• The Journal of Korean Society for School & Community Health Education
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.55-67
• /
• 2021

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine the mediating effect of human rights consciousness on the relationship between social capital and eudaimonia perceived by adolescents. Methods: The participants of this study were 9,021 adolescents, with data taken from the 6^th year(2018) panel survey. All variables were evaluated by self-report of adolescents. The data were analyzed by SPSS 21.0 and AMOS 21.0. Results: First, social capital perceived by adolescents had a direct effect on eudaimonia. Second, social capital perceived by adolescents had an indirect effect on the eudaimonia through human rights consciousness. Conclusions: This study highlighted that human rights consciousness was identified as important mediator in the relationship between capital perceived by adolescents and eudaimonia. These results can be used as an important contribution to further research and educational practices for promoting the eudaimonia in adolescents.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.141
• /
• pp.63-84
• /
• 2017

In the twentieth century Anscombe's 1958 article "Modern Moral Philosophy" argued that duty-based conceptions of morality are conceptually incoherent for they are based on the idea of a "law without a lawgiver". Concepts such as "morally ought", "morally obligated", and "morally right" require a legislator as the source of moral authority. In the past God occupied the role, but systems that dispense with God are lacking the proper foundation for meaningful employment of those concepts. Aristotle's virtue ethics can do so without appealing to any such lawgiver, and ground morality in the well being of human moral agents. Therefore Anscombe recommends a return to the eudaimonistic ethical theories of the ancients as secular approaches. Eudaimonia is a central concept in Aristotelian ethics, along with the terms "aret?"(translated as virtue or excellence) and "phronesis"(translated as practical wisdom). In Aristotle's works, eudaimonia was used as the term for the highest human good, and so it is the aim of practical philosophy to consider what it really is and how it can be achieved. Eudaimonia is a Greek word commonly translated as well-being, happiness, welfare or "human flourishing". As Aristotle points out, saying that eudaimon life is a life which is objectively desirable, and means living well. Everyone wants to be eudaimon. And everyone agrees that being eudaimon is related to faring well and to an individual's well being. But the really difficult question is to specify just what sort of activities enable one to live well. Aristotle says that the eudaimon life is one of "virtuous activity in accordance with reason," this is a necessary condition of eudaimonia, the pleasure accompanied by virtuous activities is a sufficient condition. Hence we have a more accurate translation of eudaimonia with a review the practical meaning of eudaimonia, and the correlation between eudaimonia and arete, pleasure.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• v.49 no.4
• /
• pp.131-157
• /
• 2018

The happiness of social worker's role in promoting the happiness of the people has been relatively overlooked. Despite the importance of the ultimate value and meaning of eudaimonic happiness felt by social workers as a value-oriented profession, negative aspects such as work-related burn-out or hedonic happiness such as pleasure has been mainly focused so far. Happiness is a concept that must be met with both hedonia and eudaimonia, and it is necessary to understand both two dimensions of job satisfaction experienced by social workers. The purpose of this study is to investigate 376 social worker's hedonic and eudaimonic job satisfaction and factors associated with them by analyzing "Social Worker's Eudaimonia" dataset in which the Korean Version of Global Hedonic & Eudaimonic Job Satisfaction(K-GHEJS) scale was used. The results showed that the factors affecting hedonia and eudaimonia were different so that hedonia was statistically significantly associated with the levels of education, income and workload while eudaimonia was not. Based on these results, how to improve the hedonic and eudaimonic job satisfaction among social workers was discussed.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• v.49 no.1
• /
• pp.191-219
• /
• 2018

Although several measurements of happiness at work have been developed as interest in it has grown, most of them only deal with hedonia, emotional pleasure, and there exists no measurement of eudaimonia, ultimate happiness through meaning and worthiness in Korea. This study aims to examine the validity of the Korean version of Global Hedonic and Eudaimonic Job Satisfaction (K-GHEJS) scale which covers both hedonia and eudaimonia at work. Considering the job characteristics of social work which emphasizes the values and meaning of the helping profession, online survey was performed among a total of 376 social workers. Exploratory factor analysis confirmed the goodness-of-fit of 10 items, and confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that classification as two factors of hedonic and eudaimonic job satisfaction is appropriate. The reliability was found to be high as reliability coefficient Chronbach's ${\alpha}$ was .936. This K-GHEJS scale which measures eudaimonic happiness for the first time in Korea, is expected to be useful for measuring job satisfaction of the helping professions such as social work that pursues the values and meanings of work.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.46
• /
• pp.189-234
• /
• 2023

The most common and prevailing system of virtue ethics is based around the idea of personality rather than external behavior and it grew out of the Aristotelian system of virtue ethics. The purpose of this study is to find out the characteristics of the virtue ethics found within Daesoon Thought through comparison to Aristotelian virtue ethics. This can serve as a basis to establish the virtue ethics of Daesoon Thought in further studies. The systems of virtue ethics posited by the two traditions are similar in that they are both teleological as the virtues they recognize are related to human nature in the context of certain metaphysical assumption and they both exhibit the characteristic tendencies of seeking to realize the highest human good. Therefore, in the Aristotelian context, virtues can be defined as "characteristics needed for the realization of eudaimonia," and for Daesoon Thought, virtues are "characteristics needed for the realization of the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence." The representative virtues examined in this comparative study will be the Aristotelian Golden Mean, and the the concepts of guarding against self-deception and great benevolence and great justice in Daesoon Thought. In comparison to Aristotelian virtues, these differ in three main ways. First, Aristotelian virtue is not an innate aspect of character the way it is assumed to be in Daesoon Thought wherein the original human heart bestowed by Heaven is already virtuous. Second, mental virtue in the Aristotelian context centers the mind upon reason whereas in Daesoon Thought, the heart-mind exhibits both reason and emotional concern for others. Third, eudaimonia is a concept limited to humans and their societies whereas the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence is a good that includes all beings including divine beings, animals, plants, and Heaven and Earth. Despite the differences, both require practical reason, continuous education, and effort to succeed in the cultivation of virtues and the proper implementation of virtuous living.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.371-387
• /
• 2010

On the one hand Aristotle seems to insist that practical acts are intrinsically good. On the other hand his doctrine of certain connected concepts is such that as a consequence practical acts must be considered good due to their being means to eudaimonia. This Aristotelian dilemma challenged by commenters. Cooper bases his attack on a consideration of Aristotle's account of deliberations. Deliberation is not just concerned with means in a strictly causal sense, but with things that contribute to the end. And these may also be constituent parts of complex ends or particular things that a given end may be seen to consist in. The difference between energeia and kinesis implies the distinction between praxis and poiesis. In kinesis such as 'building a house' and 'trying to save a child from drowning' we cannot sever, logically, 'the act' from the intended act-result, since no act will be left once that logical operation has been performed. The definition of poiesis relies on the possibility of such severance. But the fact that an act is kinesis has no implications whatever for the question whether it is a praxis or poiesis.