• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.354-372
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to explore the philosophical position of various scientific theories based on the scientific worldviews for science education. In addition, it aims to expand science education, which has usually dealt with epistemology and methodology, to ontology, that is, to the problem of metaphysics. It can be said that there exists a physical realism, traditionally defined as a strong determinism of the metaphysical belief. That is fixed and unchanging objective scientific knowledge independent of our minds, which was established by Newton, Einstein and Schridinger. What can be seen in the natural laws of dynamics can be called 'mathematicization'. Einstein also shook the traditional views to some extent through the theory of relativity, but his theory was still close to traditional thinking. On the contrary, to escape from this rigid determinism, we need anthropomorphic concepts such as 'possibility' and 'chance'. It is a characteristic of the modern scientific worldviews that leads the change of scientific theory from a classically strong deterministic thought to a weak deterministic accidental accident, probability theory, and a naturalistic point of view. This can be said to correspond to Darwin's theory of evolution and quantum mechanics. We can have three types of epistemological worlds that justify this ontological worldviews. These are rationalism, empiricism and naturalism. In many cases, science education does not tell us what kind of metaphysical beliefs the scientific theories we deal with in the field of education are based on. Also, science education focuses only on the understanding of scientific knowledge. However, it can be said that true knowledge can bring understanding only when it is connected to the knowledge of learned knowledge and the learner's own metaphysical belief in the world. Therefore, in the future, science education needs to connect various scientific theories based on scientific worldviews and philosophical position and present them to students.

• Journal of Popular Narrative
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.429-462
• /
• 2019

This paper argues how the concept of melodrama can be articulated with the Affect Theory and Posthumanism in relation to animal or environment representation which have emerged as the new topics of the recent era. The argument will be made through the discussion of Agustin Zarzosa's book, Refiguring Melodrama in Film and Television: Captitve Affects, Elastic Sufferings, Vicarious Objects. Using a genealogical approach, the book revisits the notion of mode, affect, suffering (hysteria), and excess which have been dealt with in the existing studies of melodrama. In chapter one, he broadens the concept of melodrama as a mode into the means of redistribution of suffering across the whole society in the mechanism of the duo of evil and virtue. It is the opposition of Brooks's argument in which melodrama functions as the means of proving the distinction between evil and virtue. Chapter two focuses on the fact that melodrama is an elastic system of specification rather than a system of signification, with the perspective of Deleuzian metaphysics. Through the analysis of Home from the Hill (Vincente Minnelli, 1959), this chapter pays attention to an 'affect' generated by the encounters between the bodies and the Mise-en-Scène as a flow not of a meaning but of an affect. Chapter three argues that melodrama should reveal an unloved (woman's) suffering, opposing the discussion on the role of melodrama as the recovery of moral order. Safe (Todd Haynes, 1995), dealing with female suffering caused by the industrial and social environment, elaborates on the arguments on melodrama in relation to female hysteria with ecocritical standpoints. The rest of the two chapters discusses the role of melodrama for the limitation and extension of the notion of the human through 'animal' and 'posthuman' melodrama. It argues that the concept of melodrama as 'excess' and 'sacrifice' blurs the boundary between human and inhuman. In summary, although the author Zarzosa partly agrees with Peter Brook's notion of mode, affect and sufferings,he elaborates the concept of melodrama, by articulating philosophical arguments such as Deleuzianism, feminism, and posthumanism (Akira Lippit and Carry Wolf) with the melodrama. Thefore, Zarzosa challenges the concepts of melodrama led by Brooks, which had been canonical in the field.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.56
• /
• pp.147-170
• /
• 2014

To divide by the concept of Cheon (天) before and after the period of Song Dynasty: before Song Dynasty; according to the ancient Book of Odes (Sigyeong-詩經), "Cheon (天) gives birth to a large number of people", and, Confucius(孔子) say "Cheon(天) gave me Virtue(德)." Mencius(孟子) say "The person done with all his heart knows Seong(性, personality), so if he knows such Seong(性, personality), then he knows Cheon(天)." In Doctrine of the Mean(中庸), it says "Cheon(天) ordered it to be called - Seong(性, personality)." So, Cheon(天) had a religious meaning, such as Sangje(上帝) - Supreme Ruler. During the Song period, Cheon(天), the source of its existence, had construed as Mugeuk i Taegeuk Non(無極而太極論 - Theory of Supreme Ultimate while being Indeterminate) and Theory of li and ki (iginon-理氣論). Juja (朱子, a honorary name of Juhui, 朱熹) had said a reasonable Cheon(天), that is, Heavenly Principle (天理 - Cheolli) by interpreting Cheon(天) as Taegeuk(太極 - Supreme Polarity) and li(理) of Muwi(無爲 - uncontrived action). That's why Juja had lost the religiosity because of his reasonable frame. The purpose of this dissertation is to identify of the quality of being religious of li(理) on the basis of attribute of Cheon(天) argued by Toegye and Juja. In the text of Seomyeong(西銘 - Western Inscription), we can see their interpretation of the content that Toegye as "西銘考證講義"(Lecture on Historical Research of Western Inscription), and Juja as "西銘解"(Commentary on the Western Inscription). Seomyeong(西銘 - Western Inscription) was expounded as a logic of 'iil bunsu' (理一分殊 - coherence is one and distinguished into many). '理一分殊' means to live in as meaningful as possible according to the human nature that has been bestowed upon thyself. Juja and Toegye both said that in the aspect of 'iil'(理一 - coherence is one), Reverence(事天) ought to be done, but to look into the aspect of 'bunsu'(分殊-distinguished into many), Juja argued that people should follow the order of Heavenly Principle(天理 - Cheolli), and Toegye argued that people should have to perform the filial piety(孝). There are differences in methods of Toegye and Juja on account of distinction between attributes of Cheon(天). Such a distinction affects the attribute of li(理). Juja said divisively that Soiyeon(所以然-why its principle is so) is li(理), and Sodangyeon(所當然-what should be so) is Sa(事-divine project). Toegye argued that Sodangyeon(所當然-what should be so) is indeed li(理). It is the position of Toegye that to know Seong(性-the personality) of Sodangyeon(所當然-what should be so) is the first, rather than to know Cheon(天) of Soiyeon(所以然-why its principle is so) that is out of reach in a faraway place. Seong(性-the personality) is li(理) that bestowed by Cheon(天). In view of discussion about the essence and existence, for Toegye, the existence is the first, rather than the essence. The issues of existence is now enabled to talk about amid the discussion of metaphysics, namely li(理). Different from Juja, a theory noticed in Toegye is the theory of 'Lijado'(理自到). 'Lijado'(理自到) denotes 'Li(理) leads on their own.' It tells that separate from thing-in-itself, there is an energy that moves and oversees the thing. This is an issue of response between "I" as the principal agent and other people. If "I" as the principal agent is sincere to others, the others will come to me insomuch as they will be revealed through me. Here, a problem between the host and guest arises. Toegye perceived this problem that do not see me and others as same, and also do not see me and others as two. This is the logic of 'ilii iiil'(一而二 二而一 - looks like one but two, looks like two but one) of '理一分殊' (coherence is one and distinguished into many). The first thing to do between these two processes is to recognize the existence of 'iil'(理一). Toegye strongly displays a religious attitude identifying Cheon(天)=Li (理)=Sangje(上帝- Supreme Ruler) in the same light.