• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.126
• /
• pp.25-52
• /
• 2013

In this thesis, the author will examine how modern philosophical expression manifests in the field of ethics based on Kant's Ethics. The author will critically assess whether Kant's Ethics is an appropriate rational theoretical alternative to overcome today's ecological crisis. In the first section, the author lists the characteristics of modernity. The purpose of this section is to show why Kant's Ethics must be understood in the context of modern age and how his ethics expresses the ideology of the modernity(I). In the second section, the author will analyze the challenge Kant's Ethics face in relation to ecological crisis from the context of dualism between person and thing(II). In the last section, the author will inspect the flaw of Kant's Ethics based on his positive position regarding vicarious duties toward animals, and pose the basic direction of the theory of ecological publicness that can overcome the limits of Kant's Ethics in the context of a critical reconstruction of neo-confucian tradition(III).

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.146
• /
• pp.1-24
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this paper is to explore the meaning of theoretical ethics regarding bioethics. First, I explore the meanings and limitations of the bioethics domain for 'the principle of equal consideration of interests' and the 'preference utilitarianism' concepts Singer presents. Secondly, I emphasize the significance of Kant's ethics in the domain of bioethics. Lastly, I suggest that Aristotle's virtue ethics should be realized in the domain of bioethics. Furthermore, I would like to suggest the meaning of human life through this. Singer's argument brings up a new topic about the meaning of evolved life not considered in the history of traditional ethics. He presented undeniable opinions about human dignity that he took for granted. In addition, it is assessed that the scope extension for the life respect target has been reasonably achieved. Contrary to this, Kant's ethics explains the meaning of human dignity based on its metaphysical meaning. Furthermore, it provides an appropriate orientation for human life. Embracing their claims is not sufficient to explain the meaning of Good Life. The meaning of Good Life is likely to be resolved through the application of Aristotle's virtue ethics. The meaning of a being of substance is living and furthermore, it is inherent to being itself.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.29
• /
• pp.125-152
• /
• 2010

The main purpose of this dissertation is a introductive proposal to reconstruct confucian moral principles. The most classical question in moral principles is : what is the good. In order to reconstruct confucian moral principles, this dissertation begin with question of what is the good in confucian moral principles. Confucianism believe in reality of the human good mind and good nature. Confucian the human good mind and good nature is comprised of benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom. Benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom(四德) is the origin of morality. Confucian's moral principles of human relationship is none other than conscientiousness and altruism. Conscientiousness is a principle of self-cultivation and self-revelation. As to altruism, confucious said, "the man of perfect virtue, wishing to be established himself", or "do not impose on others what you do not desire others to impose upon you." Altruism is rectified as a principle of reciprocity methodology of the making of whole kingdom peaceful in The Great Learning. Confucian golden rule(conscientiousness and altruism is equal to Kantian categorical imperative 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 ... etc. Kant's three principles of moral philosophy(Categorical Imperatives) imply that the idea of universality, freedom, and the kingdom of ends. We contrast confucian moral principles with Kant's three principles of Categorical Imperatives. In conclusion, confucian moral principles implicate Kant's principle of universalizability and impartiality.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• no.114
• /
• pp.27-51
• /
• 2016

According to Kant, morality is an institution that preserves and promotes humanity. However, some pathologies can be found in morality. Nietzsche is the one who severely criticized pathologies of morality, especially in terms of the phenomenon of "self-deception". Those who support Kantian tradition, can also learn from Nietzsche's criticism. But they regard "respect" as the fundamental moral attitude. This is different from Nietzsche's "pathos of distance", which is based on disrespect and contempt.

