• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.105
• /
• pp.321-350
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this paper is to identify the difference between Sangsan-Simhak(象山心學) and Yangming-Simhak(陽明心學). This means that the whole history of Sung Confucianism needs to be understood based on changing philosophical paradigm according to the times, not general perception which regards the whole history of Sung Confucianism as Li-Hak (理學) and Sim-Hak(心學). This kind of perception is caused by the general perception which divides Sung Confucianism into Sim-Hak and Li-Hak. We regard the former as Chung-Chu study and the latter as Liu-Yang study. Because of this, Sangsan study is recognized as the former stage study of Yangming study and can not be placed in independent position in whole history of Sung Confucianism. And Sang is regarded that it takes diametrical opposition with Chuhsi study. So it is said that there is no point of sameness among them. But Sangsan study was generated from 'Song-Hak(宋學)' based on paradigm of Li-Hak and Yangming study was generated from 'Ming-Hak(明學)' based on paradigm of Sim-Hak. The difference between 'Song-Hak' and 'Ming-Hak' is generated from proposition called 'Sim is Li (心卽理)' that most research has overlooked. To identify these things, this paper examine the philosophical difference between 'Song-Hak' and 'Ming-Hak' and analyze the proposition 'Sim is Li(心卽理)' that regards Sangsan study and Yangming study as same philosophical system. And this paper identify the philosophical difference between Sangsan study and Yangming study by examining the method that the concept of 'Sim is Li(心卽理)' is applied in moral cultivation. This paper shows that the difference of interpretation about the concept of Li(理), between 'Song-Hak' based on Li paradigm and 'Ming-Hak' based on Ki-Hak(氣學) paradigm, causes different meaning in 'Sim is Li(心卽理)'. Through these, this paper demonstrate the difference between the paradigm of 'Song-Hak' that Chuhsi study and Sangsan study have and the paradigm of 'Ming-Hak' that Yangming study has and the fact which Sangsan study is systematic philosophy of Sung Confucianism in itself not former stage of Yangming study.

• Korean Journal of Child Studies
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.1-14
• /
• 2005

This study investigated moral judgment and moral reasoning about aggressive behavior by intention, presentation of results of aggressive behavior, and age of child. Forty-four 3-year old and forty-six 5-year-old day-care children in Seoul and Kyonggi Province were interviewed individually with 20 pictorial tasks. Data analysis was by frequencies, percentiles, means, standard deviations, paired t-test, and ANOVA(repeated measures). Both age groups judged instrumental and resentment-based types of aggression to be worse than prosocial or rule observance-based aggression. Both age groups judged aggressive behavior to be worse when results of aggression were presented. Five-year-olds judged aggression to be worse on instrumental than on retributive types of intent. Level of reasoning on aggressive behavior was lowest in cases of satisfying resentment Level of reasoning about aggression increased with age.

• The Journal of Engineering Geology
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.585-596
• /
• 2022

This study determined major factors influencing landslide occurrence along a forest road near Sangsan village, Sancheok-myeon, Chungju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do, South Korea. Within a 2 km radius of the study area, landslides occur intensively during periods of heavy rainfall (August 2020). This makes study of the area advantageous, as it allows examination of the influence of only geological and tomographic factors while excluding the effects of rainfall and vegetation. Data for 82 locations (37 experiencing landslides and 45 not) were obtained from geological surveys, laboratory tests, and geo-spatial analysis. After some data preprocessing (e.g., error filtering, minimum-maximum normalization, and multicollinearity), structural equation model (SEM) and logistic regression (LR) analyses were conducted. These showed the regolith thickness, porosity, and saturated unit weight to be the factors most influential of landslide risk in the study area. The sums of the influence magnitudes of these factors are 71% in SEM and 83% in LR.