I. 왜 씨알인가 1. 씨알의 의미와 내용 2. 씨알사상과 씨알의 삶 3. 씨알사상의 시대적 의미 II. 씨알사상은 어떻게 생겨났는가 1. 동서문명의 만남 2. 씨알사상의 형성 3. 동서사상의 어울림 III. 내가 씨알이다 1. 주체의 철학 2. 스스로 함의 원리 3. 생각하는 백성이라야 산다 IV. 세계평화가 씨알에서 움튼다 1. 세계평화의 길 2. 반생명에서 생명친화로 3. 비폭력의 힘 V. 씨알은 세계통일로 나아간다 1. 세계통일을 위한 진통 2. 세계통일의 철학적 근거 3. 세계통일의 실천 VI. 씨알은 섬김으로 이끈다 1. 민주통일시대의 철학 2. 불타는 씨알생명 3. (...) 씨알의 삶과 섬기는 지도력 대담|21세기 씨알사상의 의미. (shrink)

철학계의 올림픽이라 할 세계철학대회가 2008년, 아시아권에서는 처음으로 서울에서 열렸다. 대회의 주제는 ‘동서 철학 전통의 만남과 융합’이었고, 유영모와 함석헌의 사상을 소개하는 특별분과가 열렸다. 다른 분과의 수강생은 서너 명에 불과했지만 유영모ᆞ함석헌 분과에는 800여 명이 몰리는 현상이 벌어졌고 이후 유럽과 일본에서는 씨알사상에 대한 본격적 연구가 시작되었다. 철학이 없어 더욱 불행했던 시기라고 하는 우리의 20세기는 유영모와 함석헌이라는 두 사상가를 숨겨 놓았다. 이 책은『다석일지』, 『다석강의』, 『뜻으로 본 한국역사』 등 두 거장의 저작에서 알짬을 뽑아 해설을 덧붙인 365일 묵상집이다. 우리말과 우리글로 철학을 한 두 사상가를 오랫동안 연구하고 (...) 글을 발표해 온 박재순 씨알사상연구소 소장이 해설을 붙였다. (shrink)

In'gan kwa sin, kŭrigo chonggyo -- Chonggyo ran muŏt in'ga (1985) -- Chabi ŭi yullihak (1990) -- Silchonjŏk sont'aek kwa sahoejŏk kyubŏm -- In'gan kwa insaeng e kwanhan sŏngch'al.

Hana man ŭi sŏnt'aek, ch'ŏrhakchŏk chajŏn -- Samul ŭi ŏnŏ, silchonjŏk chajŏn -- Na ŭi kil, na ŭi sam -- Tŏburŏ sanŭn sam ŭi silch'ŏn, int'ŏbyu -- Pak I-mun, saengae wa hŭnjŏk.

Portion of Tattvacintāmaṇi dealing with the essential nature of a proposition (Pakṣatā) and portion dealing with the definition of fallacious middle term (Hetvābhāsasamanyanirukti); Sanskrit text with commentary and translation.

1. An Tŏng-mun ŭi hangmun chŏngsin kwa ch'ŏse pangsik -- 2. An Tŏng-mun ŭi Samsan Sŏwŏn wisang chŏngnip kwa kŭ ŭimi -- 3. Ha Ik-pŏm ŭi sam kwa munhak -- 4. Pak Ch'i-bok ŭi Nammyŏnghak kyesŭng yangsang -- 5. Kang Pyŏng-ju ŭi hangmun kwa munhak -- 6. Chŏng Chae-gyu ŭi hangmun chŏngsin kwa 'Taehak' haesŏk -- 7. Kim Chin-ho ŭi haksŏl e taehayŏ -- 8. Kwak Chong-sŏk ŭi Myŏngdŏksŏl nonjaeng -- 9. Kim Hwang ŭi Kyŏnghak Sipto e taehayŏ.

There are a number of recent attempts to introduce Confucian values to the ethical analysis of technology. These works, however, have not attended sufficiently to one central aspect of Confucianism, namely Ritual (‘Li’). Li is central to Confucian ethics, and it has been suggested that the emphasis on Li in Confucian ethics is what distinguishes it from other ethical traditions. Any discussion of Confucian ethics for technology, therefore, remains incomplete without accounting for Li. This chapter aims to elaborate on the (...) concept of Confucian Li and discuss its relevance to ethics of technology. Particularly, by referring to Li’s communicative, formative, and aesthetic function, I formulate an approach to ethics of technology with an emphasis on community, performance, and the aesthetic and demonstrate how this approach proceeds with the ethical analysis of technology. In doing so, I attempt to answer the question: why Confucianism matters in ethics of technology. (shrink)

교사와 장학관을 역임한 저자가 들려주는 전통도덕의 원리와 실천서. 유가의 사상, 유가의 생활, 제도와 예법, 유가 전적의 이해 등을 설명했다. 전통적 생활방 식과 가치를 이해하고 실천하는데 도움이 되도록 엮었다.

When the odds of achieving world peace seem so long, do hopes for peace amount to anything more than wishful thinking? In this paper, I introduce the idea of meaningful hope, which can help us to u...

In a society marked by liberal gun ownership laws, and an increasingly militarized police force, how should we think about cases where a homeowner shoots a person who has mistakenly knocked on the wrong door, or where a police officer shoots someone who is unarmed? The general tendency – by shooters, courts, and many observers – is to use the framework of self-defense. However, as I will argue, relying on the framework of self-defense is inappropriate in these cases, because theories (...) of self-defensive killing are built up around a very specific type of case, namely, a random, sudden, one-off encounter between roughly equally matched strangers. When a person who acts in self-defense has undertaken certain preparations to kill in self-defense – such as buying a gun, or undergoing certain kinds of training – they transform what would have been defensive violence into offensive violence. But because the self-defense framework distinguishes only between defensive and aggressive violence, it cannot easily register the unique moral features of offensive violence. Relying on the self-defense framework, then, produces judgments that are overly permissive of killings by gun owners and police, masking them as self-defensive when in fact they are much more morally fraught. (shrink)

Formal models of appearance and reality have proved fruitful for investigating structural properties of perceptual knowledge. This paper applies the same approach to epistemic justification. Our central goal is to give a simple account of The Preface, in which justified belief fails to agglomerate. Following recent work by a number of authors, we understand knowledge in terms of normality. An agent knows p iff p is true throughout all relevant normal worlds. To model The Preface, we appeal to the normality (...) of error. Sometimes, it is more normal for reality and appearance to diverge than to match. We show that this simple idea has dramatic consequences for the theory of knowledge and justification. Among other things, we argue that a proper treatment of The Preface requires a departure from the internalist idea that epistemic justification supervenes on the appearances and the widespread idea that one knows most when free from error. (shrink)