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

      KCI등재

      이사야 벌린의 소극적 자유론과 한국헌법 제10조 = Isaiah Berlin’s Two Concepts of Liberty and Article 10 of the Korean Constitution

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A104199508

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      The division into the negative concept of liberty as “the absence of interference” and the positive concept of liberty as “self-government” which Berlin has given the main role in the concepts of liberty has a classical meaning among the moder...

      The division into the negative concept of liberty as “the absence of interference” and the positive concept of liberty as “self-government” which Berlin has given the main role in the concepts of liberty has a classical meaning among the modern theories and debates on liberty.
      There are critics who suggest the single concept of liberty as one and the same triadic relation of agents, preventing conditions, and aims, or as the negative freedom which designates the positive one for its own value. However, first, the negative concept of liberty is an opportunity-concept, whereas the positive one is an exercise-concept. Secondly, we can admit both as concepts of liberty according to our ordinary and general linguistic usage. Thus, individuality and validity as a concept of liberty can be applied to both concepts. Moreover, one can argue that it does not matter whether there exists one, two or even more concepts of liberty. What is important is that there are differing concepts(or conceptions) of liberty representing different views of the man and the world. Accordingly, Berlin's two concepts of liberty are beneficial to understanding the differing positions on liberty.
      Berlin has accentuated the rivalry of the two concepts, but the relation between the negative and the positive liberty cannot be conceived wholly opposed to each other. Both concepts are interdependent and complementary since the negative liberty is a condition of the positive liberty whereas the positive liberty can and must be the value of the negative liberty to some extent. So a synthetic concept of liberty is the appropriate one.
      The debates on the concept of freedom relate to the value of freedom. The differing positions on the value of freedom may be divided broadly into two distinct categories. One category views it as a means to want-satisfaction, and the other as a condition of autonomy. In general, negative liberty relates to the former, and positive liberty relates to the latter. Berlin has found the value of freedom in the human condition in which a man transforms himself through choices among incommensurable and absolute claims. Thus, Berlin’s view can be read to belong to the want-satisfaction theory, but his unique contribution to the theory is his emphasis on the value of freedom as a condition of the human being’s self-determination. The autonomy- based doctrine of freedom allows discrimination between more valuable and less valuable freedoms, according to their contribution to the ideal of autonomy. But it cannot accept the various kinds of human lives as broadly as the want-satisfaction doctrine does. Thus, the basic value of liberty must be seen as a means to want-satisfaction. Thereafter, the autonomy theory can and should play the secondary role of making the freedoms orderly. This can be viewed as a two-step theory on the value of freedom.
      Article 10 of the Korean Constitution provides “Human dignity and worth”. It is the leading ideal of the constitution, and the other constitutional rights serve to guarantee it. Thus the interpretation of “human dignity and worth” relates to the debate on the value of freedom. In Korea, some autonomy-based interpretations have been raised. But according to the conclusions above-mentioned, it is appropriate to interpret the clause basically as meaning that human “self-determination” which conceives the autonomy as an option for choices and permits even irrational choices. This makes the clause more effective by permitting broader ranges of human lives to be acceptable. The autonomy can and should be the secondary criterion which makes the various human lives thus accepted orderly.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 권영성, "헌법학원론" 법문사 2008

      2 성낙인, "헌법학" 법문사 2009

      3 김철수, "학설판례 헌법학 (上)" 박영사 2008

      4 심헌섭, "법과 자유" 서울대학교 42 (42): 2001

      5 Charles Taylor, "What’s wrong with Negative Liberty? Contemporary Political Philosophy: an anthology" Blackwell Publishers 1997

      6 Joseph Raz, "The Morality of Freedom" Clarendon Press 1990

      7 Christopher Megone, "One Concept of Liberty" 35 : 1987

      8 Gerald C. MacCallum, "Negative and Positive Freedom, Liberty" Oxford University Press 1991

      9 John Gray, "Isaiah Berlin" Princeton University Press 1996

      10 David Miller, "Introduction, Liberty" Oxford University Press 1991

      1 권영성, "헌법학원론" 법문사 2008

      2 성낙인, "헌법학" 법문사 2009

      3 김철수, "학설판례 헌법학 (上)" 박영사 2008

      4 심헌섭, "법과 자유" 서울대학교 42 (42): 2001

      5 Charles Taylor, "What’s wrong with Negative Liberty? Contemporary Political Philosophy: an anthology" Blackwell Publishers 1997

      6 Joseph Raz, "The Morality of Freedom" Clarendon Press 1990

      7 Christopher Megone, "One Concept of Liberty" 35 : 1987

      8 Gerald C. MacCallum, "Negative and Positive Freedom, Liberty" Oxford University Press 1991

      9 John Gray, "Isaiah Berlin" Princeton University Press 1996

      10 David Miller, "Introduction, Liberty" Oxford University Press 1991

      11 Isaiah Berlin, "From Hope and Fear Set Free, Liberty" Oxford University Press 2002

      12 Isaiah Berlin, "Four Essays on Liberty" Oxford University Press 1969

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2026 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2020-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2017-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2013-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2010-05-10 학술지명변경 외국어명 : Korean Journal of Philosophy -> Korean Journal of Legal Philosophy KCI등재
      2010-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2008-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2005-05-31 학술지명변경 외국어명 : 미등록 -> Korean Journal of Philosophy KCI등재
      2005-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2004-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2003-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.84 0.84 0.76
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.66 0.64 1.024 0.18
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