• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.37-71
• /
• 2018

Since 2016, public and political interest on basic income has been increased beyond academic interest. The recent debate on basic income has expanded on issues regarding to the concrete implementation of basic income moving further than the debate on conception of the basic income in the abstract level. This study examines major critiques of basic income which was raised from social policy area and makes a counter-argument on these critiques. Major points summarized as follows. First, the problem of jobs and social insurance exclusion is not serious enough to call for basic income. Second, existing social security systems will be crowded out by excessive financial burden if basic income is introduced. Third, policies to cultivate citizens' capacities to cope with a technological change should be given priority over basic income. This study disputes these critiques by counter arguing four points. First, it is necessary to reconstruct welfare state based on basic income, given the labor market changes, such as long-term trend of employment change, newly emerging employment of platform companies, and inconsistency of platform labor and social insurance. Second, hypothesis of crowding-out effect on social security system is just a criticism that can be applied to the basic income initiative of the right-wing. Also, it is unable to find a logical basis or evidence of this hypothesis from the historical process of welfare state development or previous studies. Third, it is necessary to discuss how to reconfigure existing social security system and basic income which are complementary to each other and also have consistency with labor market as a configuration, not as a matter of choosing between basic income and social security system. Fourth, de-laborization does not mean a refusal to labor but a free choice, and the basic principle of social security is not needs but right. In conclusion, in order to develop more productive debate on basic income, it requires more sophisticated discussion and criticism from the point of view of the distributive justice; the debate on the sustainability of social insurance-centered welfare states; and debates on the political realization of basic income.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.130
• /
• pp.219-246
• /
• 2014

Do the particular good and the common good stand in relation of opposition or superiority each other? With regard to this question, some argue that the relevant Thomas texts reveal the superiority of the common good over the particular good, while others argue for the superiority of the particular good. The argument of this articles is, however, that closer examination of texts shows that Thomas Aquinas seeks to the unity of the common good and the particular good instead of seeing the conflict between them. It is true that Thomist moral and political theory emphasizes the value of the individual, but it should be noted that for Thomas the individual as individual does not exist, but shares specific formal determination with other members of the same species and, therefore, is the individualized, concrete universal. Good, meanwhile, means perfection which each being pursues and a thing is called good in the absolute sense when it actualizes its potentialities as a whole. An individual person is said to pursue only partial good, if it only seeks its perfection as an individual. The nature of individual person should be fully realized only in and through the community pursuing the common good. But the aim of living together which is rooted in the nature of human being as a rational being is for its members to live virtuously. The political community is said to try to bring its individual members to perfection, since the virtues are what renders human beings and their acts good. In this sense the particular good of the individual person is achieved through the pursuit of the common good and the common good is realized through the pursuit of the particular good so that they coincide each other. But this unity remains imperfect, when it would not be rightly ordered to its due end which is non other than the highest good, that is God. Accordingly the goodness of the human being in an absolute sense lies in the unity of the particular good and the common good rightly oriented towards the highest good, which is also called common good which every being pursues.

