• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.139
• /
• pp.105-131
• /
• 2016

The notion of responsibility, which has now gained a firm foothold as one of the fundamental notions of philosophy and its neighboring disciplines, became the subject of philosophical enquiry only in the 19th century by Kierkegaard, who delved into the morality of critical self-awareness in ethical responsibility of the absolute self; and Nietzsche, who put emphasis on the responsibility of the sovereign self in coping with the problems of the future. Nietzsche is the first philosopher who took issue with the diminishment (Verkleinerung) of humanity-what he called human being's greatest disease-that swept Europe at that time. Concerns about Europe's future were the key movens of Nietzsche's philosophy revolving around the advent of nihilism in Europe and its solutions. He prepared alternative solutions in deep awareness that the ethics of good and evil firmly rooted in the traditional metaphysics and Christianity would not even catch the depth and breadth of the big problem of globalization brought about by modernism, let alone solve it. Nietzsche devoted his whole life to disseminating the knowledge that the future of humankind depends on removing these old ethics. This article traces Nietzsche's reflections on the ethical event of responsibility and provides an overview of the purview and scope contained in the meaning covered by the notion of responsibility in his philosophy beyond common norms and values.

• 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.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.148
• /
• pp.101-128
• /
• 2018

While there are various opinions about the relationship of Schiller's thought and Kant's, it is undeniable that Schiller owes much to Kant. What distinguished Schiller from other Weimar thinkers at his time, such as Goethe, Herder and Wieland, was that unlike them Schiller accepted Kant's project of critical philosophy. In fact, Schiller did not just accept it, but tried to interpret and formulate anew the relation of beauty and morality and some other aesthetical-ethical ideals on the basis of the new philosophy. Schiller's famous project of 'aesthetic education of mankind' itself is the product of such an endeavor. In this work we follow the history of Schiller's acceptance of Kant's critical philosophy and ruminate over its implications. And then, we'll show that Schiller's 'beautiful soul' in Grace and Dignity (1793), which is often suggested to be a proof of Schiller's conflict with Kant, was understood on the basis of Kant's moral theory. In this part of the work, we compare Schiller's ideal of the 'beautiful soul' and Shaftesbury's ethical thought, which is often presumed to be its background. From this comparison we'll be able to see that there is a considerable disparity, despite apparent similarities, between Schiller's and Shaftesbury's ethical ideals, which is due to their respective philosophical sources, that is neo-platonic metaphysics and Kant's critical philosophy.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.142
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2017

Kant's doctrine of virtue shows how an actor should behave morally in an individual situation with moral law defines the limits of human action. There is latitude for action in the course of formulating the maxims of action by an actor. And moral judgement, as Aristotle's Pronesis, is very important in the latitude for action. In the doctrine of virtue, Kant suggests two kinds of duty of virtue: one's own perfeciton as an obligatory end, and the happiness to others as an obligatory end-and raises the question of casuistics for each. However, this was the practice and training for the human moral life by application of the moral law. In particular, Kant saw that ethics does not give laws for action, but only give laws for the maxims of action, and further intended to realize the practice in a proper way of seeking truth through casuistical questions. Thus, Kant points out that the casuistic is related only to ethics in a fragmentary way and is added to ethics only as a comment on the system. According to Kant, virtue and judgment are inevitable to apply categorical imperative in the empirical and realistic world. In other words, virtue and judgment are necessary to enable people who are likely to act in accordance to inclination to live a moral life in accordance with the command of reason. Thus Kant saw that in order to take wide duty into narrow ones, human beings must not only have to cultivate virtues as a strong power of will, but also to exercise judgment. In addition, the distinction between duty of law(narrow obligation) and duty of virtue(wide obligation) is dependent on whether there is a latitude for action in the application of both duties. So the role of virtue and training of judgement is very important in the latitude for action that occurs in the process of formalizing actor's maxims. In detail, as the duty is wider, so man's obligation to action is more imperfect, but the closer to narrow duty(Law) he brings the maxim of observing this duty(in his attitude of will), so much the more perfect is his virtuous action. Thus, it was an effort to show how Kant's best moral principles, that is categorical imperative could be applied to the real world at the time of criticism. Of course, even if it is difficult to assess Kant's efforts as successful, criticizing Kant's ethics as 'formal', 'abstract', or 'monologous' is not persuasive because of critics did not understand his ethics as a whole.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.137
• /
• pp.277-321
• /
• 2016

Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy embraces characteristics of existential philosophy and philosophical anthropology. In his book "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", Nietzsche defined human beings as an existence with innate possibility for change, beings that stand at the borderline between "the last man" and "the ${\ddot{u}}bermensch$", raising a question over the meaning of human being's existential healthiness. The anthropological symptoms that Nietzsche's philosophy deals with trigger existential problems, and healing these anthropological symptoms is a precedent to healing an existence. In Nietzsche's philosophy, the ${\ddot{u}}bermensch$ is presented as a prototype of practical man with a healthy existence, born from endeavors to heal the last man prototype of a decadence that was prevalent throughout Europe at the time. Nietzsche found the root cause of nihilism found in Europe in philosophy, religion, metaphysics, and Christianity, and attempted a genealogical investigation on this aspect. In so doing, a philosophical problem surfaced whereby only one truth was used to force diverse existential styles into a uniform style. Nietzsche intensively criticized philosophy and philosophers that only studied truths from metaphysical-Christian-moral perspectives, as they overlooked the foundation of true existence and presented human beings of a feeble mind and will as a result. Nietzsche emphasized the practical role of philosophy that can contribute to the human being's ascent and growth based on realistic conditions of human existence described as the earth, that philosophy that can serve as a basis for existential transformation of human beings and their lives. The task of philosophers is to lay the groundwork for the possibility of changes for all human beings and their realization. This existential practical foundation of philosophy can be called the ${\ddot{u}}bermensch$, as it is healthy man, the "greatest reality" as Nietzsche desired.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.126
• /
• pp.345-376
• /
• 2013

Der vorliegende Beitrag zielt darauf ab, Nietzsches Einstellung zum Christentum zu $er{\ddot{o}}rtern$. Nietzsche gilt als einer der eindeutigsten Kritiker des Christentums in der $abendl{\ddot{a}}ndischen$ Geistesgeschichte. $F{\ddot{u}}r$ Nietzsche ist das Christentum nicht nur eine Religion, sondern auch eine Wertvorstellung, an der sich die $europ{\ddot{a}}ische$ Kultur orientiert hat. Nietzsche setzt sich die $vollst{\ddot{a}}ndig$ ${\ddot{U}}berwindung$ des Christentums zum Ziel, weil es der entscheidende Grund des Untergangs der $europ{\ddot{a}}ische$ Kultur ist. Ist Nietzsche Antichrist? Die Antwort auf die Frage ist sehr umstritten, denn Nietzsches Einstellung zum Christentum ist ambivalent. Freilich fokussiert Nietzsche seine Kritik nicht auf den Religionsstifter selbst, sondern auf den Apostel Paulus. In den verschiedenen Phasen seines Werkes erscheint Jesus in unterschiedlicher Weise. Er lehnt die Person Jesus nicht $grunds{\ddot{a}}tzlich$ ab, negiert aber den 'Typus' Jesus, z. B. als 'Idiot' und 'decadent'. Paulus ist der entscheidende Antipode $f{\ddot{u}}r$ Nietzsche. Der Apostel Paulus ist der wahre $Begr{\ddot{u}}nder$ des Christentums und der Sklavenmoral der Christen. Der vorliegende Aufsatz gibt Antworten auf die Fragen: Erstens, was das Christentum $f{\ddot{u}}r$ Nietzsche ist. Zweitens, wie Karl Jaspers Nietzsches $Verh{\ddot{a}}ltnis$ zu Jesus und Paulus besonders in Nietzsche und das Christentum beurteilt. Drittens, welches Problem die Interpretation von Jaspers besonders in Bezug auf seinen Begriff des 'Umgreifenden' hat.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.159-187
• /
• 2008

