• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• no.84
• /
• pp.5-32
• /
• 2009

It is becoming harder and harder to philosophically defend liberalism in general under the circumstances in which neoliberalism is presumed to be blamed for today's global economic crisis. I nonetheless believe that liberal democracy can be revitalized with the help not from outside but from inside, although this might make my paper 'untimely'. Philosophical reflection on market is indispensible to the project of radical liberalism. Philosophy of market first delves into the nature of market in Principle. Next, it stipulates upon the complex interrelationships between the market order and the democratic order. This inquiry will cast light on that both the standard pro-market theory and the anti-market theory in relation to democracy are one-sided. The project of radical liberalism can be further articulated with the introduction of the concept of 'the political'. In conclusion, radical liberalism is expounded as a plausible version of Contemporary Korean social philosophy with a universal connotation.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.456-466
• /
• 2014

This is a study of George Lindbeck's postliberalism that views religion as a cultural-linguistic approach. Knowing that the conceptual-propositional approach of the traditional Christian theology and the experiential-expressive approach of liberalism cannot be a solution for the post-modem religious phenomenon, George Lindbeck proposes an alternative. He proposes a cultural-linguistic approach to overcome the previous approaches. The first insight of Lindbeck's postliberalism is to understand religion as culture or language, because human beings become acquainted with a religion as they learn a language. The second insight comes out of the first, to understand doctrine as grammar. If we understand religion and doctrine this way the troubles and conflicts among religions will be resolved naturally, because each religion can be interpreted in its own system just as a language cannot be said to be good or bad, right or wrong. This approach makes several contributions as follows: it promotes a dialogue among religions, it emphasizes practice; and it preserves the Bible as an authoritative theological text. However it also brings many limitations as follows: it emphasizes the church's interpretation rather than the text's own interpretation; it views the truth simply as coherence; it promotes radical relativism and elitism; and through theological eschatology he makes his theory return to a propositionalism. Accordingly, the researcher concludes that Lindbeck's cultural-linguistic theory of religion is not an alternative that overcomes the limitations of theological conservativism and liberalism.