고규소-Al 합금의 초정미세화에 관한 연구 (1)

이상익,김수영,남태운 대한금속재료학회(대한금속학회) 1973 대한금속·재료학회지 Vol.11 No.4

高珪素-Al合金에 있어서 몇 種의 元素에 의한 初晶 Si의 微細化가 硏究되고 있으나, Cu 接種 添加에 의한 微細化 硏究는 거의 없다. 本 硏究에 있어서는 Al-20%Si 合金의 初晶 Si의 微細化에 對하여 Cu 添加量, 주입溫度, holding time, S와의 複合處理 등의 영향을 檢討하였다. Cu 添加에 의한 初晶珪素의 變化는 현미경과 X-ray diffraction으로 관찰했다. 本 實驗을 통하여 얻은 結論은 다음과 같다. 1) Cu 添加에 의한 高珪素-Al合金의 初晶 Si微細化의 최적량은 750℃에서는 0.6%Cu이며 800℃, 850℃에서는 1% Cu 이다. 2) Holding time의 영향은 주입 直後에서 5分까지 微細化되며 그 以上의 holding time은 微細化에 영향을 미치지 못한다. 3) S와의 複合處理에 의한 效果는 Cu單獨處理에 比하여 良好하였다. It has been already known that the addition of several refining elements had the refining effect of primary silicon crystals in high silicon-aluminum alloy. However, the effect of Cu addition has not yet been studied. The purpose of this study is to clarify effects of an amount of Cu added, pouring temperatures, holding time and the double treatment with S on the refinement of primary silicon crystals in an Al-20% Si alloy. Influences on primary silicon crystals by Cu addition observed with metallographic examinations and X-ray diffraction methode. The results obtained are as follows: 1) With the addition of Cu, the finest primary silicon crystals is high silicon-Al alloys were obtained with 0.6% at 750℃ and, 1% at 800℃ and 850℃. 2) The refining effect increased significantly for first five minutes period after the treatment. However, the longer holding did not improve a refining effect. 3) The refining effect of the double treatment with S was better than the single treatment by Cu

許筠의 文學理論

李相翊 숙명여자대학교 문리과대학 국어국문학과 1980 靑坡文學 Vol.13 No.-

醒菴의 性三樣說의 立場에서 본 湖洛論爭의 檢討

李相益 成均館大學校 儒學大學 1983 儒學大學報 Vol.8 No.-

梅月堂 金時習의 道ㆍ佛觀

李相益 東洋哲學硏究會 1991 東洋哲學硏究 Vol.12 No.-

한국사학 : 수당(修堂) 이남규의 역사의식

이상익 한국사상문화학회 2002 한국사상과 문화 Vol.16 No.-

Holmium:YAG 레이저를 이용한 요관경하배석술의 치료경험

이상익,정태융,심희영 관동대학교 의과학연구소 2001 關東醫大學術誌 Vol.5 No.1

Purpose : The holmium:YAG laser has a variety of potential urological application, including ablation of soft tissue lesions as well as stone fragmentation. We present our experience with the holmium:YAG laser for the treatment of ureteral stone. Materials and Methods : During a 18-month period 35 patients underwent 39 holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy to treat ureteral stone. A 7.5 Fr wolf semi-rigid ureteroscope and holmium:YAG laser(Trimedyne, Irvine, Omnipulse-MaxTM,CA,USA) with 365 μm laser fiber were used. The laser was set at the power of 0.5 to 1.5J and the frequency of between 5 to 10 Hz. Results : The mean stone size was 1.2cm (range 0.6-4cm), two stones were at upper ureter, six at mid-ureter and thirty one at lower ureter. The mean hospital day was 2.7±1.0 days with mean operating time 55.6±18.2min. Stones were completely cleared in 39 cases except 1 case of ureteral perforation. Complication with ureteral perforation was threated with double J stent. Conclusion : The holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy was effective and safe in fragmenting ureteral stones irrespective of their hardness. However, it was potential to damage the ureteral wall and must be used with caution.

<韓非子>의 矛盾論과 <韓非子>의 矛盾

이상익 영산대학교 동양문화연구원 2018 동양문화연구 Vol.29 No.-

'Contradiction' refers to 'when two opposing arguments can not be established at the same time'. The concept of this contradiction first appears in Han feizi (韓非子), which is known to be the culmination of legal school (法家). In the world of scholarship, the criticism of 'contradiction' is fatal enough to be the death penalty. Han feizi basically denied the validity of the rule of virtue by defining Confucianism as a contradiction, and advocated the rule by law as an alternative. In this article, we reviewed the contradictions inherent in Han feizi, focusing on the following eight points; ① Is there consistency of diagnosis of old and present? ② Should the roads of the ancient kingship be imitated or dismissed? ③ Do we have to question all people, or should we suspect only a part? ④ Is the loyalty of the minister necessary or unnecessary? ⑤ Is power and smartness contradictory or complementary? ⑥ Can the personal punishment be compatible with the involvement system. ⑦ the problem of faithfulness and deceit, ⑧ the question of whether or not the people's mind is acceptable. As a result of reviewing these eight points, we have found that there are significant contradictions in Han feizi. Therefore, it can be said that Han feizi's theory of law is not an academic argument. ‘矛盾(矛楯)’이란 ‘대립하는 두 주장이 동시에 성립할 수 없는 경우’를 말한다. 漢字文化圈에서 이러한 모순의 개념은 法家思想을 집대성한 것으로 알려진 『韓非子』에 처음 등장한다. 학문의 세계에서 ‘모순’이라는 비판은 사형선고와 다름없을 정도로 치명적이다. 『한비자』는 유가의 덕치론을 모순으로 규정함으로써 덕치론의 타당성을 근원적으로 부정하고, 그 대안으로 법치론을 제창했던 것이다. 본고에서는 ① 古⋅今에 대한 진단의 일관성이 있는가? ② 先王의 道는 본받아야 하는가, 배격해야 하는가? ③ 모든 사람을 不信할 것인가, 일부만 不信할 것인가? ④ 臣下의 忠誠은 필요한가, 불필요한가? ⑤ 勢와 賢은 모순되는 것인가, 상보적인 것인가? ⑥ 信賞必罰은 連坐制와 양립할 수 있는가? ⑦ 信義와 속임의 문제, ⑧ 民心의 可否 문제 등을 중심으로 『한비자』에 내재하는 모순들을 검토했다. 그 결과 우리는 『한비자』의 법치론에도 중대한 모순들이 내재함을 알게 되었다. 그렇다면 『한비자』의 法治論 역시 학문적으로 별 타당성이 없는 주장이라 하지 않을 수 없겠다.

