• Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.51-64
• /
• 1997

The purpose of the study was to introduce an integrated approach of new Casuistry and specified principlism in resolving ethical problems and studying nursing ethics. In studying clinical ethics and nursing ethics, there is no systematic research method. While nurses often experience ethical dilemmas in practice, much of previous research on nursing ethics has focused merely on describing the existing problems. In addition, ethists presented theoretical analysis and critics rather than providing the specific problems solving strategies. There is a need in clinical situations for an integrated method which can provide the objective description for existing problem situations as well as specific problem solving methods. We inherit two distinct ways of discussing ethical issues. One of these frames these issues in terms of principles, rules, and other general ideas; the other focuses on the specific features of particular kinds of moral cases. In the first way general ethical rules relate to specific moral cases in a theoretical manner, with universal rules serving as "axioms" from which particular moral judgments are deduced as theorems. In the seconds, this relation is frankly practical. with general moral rules serving as "maxims", which can be fully understood only in terms of the paradigmatic cases that define their meaning and force. Theoretical arguments are structured in ways that free them from any dependence on the circumstances of their presentation and ensure them a validity of a kind that is not affected by the practical context of use. In formal arguments particular conclusions are deduced from("entailed by") the initial axioms or universal principles that are the apex of the argument. So the truth or certainty that attaches to those axioms flows downward to the specific instances to be "proved". In the language of formal logic, the axioms are major premises, the facts that specify the present instance are minor premises, and the conclusion to be "proved" is deduced (follows necessarily) from the initial presises. Practical arguments, by contrast, involve a wider range of factors than formal deductions and are read with an eye to their occasion of use. Instead of aiming at strict entailments, they draw on the outcomes of previous experience, carrying over the procedures used to resolve earlier problems and reapply them in new problmatic situations. Practical arguments depend for their power on how closely the present circumstances resemble those of the earlier precedent cases for which this particular type of argument was originally devised. So. in practical arguments, the truths and certitudes established in the precedent cases pass sideways, so as to provide "resolutions" of later problems. In the language of rational analysis, the facts of the present case define the gounds on which any resolution must be based; the general considerations that carried wight in similar situations provide warrants that help settle future cases. So the resolution of any problem holds good presumptively; its strengh depends on the similarities between the present case and the prededents; and its soundness can be challenged (or rebutted) in situations that are recognized ans exceptional. Jonsen & Toulmin (1988), and Jonsen (1991) introduce New Casuistry as a practical method. The oxford English Dictionary defines casuistry quite accurately as "that part of ethics which resolves cases of conscience, applying the general rules of religion and morality to particular instances in which circumstances alter cases or in which there appears to be a conflict of duties." They modified the casuistry of the medieval ages to use in clinical situations which is characterized by "the typology of cases and the analogy as an inference method". A case is the unit of analysis. The structure of case was made with interaction of situation and moral rules. The situation is what surrounds or stands around. The moral rule is the essence of case. The analogy can be objective because "the grounds, the warrants, the theoretical backing, the modal qualifiers" are identified in the cases. The specified principlism was the method that Degrazia (1992) integrated the principlism and the specification introduced by Richardson (1990). In this method, the principle is specified by adding information about limitations of the scope and restricting the range of the principle. This should be substantive qualifications. The integrated method is an combination of the New Casuistry and the specified principlism. For example, the study was "Ethical problems experienced by nurses in the care of terminally ill patients"(Um, 1994). A semi-structured in-depth interview was conducted for fifteen nurses who mainly took care of terminally ill patients. The first stage, twenty one cases were identified as relevant to the topic, and then were classified to four types of problems. For instance, one of these types was the patient's refusal of care. The second stage, the ethical problems in the case were defined, and then the case was analyzed. This was to analyze the reasons, the ethical values, and the related ethical principles in the cases. Then the interpretation was synthetically done by integration of the result of analysis and the situation. The third stage was the ordering phase of the cases, which was done according to the result of the interpretation and the common principles in the cases. The first two stages describe the methodology of new casuistry, and the final stage was for the methodology of the specified principlism. The common principles were the principle of autonomy and the principle of caring. The principle of autonomy was specified; when competent patients refused care, nurse should discontinue the care to respect for the patients' decision. The principle of caring was also specified; when the competent patients refused care, nurses should continue to provide the care in spite of the patients' refusal to preserve their life. These specification may lead the opposite behavior, which emphasizes the importance of nurse's will and intentions to make their decision in the clinical situations.