• 기호학연구
• /
• no.56
• /
• pp.45-70
• /
• 2018

Criticism of the postmodern philosophy of the system of representation, which has continued since the Renaissance, is based on a critique of the dichotomy that separates the subjects and objects and the environment from the human being. Interactivity, highlighted in a series of works emerging as postmodern trends in the 1960s, was transmitted to an interactive aspect of digital art in the late 1990s. The key feature of digital art is the possibility of infinite variations reflecting unpredictable changes based on public participation on the spot. In this process, the importance of computer programs is highlighted. Instead of using the existing program as it is, more and more artists are creating and programming their own algorithms or creating unique algorithms through collaborations with programmers. We live in an era of paradigm shift in which programming itself must be considered as a creative act. Simulation technology and VR technology draw attention as a technique to represent the meaning of reality. Simulation technology helps artists create experimental works. In fact, Baudrillard's concept of Simulation defines the other reality that has nothing to do with our reality, rather than a reality that is extremely representative of our reality. His book Simulacra and Simulation refers to the existence of a reality entirely different from the traditional concept of reality. His argument does not concern the problems of right and wrong. There is no metaphysical meaning. Applying the concept of simulation to algorithmic art, the artist models the complex attributes of reality in the digital system. And it aims to build and integrate internal laws that structure and activate the world (specific or individual), that is to say, simulate the world. If the images of the traditional order correspond to the reproduction of the real world, the synthesized images of algorithmic art and simulated space-time are the forms of art that facilitate the experience. The moment of seeing and listening to the work of Ian Cheng presented in this article is a moment of personal experience and the perception is made at that time. It is not a complete and closed process, but a continuous and changing process. It is this active and situational awareness that is required to the audience for the comprehension of post-representation's forms.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.137
• /
• pp.57-79
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this paper is to explain MacIntyre's critique of moral pluralism of modern society and reveal the limits of his critique of liberalism. It is a distinctive feature of the social and cultural order that we inhabit that disagreements over central moral issues are peculiarly unsettleable. Debates concerned with the value of human life such as those over abortion and euthanasia, or about distributive justice and property rights, or about war and peace degenerate into confrontations of assertion and counter-assertion because the protagonists of rival positions invoke incommensurable forms of moral assertion against each other. We usually call this situation 'modern moral pluralism' and concede as the natural outcome of the activities of human reason under free institution. But in After Virtue, MacIntyre vigorously criticizes modern moral pluralism. The main cause he took which brought about this state of affairs was the failure of 'the Enlightenment project'. According to MacIntyre, the Enlightenment project which has dominated philosophy for the past three hundred years promised a conception of rationality independent of historical and social context, and independent of any specific understanding of man's nature or purpose. But not only has that promise in fact been unfulfilled, the project is itself fundamentally flawed and the promise could never be fulfilled. In consequence, modern moral and political thought are in a state of disarray from which they can be rescued only if we revert to an Aristotelian paradigm, with its essential commitment, and construct an account of practical reason premised on that commitment. But one of the deepest difficulties with the argument of After Virtue is that the very extent of its critique of the modern world seems to cast doubt on the possibility of any realistic revival under the conditions of modernity of the Aristotelianism which MacIntyre advocates. Especially when we consider we are not only the characters found in our narratives but also we ourselves are the author of our own narratives. Moral pluralism is not seen as disaster but rather as the natural outcome of the activities of human reason under enduring free institutions.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.44
• /
• pp.411-430
• /
• 2016

One of central issues in the Literature and Science discourses during the Victorian era is the relation of physiology to psychology. Many thinkers tackle the question of whether or not psychic phenomena can be reducible to their physiological bases. For instance, Victorian physiologist William Benjamin Carpenter claims that there should be a boundary between physiological and psychological qualities. Yet, his contemporary writer Grant Allen contends for the reduction of psychology into physiology. In the essay, I discuss Grant Allen's work Physiological Aesthetics (1877) so as to eventually problematize his physiological reductionism. I especially highlight the paradox of his physiological aesthetics. In order to clarify my argument, I introduce two concepts: evolutionary aesthetics and physiological reductionism. On the one hand, Allen argues for the development of aesthetic appreciation. The gradual evolution from gaudy to serene colors, for instance, reflects the fine differentiation of sensory organs. He believes that the existence of varied aesthetic pleasures corresponds to the evolution of sensory nerve structures. Nonetheless, Allen ironically gives more weight to the commonality of aesthetic experiences than to this teleological ordering of aesthetic experiences. He argues that there is no fundamental difference among humans in terms of their aesthetic assessments. Furthermore, there is even no essential distinction among plants, animals, and humans in light of their aesthetic appraisals, he states firmly. Although he asserts the gradual advance of aesthetic feelings caused by the intricacy of nervous systems, he simultaneously trivializes the evolution of aesthetic appraisal. In the essay, I highlight this paradox in Allen's physiological aesthetics. It should be underscored, lamentably enough, that Allen seeks biological purity by erasing fine lines among physiology, psychology, and sociality. He estranges aesthetic experiences from subjective variations and their socio-cultural contexts. He makes great efforts to eliminate individual differences and socio-cultural specificities in order to extremely biologize aesthetic experiences. Hence, Allen's physiological aesthetics is marked as the politics of physiological purification.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.145
• /
• pp.351-380
• /
• 2018

