• Journal for History of Mathematics
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.97-114
• /
• 2009

Whitehead is a greatest mathematical philosopher who expanded mathematical concepts and method in philosophy. In view of Whitehead that he emphasizeson metaphysical perspective, mathematical truth and empirical connection of reality, it explicates that it tends to empiricism and rationalism of mathematical philosophy. In this paper, we try to research his unique perspective of mathematical philosophy. His perspective on organic philosophy is combination of empiricism trend and rationalism trend of mathematical philosophy.

• Journal of Energy Engineering
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.40-60
• /
• 2020

When various kinds of products are produced from a single energy system, the methodology which allocates the common cost to each product cost is very important because it is directly related with the profit and loss of producer and purchaser. In the cost allocation methodology of electricity and heat for CHP, there are heat method, work method, benefit distribution method, exergy method, and so on. Benefit distribution method is the most widely known worldwide, and exergy method is widely recognized among thermal engineers. As a result of review, it is judged that the rationality of benefit distribution method is low because the result deviates from common sense, and the rationality of exergy method is high because the result consistent with common sense. In accounting, it is calculated as merit methodology and the result is used for negotiations between producer and buyer, but In thermal engineering, the rationality of exergy methodology is described only as a thesis. The purpose of this study is to compare and examine the rationality of merit methodology and exergy methodology, and the aim is to describe in detail in order that producer and buyer can understand the rationality of each methodology.

• The Science & Technology
• /
• no.8 s.459
• /
• pp.94-95
• /
• 2007

• Archives of design research
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.167-176
• /
• 1998

The modern contains many problems that cannot be solved by the reductionism based on western natual science. Up until now, it has been formed determinism over the basis of empiricism or rationalism, this can be called a mechanical view of the world. In the field of natural science since 20C, however, raised the standard of revolt in traditional determinism, plural theory headed up. Consequently, in the name of post modernity, western reason became to deconstruct, further, new theory came to need. This new paradigm also affected design, and was studied to overcome the limitation of modern design.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.25-43
• /
• 2009

이 논문은 유형 유물론의 인과적 논변과 양립할 수 있는 합리적 인과성, 곧 주관적 인과성의 한 존재론을 주장한다. 의욕들과 결심들 같은 의지적 마음은 능동적이다. 반면에, 욕망들과 믿음들 같은 정서적 인지적 마음은 수동적이다. 의지는 욕망과 믿음의 단순한 법칙적 결과가 아니다. 행위자가 개입한 합리적 결과이다. 따라서 의지 상태는 인과적 유형화를 갖지 못하므로 물리적으로 환원될 길이 없어 보인다. 구조적인 기초원자들이 연합해 움직이는 어떤 원자 모임을 행위자로 본다면, 행위자 원인은 하향적 인과를 함축하지 않는다. 그리고 유형 유물론 논변은 환원주의를 함축하지 않는다. 환원주의는 개념적 정의를 추가로 요구하기 때문이다. 따라서 인과의 주관적 개념, 행위자 개념이 유형 유물론을 배제하지 않는다.

• Korean Journal of Cognitive Science
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.245-254
• /
• 2007

It is an orthodox in epistemology that only those things that affect the truth conduciveness of a belief are relevant to the epistemic rationality of the belief. I criticize this orthodox. In this paper, 1 claim that the epistemic worth of a subject affects the epistemic rationality of inquiries and resulting beliefs. More specifically, I argue that it is epistemically irrational to conduct an inquiry when it is about something unworthy of knowing, and that the epistemic irrationality of an inquiry in this sense makes the resulting beliefs epistemically irrational. After presenting my argument, I defend it from various possible criticisms. Then I explicate the implications of my argument that opposes the core assumptions of contemporary epistemology.

