RFID를 이용한 블라스팅 상황인지 시스템

윤원준(Won-Jun Yun),노영식(Young-Shick Ro),서영수(Young-Soo Suh),강희준(Hee-Jun Kang) 대한전기학회 2009 정보 및 제어 심포지엄 논문집 Vol.2009 No.5

Development of safety monitoring system for workers in the ship building industry is currently under progress using RFID(Radio Frequency IDentification) for successful development of the U-BUSS(Ubiquitous- Safety User Safety System). For decades, RFID technology has become a key technology to provide the real-time location system of worker and is variously used for safety monitoring system to increase productivity, improve the blasting quality and enhance the safety of working condition in the ship building industry. In this paper, 2.45㎓ band RTLS(Real Time Location System) technologies and the ubiquitous safety monitoring system of the ship yard's blasting cell are described.

논문 : 아케다와 자크 데리다의 윤리적 종교성

윤원준 ( Won Jun Yun ) 한국문학과종교학회 2010 문학과종교 Vol.15 No.3

Among lots of Derrida`s works, The Gift of Death would be the one of the best writings that can demonstrate his religious interests. In this book, Derrida tries to show his understanding concerning religious faith and ethic through his interpretation of the famous story of the Akedah(binding Isaac) in the Bible. Derrida`s interpretation of the Akedah proceeds as he interacts and responds to two other interpreters of the story before him, Kierkegaard and Levinas. Like Kierkegaard, Derrida understands that religious faith as ``repetition`` is secret and cannot be shared or be transferred. Also like Kierkegaard, Derrida thinks the conflict between the human responsibility to God and the human responsibility to family and society is inevitable. However, while Kierkegaard`s interpretation of the Akedah focuses on the superiority of the responsibility to God to the responsibility toward family and society, Derrida`s interpretation tries to show the aporia in religious faith and ethic. According to Derrida, the conflict and aporia in religious faith and human ethic also can be found in other human relations. On the one hand, Derrida recognizes the characteristic of religious faith, and on the other hand, he does not want to discard the ethic for the other. In order to develop ethical religiosity, Derrida wants to consider Levinasian ethic of the other, although Levinas`s interpretation of the Akedah is very different from Kierkegaard`s interpretation. And unlike Kierkegaard, Derrida emphasizes one`s responsibility to every other. His ethical concern is found in this brief expression: "tout autre est tout autre, every other (one) is every (bit) other." Although Derrida never wants to identify himself as a religious believer, it is very probable that he has his own religiosity.

