http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
박정일(Jeong-Il Park) 한국철학회 2001 철학 Vol.67 No.-
최근에 이병덕 박사는 졸고 「열린 해석과 타르스키의 진리정의」 (이하 ‘박정일(1999)’로 약칭함)에 대하여 일견 매우 강력한 비판을 제기하였다. 그 비판의 핵심은 박정일(1999)에서 제시된 주장의 세 가지 근거가 모두 설득력이 없다는 것이다. 나는 이 글에서 이러한 이병덕 박사의 비판에 대해 답변하고자 한다. 나의 논점은 이러하다: 나는 박정일(1999)에서 타르스키의 진리정의가 철학에 필수적인 수단을 제공하지 않으며, 바로 이러한 의미에서 철학적으로 중요하지 않다고 주장하였다. 여기에 대한 이병덕 박사의 비판은 더 깊은 생각을 요구하는 자극적인 것이었지만, 나는 그가 대체로 박정일(1999)를 오해했다고 생각하며, 그리하여 그의 어떤 비판은 모호하거나 빗나갔고 또 어떤 주장은 오류라고 생각한다. 특히, 그가 제시하는 반대 주장 -이것을 의도한 것이라면- 의 논거는 거의 설득력이 없다고 여겨진다. 따라서 나는 여전히 박정일(1999)의 주장이 유효하다고 생각한다.
박정일(Park, Jeong-Il) 서울대학교 철학사상연구소 2011 철학사상 Vol.40 No.-
故 김영정 교수는 비판적 사고와 형식논리학의 ‘멋진 조화’를 꿈꾸며 ‘선제논리’라는 프로그램을 제시하였다. 불행하게도 그 프로그램은 실패로 끝났다고 여겨지는데, 그럼에도 불구하고 나는 “김영정 논제”는 여전히 유효하다고 생각한다. “김영정 논제”란 전칭명제와 특칭명제를 모두 조건문을 포함하는 양화문장으로 파악해야 한다는 주장이다. 김영정 교수는 전칭긍정명제와 특칭긍정명제를 각각 (∀x)(Sx ⊃ Px)와 (∃x)(Sx ⊃ Px)로 기호화해야 한다고 주장한다. 그러나 나는 김영정 교수의 프로그램이 실패할 수밖에 없었던 근원적인 이유는 우리의 조건문을 실질 함언으로 파악했다는 점에 있다고 생각한다. 그리하여 우리는 실질 함언이 아니라 우리의 언어실천에서 실제로 사용되는 조건문, 즉 비트겐슈타인의 “정상 조건문(normal conditional)”(p → q)을 김영정 논제와 결합하면 어떤 귀결이 나올지를 탐구할 수 있다. 이러한 “수정된 김영정 논제”에 따르면, 가령 전칭긍정명제와 특칭긍정명제는 각각 (∀x)(Sx → Px)와 (∃x)(Sx → Px)로 기호화해야 한다. 그렇게 되면 수정된 김영정 논제는 정상 조건문의 특성을 파악하기 위한 중요한 열쇠와 통로 역할을 한다. 더 나아가 이러한 생각들이 정리가 되면 예컨대 (A → B와 A → ∼B가 둘 다 참이 되는) 기바드(Gibbard) 현상은 존재하지 않는다는 것이 판명되며, 기존의 논의가 얼마나 혼란스러운 것인지를 깨닫게 한다. 요컨대 우리는 비트겐슈타인의 정상 조건문과 김영정 논제를 결합하여 “수정된 김영정 논제”를 설정한 후 이 논제를 일관성 있게 유지할 때 어떤 귀결이 나올지를 탐구할 수 있으며, 이를 통하여 “수정된 김영정 논제”를 일관성 있게 유지하는 것은 가능하다는 것, 그리고 이를 통해 전통적인 대당사각형이 복원된다는 것, 정상 조건문 p → q의 조건부 부정은 p → ∼q라는 것, 또 정상 조건문의 또 다른 사용(⇒)이 있다는 것, p → q의 대우는 ∼q ⇒ ∼p라는 것을 확인할 수 있다. The late Professor Young-Jeong Kim propounded the ‘Presupposition Logic’ program, longing for harmony between critical thinking and formal logic. Unfortunately that program is regarded as a failure, but I believe that Young-Jeong Kim’s thesis is still relevant. Young-Jeong Kim’s thesis asserts that both a universal proposition and a particular one should be considered as a quantified proposition which contains a conditional. Professor Young-Jeong Kim asserts that a universal affirmative proposition and a particular affirmative one must be symbolized as (∀x)(Sx ⊃ Px) and (∃x) (Sx ⊃ Px), respectively. However, I believe that the fundamental reason that Professor Young-Jeong Kim’s program could not help but end in failure is that he regarded our conditional as a material implication (conditional). Hence we need to consider the case that in Young-Jeong Kim’s thesis, a material implication should be replaced with a conditional which is used in our real language practice, that is, Wittgenstein’s normal conditional. According to this “modified Young-Jeong Kim’s thesis,” a universal affirmative proposition and a particular affirmative one must be symbolized as (∀x)(Sx → Px) and (∃x)(Sx → Px), respectively. Then, the modified Young-Jeong Kim’s thesis plays an important role in providing an important key and the path to for grasp the characteristics of a normal conditional. Furthermore, after we arrange our thoughts in regard to this matter, we will come to know that the Gibbard phenomenon in which both A → B and A → ∼B are true does not exist, and come to realize how confusing the previous thoughts about conditionals are. In a nutshell, we can investigate what consequences can be derived if we maintain this modified thesis consistently after we combine Wittgenstein’s normal conditional with Young-Jeong Kim’s thesis. And through this we can ascertain that it is possible to maintain the modified Young-Jeong Kim’s thesis, that we can rehabilitate the traditional opposition square, that the negation of a normal conditional p → q is p → ∼q, that there is another kind of use for a normal conditional(⇒), and that the contraposition of p → q is ∼q ⇒ ∼p.
