• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.61
• /
• pp.118-133
• /
• 2013

Lee Yeung-Hi is one of the most influential journalist in the modern history of Korea. Nevertheless, the judgement about him has been parallelized by opposite sides. He is called 'the Master of ideology', while the other calls him 'the culprit of theorization'. This thesis deduced the contemporary meaning of person Lee Yeung-Hi in order to promote communication for both sides. I compared their logical arguments and pointed out the error they missed. Also, I clarified that the criticism and anticriticism for Lee Young-Hi in the fields of both journalism and academia have fallacies, such as the fallacy of straw man, and the fallacy of question-begging. I criticized their arguments through the view of 'struggling to seek truth', which is the core value of Lee Yeung-Hi's thought. The necessity of communication between advocators and it's critics is due to the condition of Korean Journalism. Korean Journalism does not have much space to accept Lee Young-Hi in only one side. Paradoxically, the contemporary meaning of the truth that Journalist Lee Young-Hi had sought is profound and deep because of the condition where Korean Journalism is being dominated by political parallelism.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.22 no.10
• /
• pp.676-690
• /
• 2022

The present study aims to explore how fallacies, arguments that seem valid but are not, appear in 2022 South Korean presidential debates. It qualitatively analyzes the candidates' remarks in the first and last presidential debates (240 minutes) using 20 formal and informal fallacy concepts as a theoretical framework. Results show that the three candidates used 23 informal fallacies from 15 categories, including the straw man, red herring, begging the question, complex question, hasty generalization, appeal to the masses, and you too. The candidates relied on fallacies to defend their image and electoral agenda from adversary attacks and to contaminate their opponent's image and agenda. The arguers, who struggled with tough questions, frequently made fallacies as pseudo-arguments to avoid the situation without lying and violating election laws. This study indicates that the fallacy system can be a framework for analyzing crucial political content. Moreover, it warns against the abuse of fallacies in TV debates.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.123
• /
• pp.245-279
• /
• 2012

Hans Kelsen, one of prominent advocators of legal positivism, insisted that every theory of natural law try to show that it is possible to deduce from the nature, that is to say from the nature of man certain rules which provide an altogether adequate prescription for human behavior. But it is impossible to deduce from the nature certain ethical rules. The purpose of this study is to show his insistence false. Firstly, He is based on false assumption that 'nature' in theory of nature law is 'nature' in natural science. Secondary, He is based on false assumption that the entire systems of natural law are deduced from only one first natural law. Thirdly, He makes logical fallacies, that is, straw man, false dichotomy and so on. Fourthly, in spite of his critique of every theory of natural theory, this study tries to certify that theories of natural law of I. Kant and J. Maritain and so on are very excellent.