Ch'ŏrhak iran muŏt in'ga (1976) -- Hyŏnsanghak kwa punsŏk ch'ŏrhak (1977) -- Inyŏm kwa chilli, kŭrigo todŏk.

Inmunhak iran muŏt in'ga (T'onghap ŭi inmunhak, 2009) -- Tungji ŭi ch'ŏrhak (2010) -- Chonjae wa p'yohyŏn (2010) -- Mallarŭme ka mal hanŭn 'idea' ŭi kaenyŏm (Sorŭbon Taehakkyo paksa nonmun) -- P'ol Palleri e issŏsŏ chisŏng kwa hyŏnsil kwaŭi pyŏnjŭngpŏp ŭrosŏŭi si (Sŏul Taehakkyo sŏksa nonmun).

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.

Insik kwa silchon -- Si wa kwahak -- Isŏng ŭi siryŏn -- Ch'ŏrhak kwa si.

Uju ŭi chuin ŭn nugu in'ga -- Kwahak ch'ŏrhak iran muŏt in'ga (1993) -- Kwahak kisul ŭi ch'ukpok kwa chaeang (Kwahak, ch'ukpok in'ga chaeang in'ga, 2009) -- Munmyŏng ŭi mirae -- Saengmyŏng -- Hwan'gyŏng kwa hwan'gyŏng ch'ŏrhak -- Saengt'ae.

Yesul ch'ŏrhak (1983) -- Yesul kwa mi -- Yesul ŭi yangsiktŭl kwa mihak.

This study investigates the relationship among ethical philosophy, thinking style, and managerial ethical decision-making. Based on the premise that business ethics is a function of culture and time, we attempt to explore two important questions as to whether the national differences in managerial ethical philosophies remain over time and whether the relationship between thinking style and ethical decision-making is consistent across different national contexts. We conducted a survey on Korean managers’ ethical decision-making and thinking style and made a cross-cultural, cross-temporal (...) comparison with the results presented by previous studies that surveyed Korean and US managers with the same questionnaire at different points in time. Our analysis revealed that Korean managers have become more reliant on rule utilitarianism for ethical decision-making over the last two decades, which is dominantly used by US managers, corroborating our convergence hypothesis built on social contracts theory. However, as opposed to previous research, we found that managers with a balanced linear and nonlinear thinking style do not necessarily make more ethical decisions compared to those with a predominantly linear or nonlinear thinking style. This study contributes to international business ethics literature by presenting a theoretical framework that may explain the convergence of ethical philosophies employed by managers in different national contexts over time, and that the relationship between thinking style and managerial ethical decision-making may not be universal, but contingent on contextual factors. (shrink)

‘둥지’의 예술이라는 은유로 제시하는 탁월한 예술미학 강의! 예술작품은 언어를 사용하지 않고 인간의 의식 대상을 표현하고자 하는 시도에서 발생한다. 즉 그림, 무용, 연극 등 문학예술을 제외한 모든 예술양식의 언어 대부분은 감각 및 감성에만 의존하고 있는 것이다. 이러한 성격을 가장 잘 띠고 있는 예술적 언어의 모델로서 박이문 선생은 그의 예술철학과 사상의 핵심이라고 할 수 있는 새들의 ‘둥지’ 개념을 제시한다. ‘역동적인 새들의 둥지 리모델링 작업은 무한하고 유일한 삼라만상의 은유 즉 메타포’라고 주장하면서, 둥지의 예술철학을 창조적으로 증명해내고 있다.

Tongsŏ ŭi mannam -- Nojang sasang (1980) -- Nonŏ ŭi nolli (2005) -- Nabi ŭi kkum e tamgin saeroun hŭimang.

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.

이 책은 철학과 문학,예술과 과학,예술과 철학,예술과 미학 등 각기 다른 분야의 상호 공통성과 변별성, 그리고 상호 침투 현상을 엄밀한 이론적 논증을 통해 추적하는 저자의 철학적 편력기라고 할 가벼운글들과 함께 어우러져 재미있고 진지하게 읽히는 독특한 철학서이다.

An energy efficiency scenario (Joint Institute for a Sustainable Energy and Environmental Future) demonstrates that an energy future built on the use of cost-effective, high-efficiency technologies is clearly within the grasp of South Korea and would justify a nuclear power moratorium with significantly lower carbon dioxide emissions. This is a promising result, especially because applications of other sustainable energy options, such as renewables, decentralized technologies, material recycling/reuse, ecologically based land use planning, forest conservation, sustainable agriculture, and redirection of economic development (...) toward an environment-friendly industrial base, are not included in the analysis. Here lies one of the most fundamental policy choices of the newcentury: Will we build a sustainable energy and environmental future, or will we send forward the burdens and risks of a policy regime that is unwilling to value the future beyond the satisfaction of short-term interests and convenience? It is a critical time for South Korean policy making. (shrink)