해체와 부정신학

윤원준(Won?Jun Yun) 한국기독교학회 2015 한국기독교신학논총 Vol.98 No.-

본 논문의 목적은 기독교 부정신학 전통과 데리다의 해체 사이의 유사점들과 상이한 부분들을 탐구해보며 또한 해체가 가지는 신학적 의미를 탐구해 보는 것이다. 데리다의 해체와 기독교 부정신학 전통은 인간 언어의 기능과 한계에 대한 공통적 관심을 가진다. 언어적 한계 때문에, 부정신학은 신에 대한 부정적 진술들을 사용하거나 침묵을 지킨다. 부정신학은 부정이나 침묵을 통해서 언어의 한계를 벗어날 수 있고, 그럼으로써 신의 초월성을 유지할 수 있다고 생각한다. 그래서 부정신학은 신을 인간의 생각과 감각과 이해와 존재 너머에 있는 초실체나 초존재로 이해한다. 그러나 부정신학 속의 부정과 침묵은 그 속에 이미 긍정을 포함하고 있고 또 다른 종류의 긍정일 뿐이기 때문에, 니사의 그레고리, 위?디오니시우스, 그리고 히포의 아우구스티누스 같은 부정신학자들에 의해서 사용되었던 방법들은 소기의 목적을 달성하는 데 성공적이지 못했다고 데리다는 진단한다. 데리다에 의하면, 부정신학은 긍정신학과 마찬가지로 초존재, 초실체, 혹은 초본질을 말하지 않는 법을 알지 못할 뿐 아니라, 그것들을 유지하고 있다. 부정신학이 부정의 방법과 침묵으로 신에게 다가가려고 한다면, 데리다의 해체는 차연이라고 불리는 언어적 연계를 직면하며 그 속에 머물려고 한다. 차연은 모든 언어적 활동 속에 일어나는 사건을 가리키며, 존재론적인 실체가 아니기 때문에 유사?초월적 조건이라고 부르는 것이 합당해 보인다. 차연을 말하는 해체는 그러므로 언어를 뛰어넘는 어떤 초실체로서의 신을 말하는 것은 불가능하다고 진단한다. 또한 해체는 긍정적이거나 부정적인 신 진술이 언어의 한계 속에서 벗어날 수 없음을 주장한다. 그리고 그것이 긍정적이든지 혹은 부정적이든지, “말해야 함”이라는 요구와 필요라는 흔적으로서의 약속과 명령의 사건은 최초부터 그리고 우리의 존재 이전부터 있었다는 것이다. 이러한 사건이 바로 존재론적 신을 대신해서 해체가 말하고자 하는 것이다. 부정신학과는 달리 해체는 신의 이름을 다른 이름들로 대체하고 변환함으로써 신의 타자성과 신다움을 지키고자 한다고 볼 수 있다. 이러한 해체적 신다움을 절대타자라고 부를 수 있을 것이다. 데리다의 코라적 해체는 부정신학의 초실체의 문제점을 극복하는 것처럼 보일 뿐 아니라, 신의 절대적 타자성의 가능성을 여는 것처럼 보인다. This study attempts to investigate the theological implications in the Derridean deconstruction and to examine the similarities and differences between the Christian negative theological traditions and deconstruction. Derrida’s deconstruction and the Christian negative theological tradition share common interests concerning the function and the limitation of human language. Because of the linguistic limitation, the negative theology adopts the negative descriptions of God or silence. Through the negativity and silence, negative theology tries to overcome the linguistic limitations and to keep the transcendence of God. However, Derrida thinks the methods used by the negative theologians, such as Gregory of Nyssa, Pseudo?Dionysius, and Augustinus of Hippo, is not successful, because their negative theology already includes positivity in their negativity and silence. According to Derrida, negative theology, just like positive theology, does not know how not to speak and still keeps hyper?being, hyper?ousia, or hyper?essentiality. While negative theology tries to access to God using negativity and silence, Derridean deconstruction wants to face and stay in the linguistic nexus called differance. Differance is an event arising in every linguistic act. Since differance is not an ontological being, it can be thought as a pseudo?transcendental condition. Derrida’s deconstruction insists that any positive and negative descriptions of God cannot escape the linguistic limitation. Moreover, the event of the promise and call always exists from the beginning before our existence. Instead of ontological or hyper?ousiological God, deconstruction wants to talk about this event. Unlike negative theology, deconstruction tries to keep the otherness of God through the substitution and replacement of the name of God with other names. Derrida’s khoral deconstruction seems not only to overcome the hyper?ousia of negative theology, but also to open the possibility of the absolute otherness of God.