기록빔의 편광상태에 따른 $AS_{40}Se_{15}S_{35}Ge_{10}$ 박막에서 홀로그래피 회절격자형성 특성
박정일,정홍배,Park, Jeong-Il,Chung, Hong-Bay 대한전기학회 2006 전기학회논문지C Vol.55 No.9
We have been carried out the two-beam interference method to form the diffraction grating on chalcogenide $AS_{40}Se_{15}S_{35}Ge_{10}$ thin films for Holography Data Storage (HDS). In the present work, we have been formed holographic diffraction gratings using He-Ne laser (632.8nm) under different Polarization state combinations (intensity polarization holography, phase polarization holography). It was obtained the diffraction grating efficiency by 11st order intensity and investigated the formed grating structure using Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). As the results, it is shown that the diffraction efficiency of (P: P) polarized recording was maximum 2.4% and we found that its value was rather higher than that of other-polarized recordings. From the results, it is confirmed that the efficient holographic grating formation on amorphous chalcogenide $AS_{40}Se_{15}S_{35}Ge_{10}$ films depend on both the spatial variation of intensity and the polarization state of the incident field pattern.
박정일 ( Jeong Il Park ),강추원 ( Choo Won Kang ),노영배 ( Young Bae Noh ),고진석 ( Chin Surk Ko ) 대한화약발파공학회 2011 화약발파 Vol.29 No.2
Most of the blast pollution that causes complaints is noise and vibration. Hence, special attentions need to be paid to controlling the underwater noise in designing blasting for those areas. This study estimated underwater sound pressure using distance from blasting and charge per delay and underwater sound pressure level using the underwater sound pressure. To identify the validity of the estimated value, the study demonstrated the results at other areas and compared actual results with estimated results.
희귀난치성질환 대책에 대한 소고 : 일본의 난병환자에 대한 의료 등에 관한 법률안을 중심으로
박정일(Park Jeong Il),원종석(Won Jong Seok) 원광대학교 법학연구소 2014 의생명과학과 법 Vol.11 No.-
Although around 5,000 kinds of Rare Incurable or Intractable Diseases are listed on World Health Organization, just 134 kinds of them are now listed on Korean Medical Care Act. The covering range of Rare Incurable or Intractable Diseases is also limited in fundholding. There has also been little inducement to encourage researchers to develop medical supplies for Rare Incurable or Intractable Diseases, even though it is indispensable. To improve this, the Legislative Bill of Rare Incurable or Intractable Diseases introduced May 21, 2014, contains systematic management of Target Rare Incurable or Intractable Diseases and Government's Support for researching and developing medical supplies for Rare Incurable or Intractable Disease Patients. However, in comparision with the Japanese Legislative Bill of Rare Incurable or Intractable Disease patients which was introduced 3 months earlier than Korean Bill and affected Korean Bill, actual support for Rare Incurable or Intractable Disease patients in Korean Legislative Bill is not sufficient. According to the Japanese Legislative Bill of Rare Incurable or Intractable Disease patients, Japanese Government is trying to support Rare Incurable or Intractable Disease patients for their public participation and deliver Social Welfare Service to them, allowing them to be social members naturally. In this paper, first, I will discuss about Japanese and Korean Legislative Bill of Rare Incurable or Intractable Disease patients respectively. Then, I'll suggest things that Korean Government should reinforce to support Rare Incurable or Intractable Disease patients in many ways.
박정일 ( Jeong Il Park ) 한국논리학회 2016 논리연구 Vol.19 No.1
In the Tractatus, ‘logical space’ raises the several puzzles asfollows. What are logical space, logical coordinates and logical place? What is the point of such analogies and what do they refer to exactly in the Tractatus? And what do occupy logical space? Can facts, proposition, propositional sign, situation and contradiction occupy it respectively? Or is it impossible to reconcile the remarks concerning logical place in the Tractatus? Futhermore, why did Wittgenstein need the concept of logical space? What is the problem that he tried to solve through this concept? In this paper, I will endeavor to answer to these problems. Logical space in the Tractatus is the system of propositions with senses. And it is the concept which Wittgenstein contrived by making model of Hertz’s configuration space. Wittgenstein’s fundamental coordinates are in some ways similar to geometrical ones. On the other hand logical coordinates are completely different from geometrical ones. Hence attempts to understand logical space by a kind of geometrical spaces cannot be right at all.
박정일 ( Jeong Il Park ) 한국논리학회 2014 논리연구 Vol.17 No.1
Both 5.52 and 5.521 of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus raise several questions. In this paper I will explicate Wittgenstein`s concept of generality by answering such questions. These questions and problems are closely intertwined. I will try to show what follows. It is ξ-conditions that are most decisive on the concept of generality of the Tractatus. Except Ramsey, commentators such as Anscombe, Glock, Kenny etc. failed in accurately grasping the Wittgenstein`s thoughts concerning ξ-condition and their claims are not fair at all. Futhermore, from a view point of history of logic, 5.52 has very important significances. That is to say, it anticipates for the first time a possibility of infinitary logic and the concept of universe of discourse in model theory.