• MISULJARYO - National Museum of Korea Art Journal
• /
• v.96
• /
• pp.123-154
• /
• 2019

Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain is a ten-panel folding screen with images and postscripts. Commissioned by Bak Gyeong-bin (dates unknown), this screen was painted by Jo Jung-muk (1820-after 1894) in 1868. The postscripts were written by Hong Seon-ju (dates unknown). The National Museum of Korea restored this painting, which had been housed in the museum on separate sheets, to its original folding screen format. The museum also opened the screen to the public for the first time at the special exhibition Through the Eyes of Joseon Painters: Real Scenery Landscapes of Korea held from July 23 to September 22, 2019. Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain depicts real scenery on the western slopes of Inwangsan Mountain spanning present-day Hongje-dong and Hongeun-dong in Seodaemun-gu, Seoul. In the distance, the Bukhansan Mountain ridges are illustrated. The painting also bears place names, including Inwangsan Mountain, Chumohyeon Hill, Hongjewon Inn, Samgaksan Mountain, Daenammun Gate, and Mireukdang Hall. The names and depictions of these places show similarities to those found on late Joseon maps. Jo Jung-muk is thought to have studied the geographical information marked on maps so as to illustrate a broad landscape in this painting. Field trips to the real scenery depicted in the painting have revealed that Jo exaggerated or omitted natural features and blended and arranged them into a row for the purposes of the horizontal picture plane. Jo Jung-muk was a painter proficient at drawing conventional landscapes in the style of the Southern School of Chinese painting. Details in Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain reflect the painting style of the School of Four Wangs. Jo also applied a more decorative style to some areas. The nineteenth-century court painters of the Dohwaseo(Royal Bureau of Painting), including Jo, employed such decorative painting styles by drawing houses based on painting manuals, applying dots formed like sprinkled black pepper to depict mounds of earth and illustrating flowers by dotted thick pigment. Moreover, Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain shows the individualistic style of Jeong Seon(1676~1759) in the rocks drawn with sweeping brushstrokes in dark ink, the massiveness of the mountain terrain, and the pine trees simply depicted using horizontal brushstrokes. Jo Jung-muk is presumed to have borrowed the authority and styles of Jeong Seon, who was well-known for his real scenery landscapes of Inwangsan Mountain. Nonetheless, the painting lacks an spontaneous sense of space and fails in conveying an impression of actual sites. Additionally, the excessively grand screen does not allow Jo Jung-muk to fully express his own style. In Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, the texts of the postscripts nicely correspond to the images depicted. Their contents can be divided into six parts: (1) the occupant of the tomb and the reason for its relocation; (2) the location and geomancy of the tomb; (3) memorial services held at the tomb and mysterious responses received during the memorial services; (4) cooperation among villagers to manage the tomb; (5) the filial piety of Bak Gyeong-bin, who commissioned the painting and guarded the tomb; and (6) significance of the postscripts. The second part in particular is faithfully depicted in the painting since it can easily be visualized. According to the fifth part revealing the motive for the production of the painting, the commissioner Bak Gyeongbin was satisfied with the painting, stating that "it appears impeccable and is just as if the tomb were newly built." The composition of the natural features in a row as if explaining each one lacks painterly beauty, but it does succeed in providing information on the geomantic topography of the gravesite. A fair number of the existing depictions of gravesites are woodblock prints of family gravesites produced after the eighteenth century. Most of these are included in genealogical records and anthologies. According to sixteenth- and seventeenth-century historical records, hanging scrolls of family gravesites served as objects of worship. Bowing in front of these paintings was considered a substitute ritual when descendants could not physically be present to maintain their parents' or other ancestors' tombs. Han Hyo-won (1468-1534) and Jo Sil-gul (1591-1658) commissioned the production of family burial ground paintings and asked distinguished figures of the time to write a preface for the paintings, thus showing off their filial piety. Such examples are considered precedents for Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain. Hermitage of the Recluse Seokjeong in a private collection and Old Villa in Hwagae County at the National Museum of Korea are not paintings of family gravesites. However, they serve as references for seventeenth-century paintings depicting family gravesites in that they are