• (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)

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.142
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2017

Kant's doctrine of virtue shows how an actor should behave morally in an individual situation with moral law defines the limits of human action. There is latitude for action in the course of formulating the maxims of action by an actor. And moral judgement, as Aristotle's Pronesis, is very important in the latitude for action. In the doctrine of virtue, Kant suggests two kinds of duty of virtue: one's own perfeciton as an obligatory end, and the happiness to others as an obligatory end-and raises the question of casuistics for each. However, this was the practice and training for the human moral life by application of the moral law. In particular, Kant saw that ethics does not give laws for action, but only give laws for the maxims of action, and further intended to realize the practice in a proper way of seeking truth through casuistical questions. Thus, Kant points out that the casuistic is related only to ethics in a fragmentary way and is added to ethics only as a comment on the system. According to Kant, virtue and judgment are inevitable to apply categorical imperative in the empirical and realistic world. In other words, virtue and judgment are necessary to enable people who are likely to act in accordance to inclination to live a moral life in accordance with the command of reason. Thus Kant saw that in order to take wide duty into narrow ones, human beings must not only have to cultivate virtues as a strong power of will, but also to exercise judgment. In addition, the distinction between duty of law(narrow obligation) and duty of virtue(wide obligation) is dependent on whether there is a latitude for action in the application of both duties. So the role of virtue and training of judgement is very important in the latitude for action that occurs in the process of formalizing actor's maxims. In detail, as the duty is wider, so man's obligation to action is more imperfect, but the closer to narrow duty(Law) he brings the maxim of observing this duty(in his attitude of will), so much the more perfect is his virtuous action. Thus, it was an effort to show how Kant's best moral principles, that is categorical imperative could be applied to the real world at the time of criticism. Of course, even if it is difficult to assess Kant's efforts as successful, criticizing Kant's ethics as 'formal', 'abstract', or 'monologous' is not persuasive because of critics did not understand his ethics as a whole.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.27
• /
• pp.283-317
• /
• 2016

This research is an attempt to detail the multi-layered ethical characteristics of 'mutual beneficence', shown in the principle of 'guarding against self-deception' in Daesoon Thought while focusing on its major differences as well as the similarities with Kantian and Utilitarian ethical views. In these Western ethical perspectives, the concept of self-deception has received a considerable amount of attention, centering on the context of natural rights and contract theory. Meanwhile, in Daesoon Thought, 'guarding against self-deception' is presented as one of the principal objectives as well as the method or deontological ground for practice. It further encompasses the features of virtue ethics oriented toward the perfection of Dao. Here, the deontological aspect is interlinked with the concept of cultivation and the pursuit of ethics and morals. Hence this makes it a necessary condition for achieving the perfection of Dao, and likewise renders the practice of 'guarding against self-deception' more active through facilitating mutual relations based on the expansion model wherein human nature is characterized as possessing innate goodness. With regard to the tenet of 'resolution of grievances for mutual beneficence,' this concept is presented as a positive ground for practicing virtues toward others without forming grudges. Furthermore, as long as it reveals the great principle of humanity built on conscience, it will come to harmonize practitioners with others and spirits in an expression of beneficence. Moreover, originating in the Dao of Deities, guarding against self-deception is expressed as a form of life ethics and can be suggested as a new alternative for the model of virtue ethics proposed by Nussbaum. All in all, there is a natural causal relationship by which 'guarding against self-deception' in accord one's own conscience and the principle of humanity as a pursuit of perfect virtues in Dao result in the fulfillment of mutual beneficence. This readily akin to how gravity causes water to flow from high ground to low ground. Consequently, these relational features of mutual beneficence can serve an effective alternative to the Western ethical views which also address the need to overcome the egoistic mind which is liable to self-interest and alienation.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• no.93
• /
• pp.121-148
• /
• 2011

The uncodifiability thesis in anti-theory argument is the typical claim for the impossibility of ethical theorizing. Based on this thesis reflecting particularism strongly, contemporary anti-theorists in ethics argue that individual decisions in particular situations cannot be codified into moral principles. The uncodifiability thesis needs to be examined by the following two issues: a theoretical issue of whether the object of codification is moral practices or not; and a practical one of whether moral principles present the decision procedure of moral reasoning or not. The characteristics of practical reasoning show that the object of codification in ethics, as moral theorists insist, is not moral practices but morality itself. Also moral theorists, contrary to the criticisms of anti-theorists, insist that moral reasoning is comprised of not only moral principles but also moral judgments with contextual knowledge and moral wisdom. In brief, moral theorists make a persuasive response to the uncodifiability thesis when they do neither intend to codify moral practices into moral principles nor to deduce the moral reasoning from moral principles. For them moral judgments should be examined by the moral principles which present universal and idealistic morality.