誠ㆍ敬論의 存在論的 基礎 : 退溪ㆍ栗谷의 경우를 中心으로

李相益 東洋哲學硏究會 1989 東洋哲學硏究 Vol.10 No.-

김형효의 儒家・道家에 대한 이해와 그 비판

이상익 한국철학사연구회 2023 한국 철학논집 Vol.- No.77

Kim Hyunghyo once confessed that he was so influenced by Gabriel Marcel, an existential philosopher, in his younger age that he had hoarded the eschatological idea that “the world is broken not in a historical way but in an essential way; thus, it is essentially not possible to repair the world.” This idea probably has guided his entire journey toward philosophy. On the other hand, Kim has endeavored to appreciate all the differences as they are and transcend right and wrong, good and evil, accepting Heidegger and Derrida’s logic of differance, Daoism’s thesis of Inaction and the Adjustment of Controversies. Therefore, he finally holds that “the philosophy that tries to meaningfully reconstruct the world by reason should come to an end” and that “we should learn from Maitreya’s meditation to await the serenity of the world.” In his later years, by categorizing ‘three views of Truth,’ Kim criticized ‘the truth of reality and thinking of action’ and ‘the truth of ideality and thinking of imperativeness.’ At the same time, he promoted ‘the truth of factuality and the thinking of inaction.’ In this context, he considered Confucianism vain while defending Buddhism and Taoism as he regarded them as practical sciences. Such an argument begs scholarly reviews in detail. It is our task to articulate his ‘philosophy of factuality.’ 김형효는 젊은 시절 실존철학자 가브리엘 마르셀의 영향을 받아 “이 세상이 역사적으로 깨어진 것이 아니라 본질적으로 깨어졌다는 점, 따라서 그 세상을 본질적으로 수리한다는 것은 불가능하다”는 종말론적 사유를 가슴속에 품게 되었다고 술회한 바 있는데, 이러한 생각은 그의 평생을 지배한 것 같다. 그는 한편으로는 하이데거와 데리다의 차연(差延)의 논리, 그리고 도가의 무위론(無爲論)과 제물론(齊物論)을 수용하여 이 세상의 차별상들을 그대로 수용하고 ‘시비선악을 양가적으로 초탈하자’고 생각했다. 그리하여 마침내 그는 “세상을 이성으로 유의미하게 재구성하려는 철학의 이상이 이제 막을 내려야 한다”고, “미륵의 반가사유(半跏思惟)처럼 세상이 고요를 배울 때까지 기다려야 한다”고 주장했던 것이다. 만년에 그는 이른바 ‘세 가지 진리관’을 구분함으로써, ‘유위적 사유와 현실성(reality)의 진리’와 ‘당위적 사유와 이상성(ideality)의 진리’를 비판하고, ‘무위적 사유와 사실성의 진리’를 추구하게 되었다. 이러한 맥락에서 그는 유학을 ‘허학’으로 규정하고, 도가와 불교를 ‘실학’으로 규정하여 적극 옹호했던 것이다. 하지만 그의 이러한 주장에 대해서는 다양한 비판을 제기할 수 있다. 따라서 그가 추구한 ‘사실성(factuality)의 철학’은 앞으로 더욱 정밀하게 다듬어질 필요가 있겠다.

朱子와 陳亮의 王覇論爭에 대한 재검토

이상익 연세대학교 국학연구원 2007 동방학지 Vol.138 No.-

Reexamination on the Dispute of Kingly and Tyrannical Ways between Chu Hsi(朱熹) and Chin Liang(陳亮) Lee, Sang-Ik* The debate on kingly and tyrannical ways between Chu Hsi(1130~1200) and Chin Liang(1143~1194) has something to do with the issue how to evaluate Han and Tang dynasties. Chin thought that three kingdoms (Ha, Eun and Chou) and two dynasties (Han and Tang) do not have great difference in a sense of their nature, even if so, its difference is just degree. However, Chu had a different idea from chin. In his thought, three kingdoms followed heavenly rules, but two dynasties did desires of human. It will be difficult to judge who is right. However, it will be possible to elucidate their views on ideal man and ideal politics through the debate. Chu's ideal man is a pure confucian(醇儒), but Chin's one is a mature person(成人). While a pure confucian means a man of virtue, a mature person means a man of ability. This difference reflects their different views on ideal politics. Chu regards self-cultivating(修己) and ruling-others(治人) as one thing and their relation as a root-branch relation. Ruling-others is only an external effect of self-cultivating. For Chin, however, the two has no causal connection. They are completely separate beings. Thus, it can be said that ruling-others is only through punishment and reward, not through moral influences. In view of these points, it must be incorrect to regard the debate as a conflict between motivationalism and consequentialism. The issue of the dispute on the surface is about how to evaluate Han and Tang dynasties, and the issue under the surface is how to conceptualize ideal man as a cornerstone for successful politics.