• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.129
• /
• pp.23-51
• /
• 2014

Christine M. Korsgaard believes that constructivism can respond to moral skepticism without depending upon moral realism. The purpose of this paper is to examine Korsgaard's kantian constructivism and her positions on moral realism. According to Korsgaard moral realism cannot answer normative questions in that it sees the function of moral concepts as describing the reality and so accepts the model of applied knowledge for action. In contrast Korsgaard insists that constructivism is better at justifying normativity since it regards moral concepts as representing the solutions to practical problems and so shows that moral principles are necessarily involved in the practical problems of agency. Korsgaard's constructivism has antirealistic elements such as pure proceduralism, the constitutive model to exclude ontological, metaphysical meanings, and the account of human beings as the sources of values. In spite of those antirealistic elements it is difficult to jump to a conclusion that Korsgaard's constructivism is antirealism. Korsgaard, in the early book, The Sources of Normativity, says that kantian constructivism has something to do with a form of realism, or procedural moral realism. And in the following books she argues that constructivism is compatible with realism although she pays attention to the practical implications of constructivism and then sets aside its ontological relevance. That is, Korsgaard does not want that her constructivism results in antirealism. Korsgaard's realism, however, is too weak to be called as realism. There is, also, a question why one would rather take a constructivist approach if one holds on to realism.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.101-110
• /
• 2020

Since the third inter-Korean summit, the inter-Korean summit in Pyongyang and the U.S.-North Korea summit in Singapore and Hanoi, denuclearization negotiations are under way that will determine the fate of the Korean Peninsula. However, the negotiations are stalled and some skepticism is expected due to the conflicting U.S.-North Korea stance over the terms of denuclearization. The reason why it is difficult to realize the complete denuclearization of North Korea is that there are a variety of variables such as the traditional security dilemma in Northeast Asia, the hegemonic competition between the U.S. and China, and the formation of a new cold-war system. At a turning point when three inter-Korean summits and three U.S.-North Korea summits were held in the wake of the 2018 PyeongChang Winter Olympics, North Korea's complete denuclearization has become a must-do historical task for Northeast Asia and world peace beyond the Korean Peninsula. In this sense, the inter-Korean summit in Pyongyang is seen as a historic occasion for presenting a new milestone for the denuclearization of North Korea and the development of inter-Korean relations through the 9.19 Pyongyang Joint Declaration and the Military Agreement. Meanwhile, Constructivism, which has become the main paradigm of international political theory, presents the view that ideological variables such as ideology, history and culture define material factors, identity and interests of state actors, and that the structure of international relations can be changed through interaction. In this study, the historical meaning of the 9.19 Pyongyang Declaration, which is now past its first anniversary, was considered from a constructivist perspective. To this end, the development process of constructivism theory and analysis model and the development process of inter-Korean relations were briefly reviewed, and the military implications of the 9.19 Military Agreement were presented.