In every society, citizens must decide how to punish criminals, uphold the virtue of justice, and preserve the security of the community. In doing so, the members of society must ask themselves how they will punish those who carry out the most abhorrent of crimes. Many common responses to such a question is that death is an acceptable punishment for the most severe crimes. But to draw some theoretical distinction between a crime that deserves incarceration and a crime that is so heinous that it deserves capital punishment is subject to three errors. First, what possible line could be drawn? To decide on a particular number of deaths or to employ any standard would be arbitrary. Second, the use of a line would trivialize and undermine the deaths of those whose murderers fell below the standard. Third, any and all executions still are unjust, as the State should not degrade the institution of justice and dehumanize an individual who, although he or she has no respect for other human life, is still a living person. Simply put, all murders are heinous, all are completely unacceptable, and deserve the greatest punishment of the land; however, death as punishment is inappropriate. Also, while this article arrives at the conclusion that the death penalty is an inappropriate form of punishment, I have not offered an acceptable alternative that would appease those who believe capital offenders deserve a punishment that differs in its quality and severity. This is a burden that, admittedly, I am unable to meet. I finally conclude that the death penalty is unjustified retribution. This is the only claim that can effectively shift the intellectual paradigms of the participants in the debate. The continued use of the death penalty in society can only be determined and influenced by the collective conscience of the members of that society. As stated at the outset of this article, it is this essentially moral conflict regarding what is just and degrading that forms the backdrop for the past changes in and the present operation of our system of imposing death as a punishment for crime.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.45
• /
• pp.295-324
• /
• 2016

This essay attempts a contrapuntal reading of Thomas More's Utopia. Contrapunctual reading, proposed by Edward Said. attempts to make a text speak across temporal, cultural, and ideological boundaries to a topic of present. I examine two opposite readings of Utopia around 2011 by both pro- and anti-Occupy Wall Street positions. On the one hand, the opponents of Occupy find its limits as a utopian social movement echoing in the fictional character of Hythrodaeus and the alternative society verbally sketched by him in Book Two of Utopia. On the other, Occupy's advocates read More's text as embodying its radial possibility. However, each shares the tendency to denounce Book Two, praising Book One in which Hythrodaeus vehemently criticizes England; they read Hythrodaeus not as an utopian idealist but as a social critic. The Occupy, as a result, is seen here as having an ambivalent relationship to utopianism. I reinterpret the radical possibilities of Book Two criticized by both pro- and anti-Occupy invocations of Utopia. Book Two provides a utopian space in which the existing social contradictions are cancelled, revealing the limits of the three partial utopias proposed at the end of Book One. Following Louis Marin's argument, I argue, the "utopic" space does not lie in the so-called ideal society described in the text but in the inconsistencies between the text's description(discourse) and topography(map). In Book Two the existence of a king is described, yet his space is not found in the topography of utopia; likewise market is described as existing at the center of a city, yet its space is not found either. These inconsistencies create a neutral space in which the ideological contradictions of the text are cancelled, and the space opens up the possibility of communal society beyond modern sovereign power and capitalism I argue this utopian dream needs to be summoned once again in our time as a compelling alternative to the corporate, capitalist order.

• (The) Research of the performance art and culture
• /
• no.25
• /
• pp.5-30
• /
• 2012

