• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.135-165
• /
• 2010

In this paper, I explore Turner's argument against libertarianism. He claims that libertarians can't be compatible with naturalism, without abandoning the Consequence Argument. In order to support this claim, he proposes the Supervenience Argument. According to him, the Supervenience Argument can't be rejected without abandoning either the Consequence Argument or naturalism. But I show that libertarians don't have to accept his Supervenience Argument, even though they stick to the Consequence Argument, and that even though they accept his Supervenience Argument, they don't have to abandon the freedom of agent. For these reasons, I conclude that Turner's argument against libertarianism turns out a failure.

• Lingua Humanitatis
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.301-319
• /
• 2002

In a recent paper, I have proposed an analysis concerning propositions and 'that'-clauses as a solution to Kripke's puzzle and other similar puzzles, which I now call 'the Indefinite Description Analysis of Belief Ascription Sentences.' I have listed some of the major advantages of this analysis besides its merit as a solution to the puzzles: it is amenable to the direct-reference theory of proper names; it does not nevertheless need to introduce Russellian (singular) propositions or any other new entities. David Lewis has constructed an interesting argument to refute this analysis. His argument seems to show that my analysis has an unwelcome consequence: if someone believes any proposition, then he or she should, ipso facto, believe any necessary (mathematical or logical) proposition (such as the proposition that 1 succeeds 0). In this paper, I argue that Lewis's argument does not pose a real threat to my analysis. All his argument shows is that we should not accept the assumption called 'the equivalence thesis': if two sentences are equivalent, then they express the same proposition. I argue that this thesis is already in trouble for independent reasons. Especially, I argue that if we accept the equivalence thesis then, even without my analysis, we can derive a sentence like 'Fred believes that 1 succeeds 0 and snow is white' from a sentence like 'Fred believes that snow is white.' The consequence mentioned above is not worse than this consequence.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.359-387
• /
• 2015

As is well known, the consequence argument(shortly, CA) is intended as showing the incompatibility of free will and determinism. Recently, professor Choi Hoon tries to show there is a way in which Davidson's anomalous monism(shortly, AM) can be interpreted to counter CA. But I do not agree with his interpretation. So, in this paper, I will try to show why in the following way. In order to counter CA, it must be possible for AM to deny at least one of the premises of CA or to deny ${\beta}$ rule which guarantees the validity of CA or to show that free will is compatible with determinism in spite of the soundness of CA. In this paper, I will show that AM can do neither.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.197-217
• /
• 2014

In my previous papers, I have argued that the so-called 'Uncontested Principle' does not hold for indicative conditionals based on inductive reasoning. This is mainly because if we accept that a material conditional '$A{\supset}C$' can be inferred from an indicative conditional based on inductive reasoning '$A{\rightarrow}_iC$', we get an absurd consequence such that we cannot distinguish between claiming 'C' to be probably true and claiming 'C' to be absolutely true on the assumption 'A'. However, in his recent paper "Uncontested Principle and Inductive Argument", Eunsuk Yang objects that my argument is unsuccessful in disputing the Uncontested Principle. In this paper, I show that his objections are irrelevant to my argument against the Uncontested Principle.

• English Language & Literature Teaching
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.107-125
• /
• 2006

This article reports some Korean EFL learners' cognitive tendencies drawn up from their responses to logical fallacies in the argument passages, and its pedagogical implications. The findings of experimental study show the meaningful disparities in three sets of judgment tests designed to identify and explicate faulty arguments: based on the three general types of fallacies using language, emotions, and distraction tactics, subjects on average gained the highest scores in the test questions with language-loaded fallacies and the lowest scores in those with emotion-based ones among the three different types; for this reason, the scores that subjects obtained in the test of distraction-loaded fallacious arguments fell in between the two poles. These discrepancies, mainly based on statistical inferences, support the possibility that the Korean EFL learners are most likely to be manipulated by emotions/distraction- loaded argument tactics than by language-based ones in the three types of fallacious arguments; and, they are least likely to be influenced by language-oriented trickeries. As a consequence, such variances in abilities to recognize the intrinsic elements of logical fallacies suggest some basic instructional approaches to critical reading of argumentative texts with due weights on the Korean EFL learners' culture-specific cognitive tendencies.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.163-196
• /
• 2017

Wittgenstein declares in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus that he resolved Russell's Paradox. According to him, a function cannot be its own argument. If we assume that a function F(fx) can be its own argument, a proposition "F(F(fx))" will be given, where the outer function F has a meaning different from the inner function F. In consequence, "F(F(fx))" will not be able to have a definite sense. Why, however, does Wittgenstein call into question a function F(fx) and "F(F(fx))"? To answer this question, we must examine closely Russell's own resolution of Russell's Paradox. Only when we can understand Russell's resolution can we do Wittgenstein's resolution. In particular, I will endeavor to show that the idea in Wittgenstein's 1913 letter to Russell provides a decisive clue for this problem.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.155-183
• /
• 1998

