• Title/Summary/Keyword: 불가지론

Search Result 5, Processing Time 0.02 seconds

The Story between Truth and Fiction: Epistemological Approach to Possibility & Limitation of the Re-presentation cinematographic (진실과 거짓 사이에서 이야기하기: 영화적 재현의 한계에 대한 인식론적 고찰)

  • Lee, Sung Wook
    • Cartoon and Animation Studies
    • /
    • s.32
    • /
    • pp.221-244
    • /
    • 2013
  • The purpose of this study was to concentrate on macroscopic discussion about how the recurrence of actual case in move is accepted ideologically. When considering the characteristic that non-visual factors are embodied when movie image reflects a certain target, the issue of recurrence has always caused discussion. Regardless of its independence or dependence, one individual's experience can be similar to sensual recognition but it can't be identical. Therefore, 'the truth recurred by movie' can't be real 'truth'. When director expresses the target, the aesthetic intention gives an effect to audience's emotion and recognition, Therefore, the study tries to review whether the movie truth drawn by movie can reach the possibility of epistemology agreement.

Kant's Categorical Imperative and Chu Hsi's Moral Philosophy (칸트의 정언명법과 주자(朱子)의 도덕철학)

  • Lim, Heon-gyu
    • (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
    • /
    • no.35
    • /
    • pp.297-327
    • /
    • 2009
  • Kant proposed three principles of moral philosophy(Categorical Imperative) and Supreme moral principle in The Fundamental principles of Metaphysics of Ethics : Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law ${\cdots}$ etc. Kant's three principles of moral philosophy(Categorical Imperatives) imply that the idea of universality, freedom, and the kingdom of ends. We contrast Chu Hsi's Moral Philosophy with Kant's three principles of Categorical Imperatives. In conclusion Chu Hsi's moral rules be equal to kantian categorical imperative. These rules implicate principle of universalization, impartiality, and the kingdom of ends. But Chu Hsi believe in reality of the human mind and it's nature. Human mind and it's nature is comprised of benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom. Benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom(四德) is the origin of morality. Chu Hsi's philosophy of LI(理) is metaphysics of Tao-Te(道德) or ontological-metaphysical Ethics. Everyone has created with LI. LI is potentiality of Human beings and the good. Chu Hsi's moral philosophy is distinguished from the traditional theory of the substance and modern scientism(phenomenalism)

Theistic Evolution: between Creationism and Evolutionism (유신진화론: 창조론과 진화론 사이에서)

  • Je, Haejong
    • The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
    • /
    • v.21 no.6
    • /
    • pp.445-455
    • /
    • 2021
  • Interest in the origin of the universe and man has historically been one of the central themes of human inquiry. The question of origin is not just a matter of intellectual curiosity, but a matter of human identity and an important matter of human destiny. The traditional model presented in relation to the origin of man is largely the Christian creationism that all things originated from the Creator, the evolutionary theory that everything happened by chance and evolved from lower to higher animals, and the agnosticism that we cannot know anything about the origin. This study deals with the theory of theistic evolution, a combination of creationism and evolutionism. It is argued that the theory of the evolutionary origin was not an immediate creation, although all things originated from God, but through creation through a long evolutionary process. The theory of theistic evolution was proposed by combining two conflicting theories of origin in a Christian way, which has several essential problems, but this study pointed out two. First, the God of the Bible is reduced to the image of being confined to the laws of nature, not the Almighty Creator. Second, by interpreting the events of the Bible symbolically, it results in rejection of historicity. Therefore, it is more rational to choose either evolutionism or creationism rather than the theory of theistic evolution.

Affective Polarization, Policy versus Party: The 2020 US Presidential Election (정서적 양극화, 정책인가 아니면 정당인가: 2020 미대선 사례)

  • Kang, Miongsei
    • Analyses & Alternatives
    • /
    • v.6 no.2
    • /
    • pp.79-115
    • /
    • 2022
  • This study aims to account for electoral choice in the 2020 presidential election by focusing on social identity which forms the basis for core partisan groups. Two views compete to explain the origins of polarization, policy versus party. One emphasizes policy as more influential in choosing presidential candidates. This follows the tradition of retrospective voting theory in which voters' choice rely on government performance. Incumbent president whose performance proves well are rewarded to be reelected. Policy performance is based on measures around distinctive preferences for government spending. Republican Individuals prefer individual responsibility to government support, while Democratic counterparts support government support. Another perspective put an emphasis on the role partisanship which favors in-party members and disfavors partisan out-groups. Interparty animosity plays the key role in determining electoral behavior. This study relies on the Views of the Electorate Research (VOTER) Survey which provides a panel data of several waves from 2011 to 2020. A comparative evaluation of two views highlights three findings. First, policy matters. Policy preferences of voters are the primary drives of political behavior. Electoral outcomes in 2020 turned out to be the results of policy considerations of voters. 53.7 percent of voters tilted toward individual responsibility voted for Trump, whereas 70.4 percent of those favorable views of government support than individual responsibility voted for Biden. Thus effects of policy correspond to a positive difference of 26.4 percent points. Second, partisanship effects are of similar extent in influencing electoral choice of candidates: Democrats are less likely to vote for Trump by 42.4 percent points, while Republicans are less likely to vote for Biden by 48.7 percent points. Third, animosity of Republicans toward Democrat core groups creates 26.5 percent points of favoring Trump over Biden. Democrat animosity toward Republican core groups creates a positive difference of 13.7 percent points of favoring Biden.