I. Identity of Yeonsegeuk as total arts. The purpose of the thesis is to arrange the identy of Yeonsegeuk(Kino-Drama) which is theatre or film. The process of study is tried to discuss on the aethetic of Yeonsegeuk. II. Appearance of Yeonsegeuk and negative disputation of yeonsegeuk The first imported Yeonsegeuk from Japanese in Korea is made by the group of Mizuno Ganggetsu(水野觀月) on Oct. 16. 1915 at Pusan and also to run in Seoul at Hwanggeumgwan. The first of Korean Yeonsegeuk is by Kim, Dosan, a leader of Singeukjwa(theare group) on Oct. 27. 1919 at Danseongsa. Before the liberation of Korea from Japan all made korean Yeonsegeuk are 28 works. III. Dramatic form of Yeonsegeuk I study on the relation between Yeonsegeuik and Sinpageuik(new theatre of modern drama in 1920's). I find that Yeonsegeuik admitted the thechnics of the Sinpageuik and the contents. If We think that the theatre is synthetic art which genealize all arts, we can insist that the Yeonsegeuk is valued the total art as new performance to comply with film art to theatre. Conclusionly Yeonsegeuk is called 'Expanded Theatre' as the new performance which must be dicussed in the view of total art. VI. Discussion on the the aethetic of Yeonsegeuk When we compare the structure of film with the structure of theatre, we can't find a diffrent element between the structure of two art in art semiotic. But we find a fact that film art has special elements in mechanics character which are camera working and motage. These technics influence on the audience's mind. It is different point between Japan and Korean's Kino-drama and Germany's that is to admit the aethetic of total art or not. V. Yeonsegeuk as new performance During Korean modern times Kino-drama was first a kind of total art with stage and screen. But it is regretable that Kino-drama didn't have the background of theory which discourse on the comprehension of total art. As the result Kino-drama bring the confusion of argument that Kino-drama is total art or expanded theatre. This confusion will be disputed on film art as performing arts or future art as expanded film and total art.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.119-147
• /
• 2012

This paper aims to explore whether the trilemma of welfare states has been a valid argument about the recent change of welfare states. Based on fuzzy-set ideal type analysis of data from seventeen OECD countries, it examines that welfare states have achieved three core policy objectives -income equality, employment growth and fiscal discipline- in the service economy during the period between 1981 and 2010. The evidence presented in this paper does not support the trilemma of the service economy where only two goals can be pursued successfully at one time, at a cost of the other remained goal. The trilemma has been effective only to the countries in liberal welfare regime where employment growth and fiscal discipline has been achieved at a cost of higher levels of income equality. However, conservative welfare-state regimes have experienced the deterioration of income equality and fiscal restraint after the mid 1980s and it seems that they have diverged into various models. In the countries of the social democratic welfare regime, the goals of equality and employment have been achieved simultaneously together with fiscal discipline since the early 2000s. While they are classified as the perfect model in the research, Southern European welfare states including Greece and Italy, classified as 'the crisis model', have not performed well in all the three aspects. On the evidence presented in this paper, it can be said that the trilemma of welfare states in the service economy is not effective to explain the policy goals of welfare state as well as the result of redistributive politics in the service economy.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.129-154
• /
• 2014

The study examined Daxuezhalu written by ShiTan Li Shen-Yi. Three different editions of Daxuezhalu were looked into, one of which in Shitanji("石灘集") could be considered methodical, if not perfect. In addition, Guojirucangben("國際儒藏本" as goudou(句讀) and correction was made on its wrong contents through dainjiao(點校) by WangXinzhu(王心竹). For these reasons, Daxuezhalu in Shitanji was used as the basis for the study and Guojirucangben as a supplement. Explanatory notes were added to Daxuezhangjuxu("大學章句序") in Daxuezhalu, but consent cannot be given to some of them, which include the author's opinion that views Jing(敬) as essence of Xiaoxue("小學") and Daxue("大學"), and the unique interpretation of Zhangju(章句), which can be attributed to the fact that the author didn't revise Daxuezhalu after writing it at the age of 37. However, the explanatory notes on xin(心), xing(性), qing(情), zhi(志) and yi(意) in An(按) toward the end of Daxuezhangjuxu are considered unique. The followings in Jingwen(經文) were examined as questionable. ShiTan(石灘) reflected on the ways to reach zhishan(至善) as in the table that shows Sangangling(三綱領), which may be viewed as distinctive. The review of zhizhijie('知止'節) reveals that ShiTan(石灘) followed Zhuzi(朱子) on the issue of whether to relocate zhizhijie('知止'節) through his interpretation for leaving it where it was. The same was applied regarding tizhi(體制) in chuanwen(傳文) by following Zhuzi(朱子)'s argument on Daxuezhangju("大學章句"). While the tendency to divide it into zhi(知) and hang(行) was seen, there was difficulty in thorough understanding with all the comments being in goujie(句節). It is considered overreaction that he argued in favor of shen(?) without any comments on Gewuzhizhibuwangzhang("格物致知補忘章"), although he mentioned characters, jin(謹) and shen(?) unlike Zhuzi(朱子).