Recent scholars focus mainly on Paul’s use of ‘brothers (and sisters)’ or ‘brother (and sister)’ in Greco-Roman epistolary conventions and cultural backdrops. However, Jewish dimensions (particularly ethnic dimensions) of Paul’s sibling language still remain unexplored in current scholarship. Furthermore, scholars have not drawn much attention to how Jewish letter writers use sibling terms in their letters. This article offers a new interpretation on Paul’s sibling language in light of its Jewish usage. We should note that Jewish letter writers did not (...) address their Gentile letter recipients as ‘brother(s)’. However, Paul did call his recipients ‘brothers’. It is unlikely that Paul employed sibling language without being aware of its common Jewish usage. The author proposes that Paul’s sibling language is used in the context of an ethnic insider designation (shared ethnicity), and that ascribing the title of brother to believers including Gentiles signals the re-definition of the family of Abraham. (shrink)

This paper examines an aspect of the grammar-interaction interface with respect to how participants orient to intra-turn phrasal unit boundaries as a locus that has interactional import for turn and sequence organization in Korean conversation. Phrasal unit boundaries in Korean serve as a space within a turn in which the speaker of the turn in-progress invites the recipient to acknowledge the speaker's point expressed up-to-that-point and collaboratively display his/her understanding thereof. In a sequentially and topically 'ripe' context, such unit boundaries (...) often constitute places where more active participation on the part of the recipient is invited in the form of collaborative completion in which the recipient co-constructs the primary speaker's on-going turn. Phrasal unit boundaries also provide interactional resources which the speaker may exploit to sequentially delete out a problem in talk, e.g., by a sort of tying operation in which a subsequently added phrasal unit ties back to the speaker's previous utterance to the effect that the intervening talk containing a problem is canceled out by way of being shown to have been an interruption of the speaker's turn in-progress. This practice points to an aspect of the way in which the 'agglutinative' grammatical process involving the use of phrasal units shapes interactional patterns as observed in the course of organizing turns/sequences and managing problems in talk. (shrink)

This paper examines an aspect of the grammar-interaction interface with respect to how participants orient to intra-turn phrasal unit boundaries as a locus that has interactional import for turn and sequence organization in Korean conversation. Phrasal unit boundaries in Korean serve as a space within a turn in which the speaker of the turn in-progress invites the recipient to acknowledge the speaker's point expressed up-to-that-point and collaboratively display his/her understanding thereof. In a sequentially and topically 'ripe' context, such unit boundaries (...) often constitute places where more active participation on the part of the recipient is invited in the form of collaborative completion in which the recipient co-constructs the primary speaker's on-going turn. Phrasal unit boundaries also provide interactional resources which the speaker may exploit to sequentially delete out a problem in talk, e.g., by a sort of tying operation in which a subsequently added phrasal unit ties back to the speaker's previous utterance to the effect that the intervening talk containing a problem is canceled out by way of being shown to have been an interruption of the speaker's turn in-progress. This practice points to an aspect of the way in which the 'agglutinative' grammatical process involving the use of phrasal units shapes interactional patterns as observed in the course of organizing turns/sequences and managing problems in talk. (shrink)

우리 시대 시사토론의 명사회자 김규칠이 21세기의 새로운 희망을 제시한 책. 본격적인 개혁시대로 도래한 현시점에 있어서 신문화 운동과 문화력 구축 운동 등에 관한 글들을 모아 엮었다. 또한 동양고전들 중에서 공직자에게 본보기가 될 만한 인물들을 가려 뽑았다.

BackgroundThis study aimed to identify the healthcare providers’ experience and perspectives toward end-of-life care decisions focusing on end-of-life discussion and physician’s order of life-sustaining treatment documentation in Korea which are major parts of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Act.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted using a questionnaire developed by the authors. A total of 474 subjects—94 attending physicians, 87 resident physicians, and 293 nurses—participated in the survey, and the data analysis was performed in terms of frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation using the (...) SPSS 24.0 program.ResultsStudy results showed that respondents were aware of terminal illness and physician’s order of life-sustaining treatment in Korea well enough except for some details. Physicians reported uncertainty in terminal state diagnosis and disease trajectory as the most challenging. Study participants regarded factors (related to relationships and communications) on the healthcare providers’ side as the major impediment to end-of-life discussion. Study respondents suggested that simplification of the process and more staff are required to facilitate end-of-life discussion and documentation.ConclusionBased on the study results, adequate education and training for better end-of-life discussion are required for future practice. Also, a simple and clear procedure for completing a physician’s order of life-sustaining treatment in Korea should be prepared and legal and ethical advice would be required. Since the enactment of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Act, several revisions already have been made including disease categories, thus continuous education to update and support clinicians is also called for. (shrink)

