• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.144
• /
• pp.167-203
• /
• 2017

In this paper I will investigate the problems of the Ego of Kant, Husserl and $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ from the standpoint of $trisvabh{\bar{a}}va$ and the transformation of the basis of $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$. Kant's Copernican revolution and Husserl's Phenomenological reduction are the keys to understanding their philosophies. We especially want to look into the comparison between the Ego of Kant, Husserl and $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$. According to Kant, we need the transcendental Ego as absolute in order to unite consciousness. Kant criticizes traditional metaphysics which had argued that the metaphysicians regard the transcendental Ego as substance. If they regard the transcendental Ego as an empirical object, this attempt will be in vain, because they seek to know unknown things. Husserl's phenomenological reduction is properly understood as a method designed to transform a philosopher into a phenomenologist by virtue of the attainment of a certain perspective on the world phenomenon. We will find the field of the transcendental, absolute ego through phenomenological reduction. Transcendental, absolute ego constitutes our whole world and gives meaning to the world. $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ argues that what our ordinary consciousness (the sixth consciousness) regards subjectivity and objectivity as separate, or that self and the world is an imagination that $alaya-vij{\tilde{n}}ana$, the mind more profound than the ordinary consciousness, created. $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra^{\prime}s$ $alaya-vij{\tilde{n}}ana$ creates the whole objects and the consciousness (the sixth), so we must regard them as illusionary. $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ insists that there are three natures of mind and we attain the transformation of the basis in mind. Based on this point of view, Kant, Husserl and $Yog{\bar{a}}c{\bar{a}}ra$ want to transcend and overcome the limits of the ordinary consciousness, and then they want to find the absolute truth (everything) and want to be a men of freedom.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.329-355
• /
• 2021

The objective of this paper is to reveal that the formation of Deleuze's system is a result of a back flow of the 'ideal of pure reason' in Kant's system. I will try to seize upon the keyword in his main book, Difference and Repetition, and examine the aspect of mutual transformation between Deleuze's transcendental empiricism and Kant's transcendentalism. When analyzing Deleuze's system, most researchers tend to focus on anti-Hegelianism, but it is proper that Kant be adopted as the start when tracing the way of deployment directly. Fundamentally, Deleuze is different from Hegel in his approach to observing entire ground of thought. Even if Deleuze surely has the capability of becoming in the dialectical context, his systemic environment wherein dialectics is applied is different even at the onset. While Hegel follows the way of origin and copy or a system that begins from a preceding point of origin, Deleuze follows a way of copy and recopy or a system that begins without a point of origin. This characteristic of Deleuze's system originates directly from idealistic play. In fact, we can anticipate and identify in his book that he refers to Kant who accepted the tradition of empiricism. Therefore, the main contents of this paper is to present an overview of Kant's influence on Deleuze's system. While tracing ideas back to Kant's system, the cohabitation of empiricism and rationalism, which Kant felicitously revoiced, there emerges a definitude of world recognition. This occurs through cohabitation, and this is both deconstructed and integrated by Deleuze, and therein definitude is turned into a vision of prosperity. To the vision of prosperity that spans definitude to recognition, a philosopher has the right to select a philosophical system because selection methodology in philosophy is not a problem of legitimacy so much as the needs of the times. Deleuze's choice resulted in the opening of pandora's box in an abyss and secret contents have in turn risen sharply.

• 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.

• Journal for History of Mathematics
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.119-125
• /
• 2004

Truth, goodness, and beauty are originated from the Greek philosophy and these concepts are unified by Kant. This article shows that these three concepts correspond to three conditions of axiomatics, that is, consistency, completeness, and independence, respectively.

• 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.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.130
• /
• pp.277-304
• /
• 2014

