HOME > °Ô½ÃÆÇ > °øÁö»çÇ×
°øÁö»çÇ×
2019³â µ¿¾çöÇаú BK21Ç÷¯½º »ç¾÷´Ü Á¦ 70ȸ ÇØ¿ÜÇÐÀÚ ÃÊû°­¿¬

À¯Çö¼® 2019-05-21

2019³â µ¿¾çöÇаú BK21Ç÷¯½º »ç¾÷´Ü

 

Á¦ 70ȸ ÇØ¿ÜÇÐÀÚ ÃÊû°­¿¬

 

 

¾È³çÇϽʴϱî!

 

µ¿¾çöÇаú BK21Ç÷¯½º »ç¾÷´Ü¿¡¼­´Â 6¿ù 7ÀÏ(±Ý), ¹Ì±¹ ÇÏ¿ÍÀÌ ´ëÇб³(University of Hawaii at Manoa) öÇаú¿¡ ÀçÀÓ ÁßÀÎ ÇÁ·©Å¬¸° ÆÛŲ½º(Franklin Perkins) ±³¼ö´ÔÀÇ ÃÊû °­¿¬À» °³ÃÖÇÕ´Ï´Ù.

 

ÆÛŲ½º ±³¼ö´ÔÀº Áß±¹Ã¶Çаú µ¿¼­ºñ±³Ã¶ÇÐ ºÐ¾ßÀÇ ±ÇÀ§Àڷμ­ ÇØ´çºÐ¾ß¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±íÀÌ ÀÖÀ¸¸é¼­µµ Çõ½ÅÀûÀÎ Çؼ®À» ÅëÇØ ¸¹Àº ÈǸ¢ÇÑ ¿¬±¸ ¼º°ú¸¦ µµÃâÇÏ°í °è½Ê´Ï´Ù. ±³¼ö´ÔÀÇ ´ëÇ¥Àú¼­ Heaven and Earth Are Not Humane: The Problem of Evil in Classical Chinese Philosophy, Leibniz and China: A Commerce of Light´Â ÀÌ¿Í °°Àº ±³¼ö´ÔÀÇ Çй®À» Àß º¸¿©ÁÖ°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.

 

À̹ø ÃÊû °­¿¬Àº 2°³ÀÇ ¼¼¼ÇÀ¸·Î ³ª´©¾îÁý´Ï´Ù. ¿ì¼± ù ¹ø° ¼¼¼ÇÀº ¡°¸ÍÀÚ¿¡¼­ µµ´öÀû °¡Ä¡¿Í ºñµµ´öÀû °¡Ä¡´Â ±¸º°µÇ´Â°¡? (Is there a distinction between moral and non¡ªmoral values in the Mengzi?)¡±¶ó´Â Á¦¸ñÀ¸·Î ÁøÇàµÇ´Â Ư°­ÀÔ´Ï´Ù. µµ´öÀû/ºñµµ´öÀû °¡Ä¡¶ó´Â À̺йýÀû Ʋ·Î¡º¸ÍÀÚ¡»¸¦ ÀÌÇØÇÏ´Â ¹æ½ÄÀÌ °®°í ÀÖ´Â ¹®Á¦Á¡À» ÆľÇÇÏ°í, ¸ÍÀÚ°¡ °¡Ä¡µéÀ» ü°èÈ­ÇÏ´Â ¹æ½ÄÀ» ¼³¸íÇϴµ¥ ÃÊÁ¡À» ¸ÂÃä´Ï´Ù.

 