매월당 김시습은 조선조를 대표하는 학자로서 수양대군의 왕위찬탈 사건의 불의함을 보 고 당시의 현실에 항거하여 은둔과 유랑의 삶을 선택한 생육신 가운데 한 명이다. 이 글은 매월당의 유불도 삼가사상 가운데 도가사상에 초점을 맞춰 그의 학문관을 살펴보고자 한 것이다. 이 글은 특히 매월당이 본 장자관의 기본입장이 무엇인지 살펴보는 것이 목표이다. 매월당은 자신의 시대가 장자가 언급한 인간세와 같다고 규정한다. 인간세란 기본적으 로 인간이 살아가는 세상을 가리킨다. 그러나 장자는 특히 정치적 혼란의 상황으로 야기된 난세를 지칭하여 인간세라고 규정한다. 매월당은 이러한 장자의 사상을 계승하여 자신의 시대를 인간세라고 (...) 규정한 후 그 위에서 펼쳐지는 갖가지 병폐들을 지적하면서 이에 대한 반성을 촉구한다. 여기서 대안으로 제시되는 것이 장자적 의미의 자연세계를 대변하는 도 교적 천상의 세계이며, 신선에로의 변화 가능성을 꿈꾸어보는 것이었다. 매월당은 인간세의 한계를 극복하는 방편으로써 인간세의 가치 덕목이라 할 수 있는 외 물에 대한 부정적인 태도와 이를 통한 거리두기의 입장을 취한다. 매월당은 외물에 대한 거리두기 차원에서 장자의 좌망에 주목하고 무사, 무려와 같은 무심의 마음상태를 간직해 야 함을 강조한다. 이러한 맥락에서 매월당은 방내인의 삶의 한계를 비판함과 동시에 방외 인의 삶이 가지고 있는 철학적 의의에 대해 주목하기도 한다. 그가 방내인이 이해하기에 곤란한 미친 행동을 보인 것이라던가, 평생 졸박한 삶의 태도로 일관한 것, 그리고 자기 자신을 가리켜 기형아와 같은 사람이라고 평가하면서 한 세상을 살아간 것은 매월당의 삶 의 자취가 장자철학과 밀접하게 연관된 방외인의 삶 그 자체였음을 알려준다. (shrink)

This book, based on Jaegwon Kim's 1996 Townsend Lectures, presents the philosopher's current views on a variety of issues in the metaphysics of the mind...

Volume 26, Issue 2, June 2019, Page 163-167.

Zenpen Kyūsō Sensei bunshū -- Hoi Kyūsō Sensei bunshū -- Kōhen Kyūsō Sensei bunshū -- Furoku Kyūsō ikkō.

Mal ŭi him -- Kŏjinmal ch'ammal kŭrigo ch'immuk.

Direction of fit theories usually claim that beliefs are such that they “aim at truth” or “ought to fit” the world and desires are such that they “aim at realization” or the world “ought to fit” them. This essay argues that no theory of direction of fit is correct. The two directions of fit are supposed to be determinations of one and the same determinable two-place relation, differing only in the ordering of favored terms. But there is no such determinable (...) because of ineliminable asymmetries between the way that beliefs “aim at truth” and the way that desires “aim at realization.” This essay traces the ills of direction of fit theory to a misunderstanding of Anscombe and proposes a cure that distinguishes theoretical and practical thought by appeal to a distinction between thought in the form of a state and thought in the form of an event. (shrink)

An observation of Hume’s has received a lot of attention over the last decade and a half: Although we can standardly imagine the most implausible scenarios, we encounter resistance when imagining propositions at odds with established moral (or perhaps more generally evaluative) convictions. The literature is ripe with ‘solutions’ to this so-called ‘Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance’. Few, however, question the plausibility of the empirical assumption at the heart of the puzzle. In this paper, we explore empirically whether the difficulty we (...) witness in imagining certain propositions is indeed due to claim type (evaluative v. non-evaluative) or whether it is much rather driven by mundane features of content. Our findings suggest that claim type plays but a marginal role, and that there might hence not be much of a ‘puzzle’ to be solved. (shrink)