• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.4
• /
• pp.565-575
• /
• 2017

This study analyzes the epistemic considerations and the argumentation level revealed in the discourse of the key concept of natural selection for science-gifted elementary students. The paper analyzes and discusses the results of a three-student focus group, drawn from a cohort of twenty gifted sixth-grade elementary students. Nature, generality, justification, and audience were used to analyze epistemic consideration. Learning progression in scientific argumentation including argument construction and critique was used to analyze students' scientific argumentation level. The findings are as follows: First, Epistemic considerations in discourse varied between key concepts of natural selection discussed. The nature aspect of epistemic considerations is highly expressed in the discourse for all natural selection key concepts. But the level of generality, justification and audience was high or low, and the level was not revealed in the discourse. In the heredity of variation, which is highly expressed in terms of generality of knowledge, the linkage with various phenomena against the acquired character generated a variety of ideas. These ideas were used to facilitate engagement in argumentation, so that all three students showed the level of argumentation of suggestions of counter-critique. Second, students tried to explain the process of speciation by using concepts that were high in practical epistemic considerations level when explaining the concept of speciation, which is the final natural selection key concept. Conversely, the concept of low level of epistemic considerations was not included as an explanation factor. The results of this study suggest that students need to analyze specific factors to understand why epistemological decisions are made by students and how epistemological resources are used according to context through various epistemological resources. Analysis of various factors influencing epistemological decisions can be a mediator of the instructor who can improve the quality and level of the argumentation.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.145
• /
• pp.351-380
• /
• 2018

In every society, citizens must decide how to punish criminals, uphold the virtue of justice, and preserve the security of the community. In doing so, the members of society must ask themselves how they will punish those who carry out the most abhorrent of crimes. Many common responses to such a question is that death is an acceptable punishment for the most severe crimes. But to draw some theoretical distinction between a crime that deserves incarceration and a crime that is so heinous that it deserves capital punishment is subject to three errors. First, what possible line could be drawn? To decide on a particular number of deaths or to employ any standard would be arbitrary. Second, the use of a line would trivialize and undermine the deaths of those whose murderers fell below the standard. Third, any and all executions still are unjust, as the State should not degrade the institution of justice and dehumanize an individual who, although he or she has no respect for other human life, is still a living person. Simply put, all murders are heinous, all are completely unacceptable, and deserve the greatest punishment of the land; however, death as punishment is inappropriate. Also, while this article arrives at the conclusion that the death penalty is an inappropriate form of punishment, I have not offered an acceptable alternative that would appease those who believe capital offenders deserve a punishment that differs in its quality and severity. This is a burden that, admittedly, I am unable to meet. I finally conclude that the death penalty is unjustified retribution. This is the only claim that can effectively shift the intellectual paradigms of the participants in the debate. The continued use of the death penalty in society can only be determined and influenced by the collective conscience of the members of that society. As stated at the outset of this article, it is this essentially moral conflict regarding what is just and degrading that forms the backdrop for the past changes in and the present operation of our system of imposing death as a punishment for crime.

• Journal of Korean Medical classics
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.121-141
• /
• 2007