À̾ µÎ ¹ø° ¼¼¼ÇÀº ±¹Á¦ÇмúÁö °ÔÀ縦 À§ÇÑ ³í¹® ¼¼¹Ì³ªÀÔ´Ï´Ù. ÆÛŲ½º ±³¼ö´ÔÀº A&HCI Àú³ÎÀÎ Philosophy East & West ÀÇ ÆíÁýÀåÀ¸·Î¼­ ±¹Á¦Àú¸íÇмúÁö °ÔÀ縦 ¸ñÇ¥·Î ÇÏ´Â ´ëÇпø»ý, ½ÅÁø ¿¬±¸Àڵ鿡°Ô È¿°úÀûÀÎ Á¶¾ðÀ» ÇØÁÙ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ºÐÀÔ´Ï´Ù. ƯÈ÷ ÇØ´ç Àú³ÎÀº ±¹³» ¿¬±¸ÀÚµéÀÌ ¸¹ÀÌ Áö¿øÇÏ´Â ÇмúÁöÀ̱⠶§¹®¿¡, ±¹³»¿¬±¸ÀÚµéÀÌ ³í¹® Åõ°í½Ã ¹üÇÏ´Â ¿À·ù, ¹®Á¦Á¡¿¡ ´ëÇØ »ó¼¼È÷ ¼³¸íÇØÁÖ½Ç °ÍÀ¸·Î ±â´ëÇÕ´Ï´Ù.

 

Áß±¹Ã¶Çп¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼­±¸ÇаèÀÇ µ¿ÇâÀ» »ìÆ캸°í »õ·Î¿î Á¢±Ù¹æ½ÄÀ» ¹è¿ï ¼ö ÀÖÀ» »Ó¸¸ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó, ±¹Á¦ÇмúÁö Åõ°í¸¦ ÁغñÇÏ´Â ´ëÇпø»ý ¹× ¿¬±¸ÀÚ ¿©·¯ºÐ²² ½ÇÁúÀûÀÎ µµ¿òÀ» ÁÙ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ¼ÒÁßÇÑ ±âȸ´Ï¸¸Å­ ¸¹Àº °ü½É°ú Âü¿©¸¦ ºÎŹµå¸³´Ï´Ù.

 

¢Ã °­¿¬ Á¦¸ñ

¡°¸ÍÀÚ¿¡¼­ µµ´öÀû °¡Ä¡¿Í ºñµµ´öÀû °¡Ä¡´Â ±¸º°µÇ´Â°¡?¡±

(Is there a distinction between moral and non¡ªmoral values in the Mengzi?)

 

¢Ã °­¿¬ °³¿ä

There is no doubt that classical Chinese philosophers were concerned with values and judging actions as right or wrong, nor is there is any doubt that many of their values correspond to what modern European philosophers have taken to be moral values. For these reasons, philosophers regularly use the term ¡°moral¡± in interpreting Chinese philosophical texts. In this talk, I will argue that Chinese philosophers themselves did not distinguish between moral and non¡ªmoral values. Rather than generalize about Chinese philosophy, I will use the Mengzi as a test case. I will show that Mengzi does have ways of grouping and dividing values but that these ways do not correspond to the categories of moral and non¡ªmoral.

One purpose of this argument is gaining a better understanding of the Mengzi itself: if we begin from categories foreign to the text, we are likely to distort and obscure its actual arguments. The main purpose of the talk, though, is philosophical rather than textual. I will suggest that Mengzi¡¯s way of organizing values is more effective and sensible than the division between moral and non¡ªmoral. The uncritical application of the moral/non¡ªmoral distinction to the Mengzi thus loses one of the most important things we might learn from the text, which is that one can have a coherent, persuasive, and effective system of values without ¡°morality.¡±

 

¢Ã ÀϽà / Àå¼Ò

2019³â 6¿ù 7ÀÏ (±Ý) / Åð°èÀι®°ü 3Ãþ 31310È£(½Ã½ÀÀç)

 

¢Ã ¼¼ºÎ ½Ã°£Ç¥

 

Sessoin¥° (14:00~16:00)

¡°¸ÍÀÚ¿¡¼­ µµ´öÀû °¡Ä¡¿Í ºñµµ´öÀû °¡Ä¡´Â ±¸º°µÇ´Â°¡?¡±

(Is there a distinction between moral and non¡ªmoral values in the Mengzi?)

 

Sessoin¥± (16:00~18:00)

±¹Á¦ÇмúÁö °ÔÀ縦 À§ÇÑ ³í¹® ¼¼¹Ì³ª

 

¢Ã ÁÖÃÖ

¼º±Õ°ü´ëÇб³ µ¿¾çöÇаú BK21PLUS»ç¾÷´Ü, À¯ÇдëÇÐ, À¯±³¹®È­¿¬±¸¼Ò