• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.77-102
• /
• 2011

This paper is about the problems that Quine's criterion of ontological commitment creates for Nominalists. Quine's clear criterion of ontological commitment, summarized as "to be is to be the value of a variable", means that when we accept a sentence to be true, we are committed to the existence of things that must exist for the sentence to be true. The criterion causes problems for Nominalists. According to Quine's criterion, Nominalists who consider "Humility is a virtue" as true should accept the existence of the property, humility. However, Nominalists are reluctant to accept that properties such as humility exist, although they wish to accept what is meant by "humility is a virtue". The way out of this predicament is presenting a paraphrase which delivers what Nominalists wanted to say through the original sentence without ontological commitment to the property. Several attempts were made to paraphrase such sentences, only to fail. In this paper, successful paraphrases will be presented to cope with previously discussed difficulties. Beforehand, several issues involved in the Quine's criterion will be clarified. Also, Lewis's critical objection that we should give up the business of paraphrase will be discussed.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.1-31
• /
• 2008

최근 가장 영향력 있는 수학적 실재론과 관련된 논변은 버지스와 로젠의 딜레마이다. 일종의 반-유명론적 논증인 버지스-로젠 딜레마는 유명론자들이 취할 수 있는 제한된 선택지를 제시한 후 그 어느 선택지도 적절하지 못함을 주장하는 것이다. 논자 역시 버지스-로젠 딜레마가 성립한다면 유명론이 가망 없는 전략임에 동의한다. 그러나 논자는 그들의 논의가 유명론 대 실재론이라는 대립구도 대신, 유명론 대 수학 및 과학이라는 잘못된 대립구도를 전제하고 있음을 본 논문을 통해 밝히고자 한다. 간략히 말해, 논자는 버지스-로젠 딜레마는 수학자 및 과학자들의 주장이 글자 그대로 실재론을 함의함을 전제하는데, 이것은 실제 수학 및 과학 활동과 일치하지 않을뿐더러, 이를 입증하기 위해서는 철학적 가정이 개입해야 함을 밝히고, 그 과정에서 유명론의 가능성을 모색하고자 한다. 이러한 논자의 전략은 유명론 진영 안의 특정한 입장을 지지하는 것은 아니다. 버지스-로젠 딜레마는 특정한 유명론의 문제라기보다는 유명론 자체의 가능성과 관련된 것이기 때문이다.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.44 no.6
• /
• pp.533-539
• /
• 2023

This article reviews a few academic discussions in our geological society. The author presents his opinion on the discussions regarding the ages of the Okcheon Group, Myogog Formation, and hominid footprints of the Jeju Island, as well as on the inaccurate reportage in mass media. The academia advances via healthy debates and discussions. The arguments for and against Darwin's "Origin of Species" and scientific debates regarding Wegener's "Continental Drift Hypothesis" are well known. In academic debates or discussions, authority should not be involved in any form. Academic research should be conducted based on scientific principles and evidence-free of personal preferences or other nonacademic factors. Opponents should challenge with scientific approaches, suggesting alternatives based on science. Opposition without scientific basis is not productive in conducting academic research in search of scientific truth. Often, the news media delivers inaccurate information to the public-intentionally or unintentionally. There must be a mechanism to immediately identify and rectify inaccurate, false, or fake information for the benefit of the public and the credibility of the news media.