This article aims to investigate the change of theories of reading and its historical meaning in the later Joseon period. Three scholar who left major theories of reading are mainly analyzed for the sake of it. Park, Se-chae(1631-1695) was a Neo-Confucianist who had the theory of reading named Dokseo-Gungliron(讀書窮理論). It was totally based on the scheme of Neo-Confucianist instruction and concentrated on mastering the moral principles with relishing the sentences of the Confucian Canons. Jeong, Yak-yong(1762-1836) was a Practical learning scholar and then criticized the moral-centric theory of reading of Neo-Confucianism. He valued much of the Confucian Canons but also focused on erudite reading so as to enlarge practical knowledge. Hong, Gil-ju(1786-1841) was a stylist and presented a severe criticism against Neo-Confucianist theory of reading as much. He thought that what we could realize with reading are the principles of the individual, not of the whole. The change of theories of reading in the later Joseon period as above reveals us the fact that the intellectual history of that period was in the process of dynamical change.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.371-393
• /
• 2018

Jeong Yak-yong attempted to establish a new philosophical system through the criticism on Neo-Confucianism. The most important area among the ideas of Dasan is on the ethical thoughts. He has a tremendous interest in the ethical education as well as ethical thought. During his exile, he gathered children around and educated them by editing "Jegyeong(弟經)". Dasan regarded "Sohak(小學)" to have some problems in educating children. Thus, he reconstructed the contents of "Sohak" and edited "Jegyeong". "Jegyeong" is more concise than Sohak and is a textbook focusing on children which is mainly composed of practical etiquette in the everyday life. It contains etiquettes to parents, teachers and adults, etiquettes on food in the everyday life and etiquettes between men and women. Although the contents does not exceed the scope of Sohak, he selected reasonable contents and composed with practical contents. Thus, it is practical. Dasan also attempted to make a novel interpretation on Saseo (四書), i.e., Noneo, Maengja, Daehak and Jungyong. His new interpretation on Saseo can be considered as ethical textbooks in a broad sense. Dasan considered the key ethical principle of Saseo (四書) to be Seo (恕). Accordingly, he thought it is very important to understand and practice ethical principle of Seo (恕). Dasan studied and annotated "Simgyeong(心經)" and "Sohak(小學)" for self moral discipline. And, he thought it is utmost important to understand and accept the existence of Sangje (上帝) in order to keep moral mind. He believed it to be important to have Gyesingonggu (戒愼恐懼), which is to aware and respect the existence of Sangje (god) for self discipline and Sindok (愼獨) to be cautious about things that only he was aware of. He thought that if people are aware of Sangje (上帝) and make dialog with Sangje, the will of Sangje could be expressed into Dosim (道心). In the ethical education, it can be said that, ultimately, the awareness on the absolute being is the most important point to Dasan.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.144
• /
• pp.1-15
• /
• 2017

As early as three thousand years ago, Chinese philosophers had discussed the metaphysics. Ancient Chinese philosophers call the "superficial" problem "Dao", as opposed to the specific thing.Accordingly, and come out as many everyday transaction processing "the way", "the law", and even intellectual proposed, they constructed themselves of repair, and the law of life skills such as "truth" were called "Dao". Therefore, the Chinese traditional culture, in fact, formed a "Dao culture". Among them, the "Dao" of Confucianism and Daoism, plus the later, the "Dao" of Buddhism, are the most far-reaching impact, become two thousand years, leading the vast majority of Chinese people "values", "moral standards" and "thinking mode" of the three invisible forces. This article aims to outline description "Overview of Chinese Dao cultural formation", and in the most simple way, the main spirit of "Confucianism", "Daoism" and "Buddhism", And then summed up the characteristics of the Chinese traditional "Dao" culture centered on Confucianism, Daoism and Buddhism. This paper is hoping to let the world have a clearunderstanding of the traditional "metaphysical" culture of China.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.42
• /
• pp.47-68
• /
• 2016

This paper closely examines Popol Vuh, regarded as the Bible of the Mayans, from the perspective of the Deep Ecology. Deep ecology is a concept born out of the criticisms on the existing environmental movements as superficial, and encourages the moral and ethical change of the man's attitude towards the nature, inevitably becoming "metaphysical" in character. As such the Deep ecology advocates the break away from the anthropocentricism, the dichotomous thinking and the rationalism of the modern times. Popol Vuh is a text that contains such concepts and it requires an analysis from the Deep ecological perspective beyond the existing framework of the study that simply focuses on mythological elements.