• The Journal of Korean Medical History
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.47-58
• /
• 2015

Objectives : The purpose of this study was to investigate Wang Lun (王綸)'s assertion on Ginseng and Astragali Radix and its related arguments that had shown critical or advocative point of views about Wang lun's theory. It was expected that this study would help understand the history of arguments on the usage of Ginseng and Astragali Radix that had been triggered by Wang lun's assertion. Methods : In the process of investigation, this study first looked into the assertions of Wang Lun and the representative arguments about it, which includes Yu Tuan, Wang Ji (汪機), Sun Yikui (孫一奎). And secondly, this study also examined the other following additional arguments that had shown the conclusional aspects of this disputes. Results & Conclusions : Wang Lun (王綸)'s assertion on Ginseng and Astragali Radix proclaimed that in the symptoms of fevers in lung or lack of blood (血) the use of Ginseng and Astragali Radix must be prohibited. This assertion later faced severe criticism by opposers like Yu Tuan, Wang Ji. These opposers asserted that Yang (陽) has the ability of creating Yin (陰), and Ginseng and Astragali Radix could be the right drugs to the symptoms by lack of Yin. But a few approvers like Sun Yikui (孫一奎) had tried to advocate Wang Lun's assertion and casted the question of true meaning of Wang Lun. And In the other following arguments, it could be said that the influence of Wang Lun's assertion had gradually waned but could have been reciprocally accepted in the opposite point of view.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.373-393
• /
• 2018

Manipulation arguments purport to show that source freedom is incompatible with determinism. According to manipulation arguments, (1) intuitively, an agent manipulated in a certain manner to do A is not free, and (2) there is no significant difference between manipulation and determination. It follows that an agent determined to do A is not free. A compatibilist hard-line reply ('HR') denies (1), whereas a soft-line reply ('SR') denies (2). HR, which is arguably compatibilists' favorite, is assessed from the 'neutral stance.' HR turns out to fall short of adequately rejecting manipulation arguments. Recently Sartorio defends HR by claiming that (1) commits some sort of psychological fallacy. I argue that it does not work. I claim that SR is more promising. I examine the difference between intentional manipulation by design and ordinary determination. I argue that this difference suggests some determination scenario without intentional manipulation to which SR and manipulation arguments make different predictions, and that SR is better supported. Finally, incompatibilist objections are considered and replied.

• Communications of Mathematical Education
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.529-552
• /
• 2014

Recently, mathematical reasoning has been considered as one of the most important mathematical thinking abilities to be established in school mathematics. This study is to investigate the mathematical problems on the content of 'Set and Statement' and 'Sequences' in high school according to the four types of reasoning, namely Making Conjectures, Investigating Conjectures, Developing Arguments, and Evaluating Arguments. Those types of reasoning were reconstructed based on Johnson's six types of reasoning suggested in 2010. The content is dealt with in 'Mathematics II' textbook developed and published according to the mathematics curriculum revised in 2009. The subject of this study is nine types of textbooks and mathematical problems in the textbook are consisted of as two parts of 'general problem' and 'evaluation problem'. Finally, the results of this study can be summarized as follow: First, it is stated that students be establishing a logical justification activity, the highest reasoning activity through dealing with the 'Developing Arguments' type of problems affluently in both 'Set and Statement' and 'Sequence' chapters of Mathematics II textbook. Second, it is mentioned that students have an chance to investigate conjectures and develop logical arguments in 'Set and Statement' chapter of Mathematics II textbook. In particular, whereas they have an chance to investigate conjectures and also develop arguments in 'Statement', the 'Set' chapter is given only an opportunity of developing arguments. Third, students are offered on an opportunity of reasoning that can make conjectures and develop logical arguments in 'Sequences' chapter of Mathematics II textbook. Fourth, Mathematics II textbook are geared to do activities that could evaluate arguments while dealing with the problems relevant to 'mathematical process' included in 'general problem'.

• Journal of applied mathematics & informatics
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.137-149
• /
• 2001

In this paper we consider some nonlinear parabolic partial differential equations with distributed deviating arguments and establish sufficient conditions for the oscillation of some boundary value problems.

• Kyungpook Mathematical Journal
• /
• v.60 no.3
• /
• pp.423-443
• /
• 2020

Generalizations of essential arity of partial functions, based on essential sets of arguments, are introduced, and their interplay with the minor relation of functions is investigated.