hanging scrolls in the style of the paintings of literary gatherings and they illustrate geomancy. As an object of worship, Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain recalls a portrait. As indicated in the postscripts, the painting made Bak Gyeong-bin "feel like hearing his father's cough and seeing his attitudes and behaviors with my eyes." The fable of Xu Xiaosu, who gazed at the portrait of his father day and night, is reflected in this gravesite painting evoking a deceased parent. It is still unclear why Bak Gyeong-bin commissioned Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain to be produced as a real scenery landscape in the folding screen format rather than a hanging scroll or woodblock print, the conventional formats for a family gravesite paintings. In the nineteenth century, commoners came to produce numerous folding screens for use during the four rites of coming of age, marriage, burial, and ancestral rituals. However, they did not always use the screens in accordance with the nature of these rites. In the Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, the real scenery landscape appears to have been emphasized more than the image of the gravesite in order to allow the screen to be applied during different rituals or for use to decorate space. The burial mound, which should be the essence of Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, might have been obscured in order to hide its violation of the prohibition on the construction of tombs on the four mountains around the capital. At the western foot of Inwangsan Mountain, which was illustrated in this painting, the construction of tombs was forbidden. In 1832, a tomb discovered illegally built on the forbidden area was immediately dug up and the related people were severely punished. This indicates that the prohibition was effective until the mid-nineteenth century. The postscripts on the Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain document in detail Bak Gyeong-bin's efforts to obtain the land as a burial site. The help and connivance of villagers were necessary to use the burial site, probably because constructing tombs within the prohibited area was a burden on the family and villagers. Seokpajeong Pavilion by Yi Han-cheol (1808~1880), currently housed at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, is another real scenery landscape in the format of a folding screen that is contemporaneous and comparable with Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain. In 1861 when Seokpajeong Pavilion was created, both Yi Han-cheol and Jo Jung-muk participated in the production of a portrait of King Cheoljong. Thus, it is highly probable that Jo Jung-muk may have observed the painting process of Yi's Seokpajeong Pavilion. A few years later, when Jo Jungmuk was commissioned to produce Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, his experience with the impressive real scenery landscape of the Seokpajeong Pavilion screen could have been reflected in his work. The difference in the painting style between these two paintings is presumed to be a result of the tastes and purposes of the commissioners. Since Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain contains the multilayered structure of a real scenery landscape and family gravesite, it seems to have been perceived in myriad different ways depending on the viewer's level of knowledge, closeness to the commissioner, or viewing time. In the postscripts to the painting, the name and nickname of the tomb occupant as well as the place of his surname are not recorded. He is simply referred to as "Mister Bak." Biographical information about the commissioner Bak Gyeong-bin is also unavailable. However, given that his family did not enter government service, he is thought to have been a person of low standing who could not become a member of the ruling elite despite financial wherewithal. Moreover, it is hard to perceive Hong Seon-ju, who wrote the postscripts, as a member of the nobility. He might have been a low-level administrative official who belonged to the Gyeongajeon, as documented in the Seungjeongwon ilgi (Daily Records of Royal Secretariat of the Joseon Dynasty). Bak Gyeong-bin is presumed to have moved the tomb of his father to a propitious site and commissioned Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain to stress his filial piety, a conservative value, out of his desire to enter the upper class. However, Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain failed to live up to its original purpose and ended up as a contradictory image due to its multiple applications and the concern over the exposure of the violation of the prohibition on the construction of tombs on the prohibited area. Forty-seven years after its production, this screen became a part of the collection at the Royal Yi Household Museum with each panel being separated. This suggests that Bak Gyeong-bin's dream of bringing fortune and raising his family's social status by selecting a propitious gravesite did not come true.