• Journal of Christian Education in Korea
• /
• v.67
• /
• pp.157-194
• /
• 2021

The issue of AI's ethical consciousness has been constantly on the rise. AI learns and imitates everything behavior human beings do, just like a child. Therefore, the ethical consciousness we currently demand from AI is first the ethical consciousness required of humans, and at the center of it is the dignity of humans. Thus, this study analyzed human identity and its problems according to the development of AI technology, apologized the theological premises and characteristics of human dignity, and sought the direction of human dignity education as follows. First, this study discussed the development of AI and its relation to human beings. The development of AI's technology has led to the sharing of "reason or intelligence" with machines called AI which have been restricted to the exclusive property of mankind. This raised the question of the superior humanity which humans would be remained to be distinguished from AI machines. Second, this study discussed transhumanism and human identity. Transhumanism has been argued for the combination of AI machines and humans in order to improve inefficient human intelligence and human capabilities. However, the combination of AI machines with humans raised the issue of human identity. In the AI era, human identity is to believe thoughts that God had when he built us. Third, this study apologized theological premise and characteristic about human dignity. Human dignity has become a key concept of the constitution and international human rights treaties around the world. Nonetheless, declarative conviction that human is dignified is difficult to be understanded without Christian theological premise. Theological premise of human dignity lies on the fact that human is dignified feature being granted life by Heavenly Father. This feature lies on longing for "Goodness" and "eternality", pursuit of beauty, a happy being in relationship with others. Fourth, this study presented the direction of human dignity education. The direction of human dignity education has to awaken what is identity of human and how human beings were created and how much they are precious. Furthermore, it lead human to ponder consciously and accept the highest value of what human beings are, how they were created, and how precious they are. That is about educating human identity, and its core is that regardless of the circumstances - the wealth gap, knowledge level, skin color, gender, age, disability, etc. - all people are in God's image and for the glory of God, thereby being very important to God.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.77-108
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the characteristics of 'Podeok' in Daesoon Jinrihoe. The term Podeok can cause some misunderstanding as the same word Deok (德 virtue) has long been used in the Eastern Tradition. In other words, for most people who are used to traditional thought, Podeok may be conflated with the similar word 'Deok (virtue)' as used within Confucianism. People who are familiar with Confucian culture might thereby misunderstand the term Podeok as an aspect of Confucian moral ethics, or they could misconstrue Daesoon Jinrihoe as having appropriated and misused Confucian ideas. Furthermore, there are other problems that could arise if people compare Daesoon Jinrihoe's 'Podeok' with 'Deok (virtue)' as used by Laozi. While Deok in Laozi's usage represents the ability of an individual who can exercise his or her rationality with excellence, Deok in Daesoon Jinrihoe indicates the idea of actualizing Mutual Beneficence and the conditions that enable Mutual Beneficence. If one understands Deok as used by Laozi to contain the meaning of Mutual Beneficence, then it is possible to think that the two tradition share a similar meaning of Deok as Podeok in Daesoon Jinrihoe pursues Mutual Beneficence as its ultimate value. In order to preemptively correct these misunderstandings, I need to clarify how the idea of Deok was born out of traditional thought and what meanings it embodies. Additionally, it is necessary to examine how it became meaningful in Confucianism, and how it was criticized and ascribed new meanings in Laozi's thought. Through these clarification, it will become clear that Deok originally indicated a religious ritual that the king of the Zhou Dynasty performed after receiving the heavenly mandate and assuming rule over the nation. Later, this idea was transformed into a moral virtue and norm by Confucius. This moral virtue and norm was criticized by Laozi as an unnatural form of control as it was understood by Laozi as a teleological argument justifying whether or not lives were to be saved or sustained based on the perceived merits of each individual. On the contrary, Deok in Daesoon Jinrihoe and traditional thought stand on a totally different theological bases. Deok in Daesoon Jinrihoe is a means to practice and realize the truth of the earthly paradise of the Later World and the truth of Mutual Beneficence which were posited to the world through Kang Jeungsan's Works of Haewon (grievance resolution) that resolved the pattern of mutual conflict that characterized the Former World. Therefore, the idea of Podeok in Daesoon Jinrihoe gains completion only on the premises of Haewon Sangsaeng (resolution of grievances for mutual beneficence) and Boeun Sangsaeng (reciprocation of favors for mutual beneficence), and the way to practice Podeok is to practice Haewon Sangsaeng and Boeun Sangsaeng. In addition, the subordinate virtues such as loyalty, filial piety, and faithfulness that exist within Daesoon Jinrihoe's religious practice are not same as those of traditional thought. They are new concepts of virtues drawn from the cosmological laws of Daesoon Jinrihoe. To be specific, the virtues of Daesoon Jinrihoe are not rules that create discrimination and mutual conflict, but are instead ethical rules established upon the basis of Heaven and Earth having been newly organized, and thus, they will bring virtuous concordance, harmonious union, and mutual beneficence. The idea of 'Podeok' in Daesoon Jinrihoe can be understood as a religious practice that requires doctrinal understanding and tangible practice in daily life of followers. In other words, it is not the same Deok of earlier traditional thought in East Asia, but is instead a religious truth by which practitioners realize the truth of Sangje's Works of Haewon in human world as they practice Haewon Sangsaeng and Boeun Sangsaeng.