Der vorliegende Beitrag zielt darauft ab, zwei Perspektiven $f{\ddot{u}}r$ die Kunst bei Kant und Nietzsche und ihre Schlussfolgerungen zu $er{\ddot{o}}rtern$. Kants Kritik der Urteilskraft hat eine enorme Rolle in der Geschichte der ${\ddot{A}}sthetik$ gespielt. $F{\ddot{u}}r$ Kant sollen ${\ddot{a}}sthetische$ Urteile ebenso wie Erkenntnis- und Moralurteile $allgemeing{\ddot{u}}ltig$ sein, obwohl sie auf einem $pers{\ddot{o}}nlichen$ Geschmack beruhen. Die $Allgemeing{\ddot{u}}ltigkeit$ des $Sch{\ddot{o}}nen$ sei $m{\ddot{o}}glich$, weil sie nicht auf dem Gegenstand, sondern auf dem transzendentalen Subjekt basiere. Die $sch{\ddot{o}}ne$ Kunst als Kunst des Genies soll uns wie die $Natursch{\ddot{o}}nheit$ ohne Interesse wohlgefallen. Nietzsches Stellungnahme zu Kants ${\ddot{A}}sthetik$ ist sehr kritisch. Nietzsches erster Kritikpunkt richtet sich gegen das 'interesselose Wohlgefallen'. Gegen Kant behauptet Nietzsche, dass die $Sch{\ddot{o}}nheit$ sehr wohl mit Interesse verbunden ist. Grund $daf{\ddot{u}}r$ ist, dass das $Sch{\ddot{o}}ne$ wesentlich aus dem Willen zur Macht entspringt. Der zweite Kritikpunk Nietzsches liegt darin, dass in Kants ${\ddot{A}}sthetik$ die Moral im Vordergrund steht. Das $Sch{\ddot{o}}ne$ ist $f{\ddot{u}}r$ Kant durch die Moral gerechtfertigt. Nietzsche dreht diese Stellung der Moral zur Kunst um. Der dritte Kritikpunkt Nietzsches ist, dass Kant statt von der Erfahrung des $K{\ddot{u}}nstlers$ (Schaffenden) aus das ${\ddot{a}}sthetische$ Problem zu betrachten, allein vom Zuschauer (Empfangenden) aus ${\ddot{u}}ber$ die Kunst und das $Sch{\ddot{o}}ne$ nachgedacht habe. $F{\ddot{u}}r$ Nietzsche ist die Kunst $prim{\ddot{a}}r$ vom $K{\ddot{u}}nstler$ aus zu verstehen. Nietzsches Physiologie der Kunst ist mit dem Begriff 'Leib' $verkn{\ddot{u}}pft$, d.h. Nietzsche behauptet, dass physiologische und ${\ddot{a}}sthetische$ Prozesse wesentlich $zusammenh{\ddot{a}}ngen$. Die Schlussfolgerung der Physiologie der Kunst lautet: erstens, jeder Mensch ist $K{\ddot{u}}nstler$, sofern er schaffend ist, und zweitens, die Welt selbst ist nichts als Kunst. Nietzsches Physiologie der Kunst hat einen $gro{\ss}en$ Einfluss auf die $gegenw{\ddot{a}}rtige$ Kunst $ausge{\ddot{u}}bt$ und kein anderer Philosoph hat auf die $gegenw{\ddot{a}}rtige$ Kunst nachaltiger gewirkt.

• (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)

• 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.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.45-51
• /
• 2016

Aristotle said 'Poet is that from who can give happiness, therapeutic effects to the reader.' He say to 'mimoumenon' it means a native Image restored. However, Kant said that Aesthetic is requested not only reappearance but freedom. This result is that between joyful freedom and reason of the judgement of tasted feeling. Because Art ever created is the spirit of the moral ideals, and those who combine the best of the joy. I think need to more communication and joy than their theories. For poet is replaced to be communicated and joyful for our happiness and freedom.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.465-484
• /
• 2010

In diesem Aufsatz werden die Si Dan(四端) in dem Mengtzu durch die Bedeutung des Abbruchs der Selbstliebe in der Kriktik der praktischen Vernunft projiziert und gelesen. Fuer Kant ist die Befriedigung der Neigungen die subjektiven Bestimmungsgruenden seiner Willkuer. Nach ihnen macht sich selbst das allgemeine Prinzip der Selbstliebe die eigene Glueckseligkeit "zum objektiven Bestimmungsgrund." Das moralische Gesetz schlaegt jenes subjektive Prinzip der Selbstliebe nieder, und das bedeutet die Si Dan(四端) in dem Mentzu. Die Si Dan sind die Bestimmungsgruende der menschlichen Wesen. Das Subjekt des moralischen Gesetzes bricht deswegen seine Selbstliebe ab und richtet sich an sozialen Gemeinschaft, weil die Selbstlibe fuer den Individualismus.