성균관대학교 "철학과인문교육" 연구소의 제24회 논문발표회를 1월 9일 (금요일) 오후 2:20~5:50에 퇴계인문관 6층 31604호에서 개최하게 되어 아래와 같이 알려드립니다. 학생분들과 선생님들의 많은 관심과 참여 부탁드립니다. 

일 시: 2026년 1월 9일 금요일 오후 2:20~5:50
장 소: 성균관대학교 퇴계인문관 6층 604호(#31604)

일 정:
2:20~2:30 등록 및 개회 인사
2:30~3:30 박경남 (카이스트 디지털인문사회과학센터; Loyola University Chicago 박사)
                    Kant’s Doctrine of Right and Rawls’s Political Liberalism
3:40~4:40 하원재 (연세대 박사) 

                    Meaning in Trouble

4:50~5:50 백채영 (서울대; University of Massachusetts, Amherst 박사)
                    Autonomy as Ownership

        
박경남
발표 제목: Kant’s Doctrine of Right and Rawls’s Political Liberalism
초록: The purpose of this paper is to criticize Krassnoff’s independence reading of Kant’s Doctrine of Right. Krassnoff defends the independence thesis that Kant’s political philosophy does not rely on Kant’s moral philosophy by deploying Rawls’s distinction between political liberalism and comprehensive liberalism. Krassnoff argues that Kant’s Doctrine of Right should be understood as a form of political liberalism in that the moral claims of the Doctrine of Right concern inherently political values rather than comprehensively moral values, which include non-political values as well as political values. In this paper, I argue that Krassnoff’s attempt to defend the independence thesis by characterizing Kant’s Doctrine of Right as political liberalism is not plausible for the following three interrelated reasons. First, there remains a conceptual conflict between the politically liberal aspects and the strong moral claims that Krassnoff ascribes to Kant’s Doctrine of Right. Second, relatedly, Kant’s Doctrine of Right should be characterized as containing comprehensively moral claims since its strong moral claims concerning the equal freedom of each citizen could not be accepted by citizens who support Hobbesian or other prudentialist theories of political justice. Third, I argue that the failure of Krassnoff’s strategy to defend the independence reading in terms of Rawls’s political liberalism is due in part to Krassnoff’s neglect of the tension between Rawls’s claim that political liberalism is independent of moral philosophy and the strong moral claims that Rawls’s political liberalism nevertheless requires by prioritizing public right over individual interests. 

하원재
발표 제목: Meaning in Trouble
초록: In this papaer, I argue that extension, as traditionally conceived, is not generalizable in the sense required for philosophically fundamental concepts. This yields a dilemma: either abandon the generalizability of the concept or give up the philosophical fundamentality of it. I propose a third route by combining Carnap's idea of extension with a Leibnizian notion of equivalence defined as the predicational equivalence. This proposal implies a view identifying extension with properties, which provides a uniform, generalizable notion of extension.

백채영
발표 제목: Autonomy as Ownership
초록: The relational approach to autonomy holds that autonomy fundamentally depends on one’s social environment. I argue that existing relational accounts face a dilemma: they either set the bar too high, rendering autonomy unattainable, or define it in terms of a self-relationship so permissive that even manipulated or brainwashed actions may count as autonomous. To resolve this, I propose the ownership view of autonomy, which holds that autonomy depends on the degree to which one possesses and exercises ownership over one’s actions. On this view, social relationships shape ownership: when an agent is embedded in a relationship that normatively requires her to relinquish control over her actions, her autonomy is diminished. By tying autonomy to ownership, this account avoids the pitfalls of existing relational theories.

오시는 방법: 지하철 4호선 혜화역에서 내리셔서 1번 출구로 나온 후 전용 정류장에서 성균관대 셔틀 탑승 

발표회와 관련하여 궁금하신 점이 있으시면 아래의 연락처로 문의해 주시기 바랍니다.

철학과인문교육연구소 연구소장 이정규 / 02-760-0208 / jeonggyulee@skku.edu
철학과인문교육연구소 조교 우인진 / jaegoi53@gmail.com