RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      선택해제
      • 좁혀본 항목 보기순서

        • 원문유무
        • 원문제공처
          펼치기
        • 등재정보
          펼치기
        • 학술지명
          펼치기
        • 주제분류
          펼치기
        • 발행연도
          펼치기
        • 작성언어

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • M. Heidegger에 있어서 存在물음

        양영웅 제주대학교 1989 논문집 Vol.29 No.-

        M. Heidegger versucht, das Horizont fur die Interpretation des Sinnes von Sein uberhaupt freizulegen. Und er sucht den Leitfaden im Menschen als Dasein, fur das man gewisses Seinsverstandnis hat. Das Sein selbst, das das Seinsverstandnis und die Fahigkeit hat, nach dem Sein selbst zu fragen, nennt er Exitenz. Diese Seinsstrukturen des Existenzz werden Existenzialien genannt. Bevor er den Sinn von Sein selbst fragt, analysiert er das Dasein existenzial. Da diese vorliegende Arbeit vor der von Heidegger entwickelten Seinsanalyse die Strukturen der Frage und Wissenschaftlichen Methoden zu erklaren versucht, betrachtet die Arbeit die Phanomenologie als wissenschaftliche Methoden, die Notwendigkeit der Seinsfrage und die Strukturen der Frage zu erlautern.

      • Sartre에 있어서 對自의 직접적 구조

        양영웅 제주대학교 1985 논문집 Vol.22 No.2

        이상에서 우리는 싸르트르가 해명한 대자존재의 형식적 구조에 대하여 존재론적 근본 구분에서 출발하여 의식의 자기 관계,대자의 사실성 및 대자의 존재근거로서의 결여에 관하여 의식의 초월방식으로서의 지향성을 중심으로 살펴보았다. 싸르트르는 인간 현실을 대자존재로 받아들이면서, 이것을 의식의 지향성에 의해서 해명하고 있다. 게다가 의식의 인간 현실을 대자존재로 받아들이면서,이것을 의식의 지향성에 의해서 해명하고 있다.

      • M. Heidegger에 있어서 실존의 존재구조 : Horizont를 중심으로 hinsichtlich des Horzonts

        양영웅 제주대학교 1989 논문집 Vol.29 No.-

        M. Heidegger analysiert existenzial das Daseins als Freilegung des Horizontes fur eine Interpretation des Sinnes von Sein uberhaupt. Dasein als In-der-Welt-sein ist Seiendes, das sich in seinem Sein verstehend zu diesem Sein verhalt. Zum existierenden Dasein gehort die Jemeninigkeit als Bedingung der Moglichkeit von Eigentlichikeit und Uneigentlichkeit. Dasein existiert je in einem dieser Modi, bzw. in der modalen Indifferenz ihrer. Bei Heidegger erscheint die Existenzialitat als die Sorge. Das Sein des Daseins enthullt sich als die Sorge. Die formal existenzale Ganzheit des ontologischen Strukturganzen des Daseins muB daher in folgender Struktur gefaBt werden : Das Sein des Daseins besagt : Sich-vorweg-schon-sein-in(der-Welt-) als Sein-bei(innerweltlich begegnendem Seienden). Dieses Sein erfullt die Bedeutung des Titels Sorge. Folglich ist das Sich-vorweg ein Moment fur die Exitenzalitat, den Entwurf und das Verstehen, das Schon-sein-in-der-Welt ein Moment fur die Faktizitat, die Befindlichkeit und die Geworfenheit, das Sein-bei innerweltlich begegnendem Seinenden ein Moment fur das Verfallen. Das Dasein ist namlich das sichentwerfenden Seins zum eigensten Seinkonnen. Das Dasein uberantwortet ihm selbst, und es ist je schon in eine Welt geworfen. So ist das Dasein nicht nur das In-der-Welt-sein, sondern auch ursprunglich das geworfene entwerfende Sein, d. h. bedingte mogliche Sein. In welcher Form wird dann der geworfene Entwurf verwirklicht? Heidegger betrachtet den Horizont fur eine Interpretation von Sein uberhaupt, d. h. die Seinsart des Daseins oder die Seinsbedeutung als Zeitlichktit. So behauptet er einen ursprunglichen Explikation der Zeit als Horizont des Seinsverstandnisses aus der Zeitlichkeit als Sein des seinverstehenden Daseins. Bei ihm ist der Anhalt der Zeitlichkeit der Tod. Der Tod ist die Moglichkeit der schlechthinnigen Daseinsunmoglichkeit. So enthullt sich der Tod asl die eigenste, unbezugliche, unuberholbare Moglichkeit. Das eigentliche Sein zum Tode, das he iBt die Endlichkeit der Zeitlichkeit, ist der verborgene Grund der Geschichtlichkeit des Daseins. Das Dasein wird nicht erst geschichtlich in der Wiederholung, sondern weil es als zeitliches geschichtlich ist, kann es sich wiederholend in seiner Geschichte ubernehmen.

      • 양자역학의 인과성과 실재성 문제에 대한 불교철학적 접근

        현남규,양영웅 濟州大學校 基礎科學硏究所 1996 基礎科學硏究 Vol.9 No.1

        The theoretical implication of quantum mechanics shows that in the microscopic systems there would be no such things that are completely independent from observation. It is true that there were some who argued that by the measurement problem we become forced to introduce human consciousness into physical reality or at least into a description of physical reality. Bell's theorem shows us that two seemingly 'independent' measurements should be thought to be correlated with each other. This mathematically proven theorem, published in 1964, later had some experimental supports. Thus one of the philosophical conclusions induced from this may be as follows; on the one hand, we have to deny, by the special theory of relativity, that the two measurement processes in the two labs have causal influences on each other, and in spite of that, on the other hand, we should accept that the two measurement processes are, in a sense, inseparable. This shows us a possibility of self-referentials for the description of physical reality. At least we could learn, from the situations, that the result of saying something on a microscopic physical system is correlated with the result of saying some other thing on it. Without considering the point, we could not describe the quantum world. Thus even in the theoretical aspect of physics, there could be some room for the self-referential structrue to be discussed.[1] Although nobody knows what a new, revised physics would be like, we can say that it may have a self referential structure. Therefore we wanted to find out some correlations in the problem of causality and reality in quantum mechanics with that in buddhist philosophy, since we think that it may be helpful to the forthcoming new physics. There were the pre-Buddhist concept of causation such as 'self causation' and 'external causation' Buddha found these concepts to be limited and inadequate to express reality. This was not because reality as he saw it was indescribable or transcendental but because people used these concepts to express only a part of reality, the part that fit their metaphysical predictions. Rejecting an Absolute or a transempirical reality. Buddha confined himself to what is empirically given. He recognized causality as the reality and made it the essence of his teaching. But Sarvastivadins engaged in endless analysis of dharmas into their minutest forms and accepted the view that dharma is a point in space and time: the buddhist school in India came to accept the theory of atoms and the theory of moment. Thus they came to believe in an underlying substratum considered to be eternal. Afterward Nagarjuna refuted the Sarvastivada concept of reality and wrote a book, starting from fundamental proposition in Buddhist philosophy that there is nothing in this empirical world that is not causally produced [2] and his idea has been well progressed toward the thought of Zen Buddhism in China. In this thesis we have found that there are some similarities in the problem of causality and reality in quantum mechanics with those of early buddhist philosophy. To sum up, in the theory of quantum physics we need not necessarily persist on the 'causality of Einstein', but may introduce the causality of Buddha(=causality as the reality).

      연관 검색어 추천

      이 검색어로 많이 본 자료

      활용도 높은 자료

      해외이동버튼