• Proceedings of the Korea Water Resources Association Conference
• /
• 2004.05b
• /
• pp.173-177
• /
• 2004

수리${\cdot}$수문 분석시 비교내상으로 사용되고 있는 기존 합리식을 국내외 자료를 통해 고찰하여 적합한 확률론적 합리식을 나타내고, 선행강우조건, 토지 이용도, 경사도, 그리고 재현기간이 고려된 수정 유출계수를 제시한 후, 유출계수의 객관적인 산출이 가능한 GIS기법을 도입하여 설계자의 주관을 배제할 수 있도록 하며, 국내 시험유험에 적용하여 유역 특성이 고려된 유출량을 산정할 수 있도록 하는 것이다. 제안된 수정유출계수는 국내 시험유역의 하나인 설마천 자연하천유역에 도입하여 적합성 여부를 검토하였으려, 자연하천유역에서 사용가능한 수정유출계수를 제안하였다.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.446-453
• /
• 2021

This paper deals with two methods regarding fact and value. One is the method of H. Putnam, which is to break the boundary between fact and value and to make a world where the two have an inherent connection. The other is the method of J. Habermas, which regards fact and value as the product of an intersubjective agreement based on argumentation. Putnam, through his position of internal realism, moves from realism to pragmatism, especially by combining the rationalist tradition of Kant and Dewey's pragmatic views. Habermas also stands in the tradition of rationalism and universalism in Kant, at the same time emphasizing the practicability of truth in Hegel's tradition of historical reason. The significance of the strategy of Putnam and Habermas is that they have attempted to revive the realm of value against the strict dichotomy of facts and values and the subsequent devaluation of rationality in the realm of value. The starting point of this attempt is that the practical foundation of rationality is laid on life and practice. This could provide the room for escaping from rationality, which prioritizes only truths that reveal facts, that is, instrument-reduced rationality, the room for the revival of practical rationality through reflection on what is the purpose of life, and, in turn, the room for resisting to pass the realm of values and norms to the logic of habitual routines or customs. However, despite such common goal, there are clear limitations to Putnam's approach due to the differences in the strategies taken on facts and values. Putnam's method can demolish the whole universal framework that is the foundation where pragmatic pluralism will be fostered, eliminating the difference between the specificity of values and the universality of norms and shaking up the status of universal ethics. Therefore, Habermas' ethical theory is proposed as an alternative to establish a basis for universal ethics by relying on communication rationality and to secure the coercion of norms and blossom cultural pluralism as a diverse lifestyle based on this coercion.

• Digital Contents
• /
• no.12 s.103
• /
• pp.46-50
• /
• 2001

CRM은 딱 떨어지는 수학공식처럼 방법이 있어서 그대로 하면 반드시 성공하는 그런 것은 없다. 하지만 다른 기업에서 성공했던 방법을 응용하던지 인지도 있는 솔루션 회사에서 의뢰하던지, 또 CRM의 이론적 원칙을 잘 준수하게 될 성공할 확률이 조금 높다는 것 뿐이다.무작정 고객에게 접근하는 것보다 체계적이고 합리적으로 접근하는 것이 더 성공할 확률이 높다는 것은 당연한 것이 아니겠는가? 그래서 이번 장에는 CRM을 구축하는 방법론에 대해서 애기하려고 한다. 사실 여러 솔루션 제공회사에 수많은 방법론이 있지만 그 기본적인 고객에 대한 사상은 거의 같기 때문에 , CRM 구축에 인지도를 갖고 있는 SAS라는 회사의 CRM 방법론에 대해 설명하려고 한다.

• Journal of the Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.213-224
• /
• 2001

확률론적 구조설계 최적화는 구조물의 역학적 특성이나 하중의 불확실성이나 임의성과 같은 변동성을 정량적이고 합리적으로 고려할 수 있다는 점에서 기존의 전통적인 확정론적 최적화와 비교된다. 확률론적 최적화의 방법론으로는 개선된 일계이차모멘트법을 이용하는 신뢰도지수에 기반한 접근법(MPFP search)이 널리 알려져 있으며, 최근 목표성능치에 기반한 접근법(MPTP search)이 새롭게 제안되었다. 본 논문에서는 이들 두 가지 접근법에 대한 정식화를 수행하고, 특히 탐색과정에서 소모적인 반복계산을 발견하고 제거하는 알고리즘을 제시하였다. 예제에서 두 접근법에 의한 확률론적 최적화를 수행하고 구조설계 최적화의 관점에서 두 접근법의 장단점을 비교·검토하였다.