The outline and characteristics of the important doctors of the 'Zhe Zhong Pai'(折衷派) are as follows. Part 1. In the late Edo(江戶) period The 'Zhe Zhong Pai', which tried to take the theory and clinical treatment of the 'Hou Shi Pai (後世派)' and the 'Gu Fang Pai (古方派)' and get their strong points to make treatments perfect, appeared. Their point was 'The main part is the art of the ancients, The latter prescriptions are to be used'(以古法爲主, 後世方爲用) and the "Shang Han Lun(傷寒論)" was revered for its treatments but in actual use it was not kept at that. As mentioned above The 'Zhe Zhong Pai ' viewed treatments as the base, which was the view of most doctors in the Edo period, However, the reason the 'Zhe Zhong Pai' is not valued as much as the 'Gu Fang Pai' by medical history books in Japan is because the 'Zhe Zhong Pai' does not have the substantiation or uniqueness of the 'Gu Fang Pai', and also because the view of 'gather as well as store up' was the same as the 'Kao Zheng Pai', Moreover, the 'compromise'(折衷) point of view was from taking in both Chinese and western medical knowledge systems(漢蘭折衷), Generally the pioneer of the 'Zhe Zhong Pai' is seen as Mochizuki Rokumon(望月鹿門) and after that was Fukui Futei(福井楓亭), Wadato Kaku(和田東郭), Yamada Seichin(山田正珍) and Taki Motohiro(多紀元簡), Part 2. The lives of Wada Tokaku(和田東郭), Nakagame Kinkei(中神琴溪), Nei Teng Xi Zhe(內藤希哲), the important doctors of the 'Zhe Zhong Pai', are as follows First. Wada Tokaku(和田東郭, 1743-1803) was born when the 'Hou Shi Pai' was already declining and the 'Gu Fang Pai' was flourishing and learned medicine from a 'Hou Shi Pai' doctor, Hu Tian Xu Shan(戶田旭山) and a 'Gu Fang Pai' doctor, Yoshimasu Todo(吉益東洞). He was not hindered by 'the old ways(古方), and did not lean towards 'the new ways(後世方)' and formed a way of compromise that 'looked at hardness and softness as the same'(剛柔相摩) by setting 'the cure of the disease' as the base, and said that to cure diseases 'the old way' must be used, but 'the new way' was necessary to supplement its shortcomings. His works include "Dao Shui Suo Yan", "Jiao Chiang Fang Yi Je" and "Yi Xue Sho(醫學說)" Second. Nakagame Kinkei(中神琴溪, 1744-1833) was famous for leaving Yoshirnasu Todo(吉益東洞) and changing to the 'Zhe Zhong Pai', and in his early years used qing fen(輕粉) to cure geisha(妓女) of syphilis. His argument was "the "Shang Han Lun" must be revered but needs to be adapted", "Zhong jing can be made into a follower but I cannot become his follower", "the later medical texts such as "Ru Men Shi Qin(儒門事親)" should only be used for its prescriptions and not its theories". His works include "Shang Han Lun Yue Yan(傷寒論約言) Third. Nei Teng Xi Zhe(內藤希哲, 1701-1735) learned medicine from Qing Shui Xian Sheng(淸水先生) and went out to Edo. In his book "Yi Jing Jie Huo Lun(醫經解惑論)" he tells of how he went from 'learning'(學) to 'skepticism'(惑) and how skepticism made him learn in 'the six skepticisms'(六惑). In the latter years Xi Zhe(希哲) combines the "Shen Nong Ben Cao jing(神農本草經)", the main text for herbal medicine, "Ming Tang jing(明堂經)" of accupuncture, basic theory texts "Huang Dui Nei jing(黃帝內徑)" and "Nan jing(難經)" with the "Shang Han Za Bing Lun", a book that the 'Gu Fang Pai' saw as opposing to the rest, and became 'an expert of five scriptures'(五經一貫). Part 3. Asada Showhaku(淺田宗伯, 1815-1894) started medicine at Zhong Cun Zhong(中村中倧) and learned 'the old way'(古方) from Yoshirnasu Todo and got experience through Chuan Yue(川越) and Fu jing(福井) and received teachings in texts, history and Wang Yangmin's principles(陽明學) from famous teachers. Showhaku(宗伯) meets a medical official of the makufu(幕府), Ben Kang Zong Yuan(本康宗圓), and recieves help from the 3 great doctors of the Edo period, Taki Motokato(多紀元堅), Xiao Dao Xue GU(小島學古) and Xi Duo Cun Kao Chuang and further develops his arts. At 47 he diagnoses the general Jia Mao(家茂) with 'heart failure from beriberi'(脚氣衝心) and becomes a Zheng Shi(徵I), at 51 he cures a minister from France and received a present from Napoleon, at 65 he becomes the court physician and saves Ming Gong(明宮) jia Ren Qn Wang(嘉仁親王, later the 大正犬皇) from bodily convulsions and becomes 'the vassal of merit who saved the national polity(國體)' At the 7th year of the Meiji(明治) he becomes the 2nd owner of Wen Zhi She(溫知社) and takes part in the 'kampo continuation movement'. In his latter years he saw 14000 patients a year, so we can estimate the quality and quantity of his clinical skills Showhaku(宗伯) wrote over 80 books including the "Ju Chuang Shu Ying(橘窓書影)", "WU Wu Yao Shi Fang Han(勿誤藥室方函)", "Shang Han Biang Shu(傷寒辨術)", "jing Qi Shen Lun(精氣神論)", "Hunag Guo Ming Yi Chuan(皇國名醫傳)" and the "Xian Jhe Yi Hua(先哲醫話)". Especially in the "Ju Chuang Shu Ying(橘窓書影)" he says "the old theories are the main, and the new prescriptions are to be used"(以古法爲主, 後世方爲用), stating the 'Zhe Zhong Pai' way of thinking. In the first volume of "Shung Han Biang Shu(傷寒辨術) and "Za Bing Lun Shi(雜病論識)", 'Zong Ping'(總評), He discerns the parts that are not Zhang Zhong Jing's writings and emphasizes his theories and practical uses.