포스트모던적 신의 죽음과 윤리: Mark C. Taylor와 John D. Caputo 신학의 비교

윤원준 ( Won Jun Yun ) 한국조직신학회 2015 한국조직신학논총 Vol.42 No.-

본 논문의 목적은 해체적 신학을 시도한다고 알려진 대표적인 신학자인 테일러와 카푸토의 생각의 차이점을 비교 분석하고, 또한 그분석을 통해서 해체적이고 포스트모던적 시도가 기독교신학에 어떠한 영향을 줄 수 있는가를 생각해보는 것이다. 그들은 해체라는 단어를 그들의 신학 작업을 표현하기 위해서 포함시키지만, 그들의 해체적신학의 내용들은 커다란 차이점을 보인다. 테일러의 신학은 비록 헤겔에게서 많은 영향을 받고, 또한 알타이저 생각의 일부분을 도입하긴 하였지만, 테일러 자신만의 독특한 존재론인 a/theology를 재구성하는 모습이다. 이것은 데리다의 해체와도 이질적인 모습이다. 테일러의 a/theology는 신의 죽음을 신성의 부재 혹은 소멸로 이해하며 글쓰기와 상징의 얽힘이라는 무(nothing)가 되는 것으로 이해한다. A/theology존재론으로부터 도출되는 테일러적 윤리는 전통적이고 성경적인기독교 윤리와는 다른 무관심의 윤리다. 카푸토는 비록 전통적인 신학의 존재신론적 요소에 심각한 비판을 가하지만, 테일러와는 다르게 기독교 신학이라는 테두리 속에 머물고자 하는 모습이 강해 보인다. 또한 테일러와는 다르게, 카푸토가 말하는 신의 죽음은 형이상학적 전능의 신의 죽음이다. 강함(전능)의 신에 대한 개념을 버리고 십자가에서 보이는 약함의 신을 생각해야 한다고 카푸토는 생각한다. 테일러와 같이 카푸토는 종교 속에 있는 대가의 경제를 문제 삼는다. 그러나 테일러의 무관심과는 다르게, 카푸토는 타자를 향한 호의와 환대의 윤리를 주장한다. 그러나 카푸토의 윤리에 대항하는 윤리, 타자를 향한 환대에 대한 강조는 또 다른 (윤리적)구조를 만들 위험이 남아있는 것처럼보인다. The purposes of this study is to compare and contrast between the thoughts of Mark C. Taylor and John D. Caputo, who are generally called as the “deconstructive theologians,” and to investigate the possible contributions their thoughts can make for recent Christian theology. Although they use the same word ‘deconstruction’ for their works, their theologies reveal more differences than similarities. With the adoptions of several things from Hegel’s thoughts and Altizer’s death-of-God theology, Taylor’s theology develops his own ontological system called a/theology. It is hard to find any common ground between Taylor’s a/theology and Derrida’s deconstruction. According to Taylor’s a/theology, the death-of-God means God’s absence and becoming nothing, which means becoming writing, signs, and symbols. Taylor’s ethic derived from his a/theology is an ethic of indifference, which looks un-biblical and un-Christian. Although Caputo, like Taylor, criticizes the onto-theological elements in the traditional Christian theology, Caputo, unlike Taylor, trys to keep more biblical and Christian traditions. Also, unlike Taylor, Caputo’s death-of-God means the death-of-God of power and omnipotence. Caputo advocates the God of weakness, which is shown through the Cross of Jesus, rather than the metaphysical God of power. With Taylor, Caputo focuses the problem of the economy of return or reciprocity. However, unlike Taylor’s ethic of indifference, Caputo’s ethic (against ethic) is an ethic of hospitality for the other. Despite his strength of the ethic for the other, Caputo’s deconstructive ethic still seems to keep the danger of constructing another ethical system.

신의 음성과 책임: 레비나스와 데리다의 생각 속의 키에르케고르적 윤리

윤원준 ( Won Jun Yun ) 한국조직신학회 2010 한국조직신학논총 Vol.28 No.-

Since Kierkegaard`s existential philosophy`s main target was Hegelian rationalism and the Hegelian Christianity, most of Kierkegaard`s writings were colored with religious concerns and antirational thought. Like Kierkegaard, some postmodern thinkers, such as Emmanuel Levinas and Jacques Derrida, show their interests in religious issues and challenge the modern foundationalism based on human reason. Also like Kierkegaard, Levinas and Derrida want to shake the human rational systems using the words God, transcendence, infinity, or the absolute Other, which interrupt and disturb this world. Despite those similarities, the differences among Kierkegaard, Levinas, and Derrida should not be ignored. For understanding the differences concerning religious issues among them, one should examine their interpretations and the possible interpretation about the Akedah. For Kierkegaard, Abraham showed two things in his action of binding his son Isaac: First, his duty toward God was absolute; second, his ethical responsibility toward the family and the society was relative and secondary when compared to the God`s command. Kierkegaard interprets that through the obedience of trying to kill his son, Abraham showed his faith. Levinas`s understanding of the Akedah is radically different from the Kierkegaard`s. For Levinas, Abraham was tempted to kill his son by the first God`s voice. However, Abraham could overcome that temptation through waiting patiently for the second God`s voice, and successfully came back to the real God`s ethic. Although Levinas does not say explicitly that Abraham saw or heard God`s voice "you are not to kill" on Isaac`s face, Levinas`s thought concerning human face can strongly support the interpretation that Abraham saw or heard God`s ethical command "you are not to kill" on his son`s face. Therefore, the ethics revealed through human face is prior to God`s direct command to sacrifice one`s own son. In contrast to Levinas`s interpretation, Derrida agrees Kierkegaard`s understanding that the absolute duty toward God conflicts with the responsibilities for family and society. Also like Kierkegaard, Derrida says that for the duty toward God, one should be ready for "the gift of death" that looks like a madness. However, Derrida does not want to abandon the universal ethical norms because of the religious faith. He wants to state that a responsibility for one other is always in conflict and in aporia with another responsibility for another(or other) other, using the expression "every other (one) is every (bit) other, tout autre est tout autre ." It is obvious that although Derrida does not want to ignore or to destroy any ethical system, his deconstruction does not try to construct an ethical system. Derrida correctly insists that every system seeking "the pure" or "the absolute", including Levinas`s ethical system, has the possibility of violence to the other.