The purpose of this paper is to explore the syntactic criteria for determining a secondary predicates as a predicate modifier or a conjunction, and to formalize the semantic aspects of the [-ke] structure as a predicate in Korean. Syntactically, the [-ke] structure is considered to be a secondary predicate when the shared arguments appear in both the [-ke] structure and the main verb structure. On the other hand, if they do not appear in both structures, the [-ke] structure is considered to be a connective element. Semantically the [-ke] structure has numerous aspects such as depictives, resultatives, objectivity, and emphasis. The depictives of the secondary predicate can be formalize as $p{\wedge}q$ where p represents a propositional expression of the secondary predicate and q is a propositional expression of the main verb. Resultatives have the logical form $q{\rightarrow}{\Box}p$, because the consequence has to always be true. However, objectivity has the logical form $q{\rightarrow}{\diamondsuit}p$, because the consequence can be either true or false. Emphasis is represented as $q{\rightarrow}p{\uparrow}$ because the secondary predicate represents the polarity of the event.

• Lingua Humanitatis
• /
• v.5
• /
• pp.93-106
• /
• 2003

Professor Daihyun Chung has recently presented an intriguing view of Ban-mal(non-honorific expressions) in Korean. He criticizes uses of Ban-mal, on the grounds that they presuppose the existence of hierarchical structures in human beings. Professor Chung also advocates ″a relational theory of Ban-mal″ according to which ascriptions of 'n-mal' should be relativized to the speaker-hearer relationship. He employs this view in showing that uses of Ban-mal indeed presuppose the existence of hierarchical structures in human beings I claim that Professor Chung has not shown the credibility of his relational theory of Ban-mal, and that this very view leads to an unintended and undesirable consequence. Moreover, 1 show that even if we assume that this view is true for the sake of an argument, he is not able to show that uses of Ban-mal indeed presuppose the existence of hierarchical structures. All he can show is rather that uses of 'Ban-mal'(a meta-linguistic expression) presuppose the existence of hierarchical structures. Finally, 1 conclude that what really presupposes the existence of hierarchical structures is the asymmetrical uses of Ban-mal and honorific expressions.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.353-379
• /
• 2019

This paper aims to determine factors causing the stagnation of Korean firms' fixed investment after the global financial crisis, using panel data for the period of 1999-2016. Fixed investment remained sensitive to cash flow and Tobin's q although their effects decreased after the global financial crisis. A decreasing trend of cash flow and an increase in Tobin's q since the early 2000's imply that the worsening cash flow was a major factor behind the sluggish investment after the crisis. Meanwhile, debt-equity ratio remained significant for non-chaebol affiliated firms, reflecting disparity in access to external financing. Volatility of stock returns also became insignificant after the crisis, casting doubt on the argument that uncertainty was a major factor contributing to the decline of fixed investment. Analysis of financial investment confirmed the significant effect of cash flow, larger than that on financial investment than on fixed investment. In particular, debt repayment and other financial investment, except share repurchase, were sensitive to cash flow. However, the substitution of fixed investment by financial investment is a consequence, rather than a cause of declining fixed investment.

• Journal of Korean Medical classics
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.111-133
• /
• 2017

Objectives : Dryness pathogen, which is one of six pathogenic factors, causes dryness diseases. Currently, the theory on dryness disease is composed of external dryness and internal dryness. External dryness, in turn, is composed of cool dryness and warm dryness. However, these categorizations and their symptoms bear ambiguity for many reasons. Therefore, this paper aims to review various texts in order to study the special features of dryness pathogen and dryness disease. Methods : Texts that deal with dryness pathogen and dryness disease were studied. Most texts are comprised of dissertations and historical medical texts, therefore, CNKI and The Sikuquanshu's databases, and Traditional Chinese Medical(TCM) book webdatabases were utilized. Materials are listed in chronological order, and their main points regarding dryness pathogen and dryness disease are compared. Results & Conclusions : It is difficult to accept the assertion that dryness pathogen does not lead to external dryness. Dryness does not have the elements of chill and fever in itself. Dryness's elements of chill and fever are determined in the ways they combine with each individual element. Moreover, the symptoms of chill and fever on dryness disease are subject to the host's body type. External dryness and internal dryness cannot be discussed within an identical premise. Whereas the dryness in external dryness signifies the cause of a disease, the dryness in internal dryness is the consequence of a disease. In other words, internal dryness revolves around cause of disease and external dryness revolves around the mechanic of disease. It's difficult to determine whether these diseases are caused by dryness or wetness in Autumn. There is an understanding which integrates these together through the Yunqi theory, but it is imperfect.