay will apply two concepts of culture in multiculturalism - the pattern of meaning and a study of perfection- to three degrees of multicultural members: by individual, by groups and by a society as a whole. In this approach, moral panics of multicultural society in Korea have been manipulated by the secondary definitions like Korean government and media. In this study, however, the resource of the panics would be seen as nationalism in Korean history. To remove it in this essay, the conception of the pattern of meaning, which makes members understand others outer their norms, should be harmonized with that of a study of perfection by which they have identities. Secondly, the main subject of multiculturalism in Korea should at least be majority (groups)-Korean, not minority (groups)-foreigners. A stereotype of foreigners by majority is an image distorted by nationalities and races. People, for example, with the white skin from advanced countries are recognized as superior, while those born in the countries of Southeast Asia are, consciously or unconsciously, discriminated and have low positions due to socio-economic stratification in Korea. In this sense, a study of multicultural society in Korea should go forward to the inner direction to majority, because it is one of the real moral panics in Korea. In conclusion, it is important that there must be a study of identity which we can have of others in multicultural studies of Korea. It enables us to meet the conception of diversity. In that Korean government and media have neglected the danger of nationalism, it is also necessary that this study have any foundation of morality in ethics, which can give useful alternatives to the given polices of the secondary definitions.