Shop Primer의 다중 노즐 분사 스프레이 패턴 인자와 도막두께의 상관관계에 관한 연구

윤원준(Won-Jun Yun),최민규(Min-Kyu Choi),노영식(Young-Shic Ro) 대한조선학회 2010 大韓造船學會 論文集 Vol.47 No.5

폴 리쾨르(Paul Ricoeur) 사상의 신학적 함의

윤원준(Yun, Won-Jun) 침례신학대학교 출판부 2019 복음과 실천 Vol.64 No.1

선박용 블라스팅 셀 내에서의 실시간 위치 추적 기술을 이용한 작업자 안전 시스템에 대한 연구

윤원준(Won-Jun Yun),노영식(Young-Shic Ro),조상복(Sang-Bock Cho) 대한조선학회 2010 大韓造船學會 論文集 Vol.47 No.6

비해체적 해체신학

윤원준(Won Jun Yun) 한국기독교학회 2010 한국기독교신학논총 Vol.70 No.-

Like other postmodern theorists, Mark C. Taylor questions whether traditional ontotheology has valid foundations and principles for understanding reality. Instead of ontotheological foundations, Taylor`s a/theology seeks sensitivity to otherness, difference, and nothing. For Taylor, ontotheology leaves nothing unthought. Traditional ontotheological and metaphysical systems require principles or reasons that can gather all facets of reality to a dor` ernable whole. Also ontotheology femls tond isider nothing as nothing and difference as difference. In order to overcht. thosas hortchtings of ontotheological traditions, Taylor tries nce, inks", e unthinkable," that is nothing. In order to think nothing, Taylor wants to deconstruct traditional understandings of God, self, history, and book. In developing his thought, Taylor adopts the ideas of Hegel, Kierkegaard, and Derrida. For Taylor, nothing is the embodiment of the divine. While Altizer thinks the incarnation of God as the total immersion of deity in secularity, Taylor interprets the incarnation as the embodiment of the divine in writing. Therefore, for Taylor, the traditional understanding of personal God in Christianity should be eliminated. Through this death of God, the sacred returns. Likewise, for Taylor, the self should disappear. However, the disappearance of the self does not mean the total rejection of self. Rather, the self remains as a trace and is present in its absence. Instead of ontotheological archeo-teleological history, Taylor suggests erring history that does not have the origin and the telos. Instead of the idea of the book that gets its authority through the author, Taylor talks about textuality that has no authority and no referentiality. One contribution by Taylor is the understanding of the mediating role of language. He correctly points out the danger of the ontotheological illusion seeking a total system, a unifying structure, or a immediate experience. However, Taylor`s thought shows several weaknesses also. Instead challenging the structure of God, the structure of the self, or the structure of the reality, Taylor`s a/theological critique focuses on God himself, the self itself, and the reality itself. After the process of the critique, Taylor constructs another ontological system that needs to be deconstructed. Taylor`s a/theology does not look like a Christian theology. Rather, it looks like a Buddhist atheology.

이액형 도장기기를 이용한 방식 도장 시 건도막두께 결정인자들에 대한 실험적 상관관계 연구

윤원준(Won-Jun Yun),최민규(Min-Gu Choi),이성균(Sung-Goun Lee),이윤식(Yun-Sig Lee),허병동(Byung-Dong Heo) 대한조선학회 2012 大韓造船學會 論文集 Vol.49 No.5