• Journal of Information Processing Systems
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.248-265
• /
• 2015

In this paper, we propose a maximum entropy-based model, which can mathematically explain the bio-molecular event extraction problem. The proposed model generates an event table, which can represent the relationship between an event trigger and its arguments. The complex sentences with distinctive event structures can be also represented by the event table. Previous approaches intuitively designed a pipeline system, which sequentially performs trigger detection and arguments recognition, and thus, did not clearly explain the relationship between identified triggers and arguments. On the other hand, the proposed model generates an event table that can represent triggers, their arguments, and their relationships. The desired events can be easily extracted from the event table. Experimental results show that the proposed model can cover 91.36% of events in the training dataset and that it can achieve a 50.44% recall in the test dataset by using the event table.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.30 no.3
• /
• pp.323-336
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was to evaluate students' written arguments embedded in scientific inquiry investigations using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Argument components defined in this study are questions, claims, questions-claims relationship, evidence, claims-evidence relationship, multiple modal representations, and reflection. A set of criteria for evaluating each argument component was developed to evaluate writing samples of students from college freshman general chemistry laboratory classes. Results indicate that students produced, on average, moderate to powerful questions, claims, and evidence. They also constructed reasonable questions-claims relationship and claims-evidence relationship. Compared to other component scores, the average score for reflection was relatively low. Overall, the average Total Argument score was 21.4 out of a possible 36, that is, the quality of the written arguments using the SWH approach during a series of inquiry-based chemistry laboratory investigations was moderate to powerful. The findings of this study suggest that students, on average, developed reasonable scientific arguments generated as part of scientific inquiry. In other words, students are capable of putting together reasonable arguments as they participate in inquiry-based laboratory classrooms.

• Research in Mathematical Education
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.157-173
• /
• 2024

Researchers continue to emphasize the centrality of proof in the context of school mathematics and the importance of proof to student learning of mathematics is well articulated in nationwide curricula. However, researchers reported that students' performance in proving tasks is not promising and students are not likely to see the need to prove a proposition even if they learned mathematical proof previously. Research attributes this issue to students' tendencies to accept an empirical argument as proof for a mathematical proposition, thus not being able to recognize the limitation of an empirical argument as proof for a mathematical proposition. In Korea, there is little research that investigated high school students' views about the need for proof in mathematics and their understanding of the limitation of an empirical argument as proof for a mathematical generalization. Sixty-two 11^th graders were invited to participate in an online survey and the responses were recorded in writing and on either a four- or five-point Likert scale. The students were asked to express their agreement with the need of proof in school mathematics and to evaluate a set of mathematical arguments as to whether the given arguments were proofs. Results indicate that a slight majority of students were able to identify a proof amongst the given arguments with the vast majority of students acknowledging the need for proof in mathematics.

• Korean Educational Research Journal
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.109-125
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study was to examine how group argumentations mediated individual arguments by analyzing physics teachers' group argumentation and individual follow-up written arguments. Five in-service physics teachers participated in this study, two middle school and three high school teachers. The topics of argumentation included physics topics and pedagogy of them. Findings showed that the teachers constructed much more elaborated individual written arguments than group argumentation, which seemed to be resulted from different perceptions of teachers' verbal and written argumentations. Also, in their written arguments the teachers selectively utilized their colleagues' ideas shared during group argumentation. Lastly, teachers' argumentation showed different features between topics of physics and physics pedagogy. These differences were related to their orientations toward argumentation about content knowledge and teaching. These findings shed light on a productive physics teacher professional development in argumentation.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.185-232
• /
• 2016

In order to explain why begging the question is a fallacy, some of the challenges must be met. First we need to understand what begging the question is in subtle ways. In addition, it is necessary to reflect on the nature and the purpose of arguments in order to explain why begging the question is a fallacy. In this paper, I first have a general proposal about the main purpose of arguments. Then I place my own multi-layered theory of begging the question proposed in a previous study in the context of the proposals in this paper for the main purpose of arguments. Moreover, I develop a more comprehensive theory of why begging the question is a fallacy. Finally, I examine and criticize the main previous theories of begging the question, such as Frank Jackson's theory, Douglas Walton's theory, David Sanford's theory, John Biro's theory.