연구동향 분석
박사

민주주의의 규범적 기초로서의 자율성에 대한 연구 : 하버마스와 롤스를 중심으로

정태창 2018년

논문상세정보
인용/피인용
' 민주주의의 규범적 기초로서의 자율성에 대한 연구 : 하버마스와 롤스를 중심으로' 의 주제별 논문영향력
논문영향력 선정 방법
논문영향력 요약
주제
  • 철학,의사심리학,신비학, 심리학
  • 공적 이성
  • 구성주의
  • 민주주의
  • 소통행위이론
  • 자율성
  • 합당한 다원주의의 현실
동일주제 총논문수 논문피인용 총횟수 주제별 논문영향력의 평균
1,963 0

0.0%

' 민주주의의 규범적 기초로서의 자율성에 대한 연구 : 하버마스와 롤스를 중심으로' 의 참고문헌

  • 『롤스의 공적 이성에 대한 소통 행위 이론적 비판: 롤 스의 정치적 자유주의와 하버마스의 심의민주주의』
    이명순 서울대 학교 철학과 석사논문 [2005]
  • 『도덕 합의론과 공화 민주주의: 롤스와 하버마스의 이 론을 중심으로』
    정원규 서울대학교 철학과 박사논문 [2001]
  • 『공적 이성과 입헌 민주주의』
    정원섭 철학과현실사 [2008]
  • 「한국어판 서문」
    Habermas, J. 『사실성과 타당성』, 한상진 박 영도 옮김, 나남, pp. 5-7 [1999]
  • 「하버마스 교수와의 인터뷰」
    한상진 한상진 박영도 옮김, 『사실성과 타당성』, 나남, pp. 609-658 [2000]
  • 「칸트 『도덕 형이상학』에서의 실천이성, 법 그리고 국 가의 상호 연관성」
    나종석 한국칸트학회 편, 『칸트와 정치철학』, 철학과현실사, pp. 40-70 [2002]
  • 「사회문화적 가치지평과 민주주의」
    장은주 『생존에서 존엄으 로: 비판이론의 민주주의이론적 전개와 우리 현실』, 나남, pp. 133-176 [2007]
  • 「비지배 자유와 공화주의의 딜레마」
    정태창 『철학사상』, 제47권, pp. 125-160 [2013]
  • 「롤즈의 공정으로서의 정의가 현대 입헌 민주주의의 위 기에 대해 갖는 실천적 함의」
    정태창 『철학사상』, 제39권, pp. 167-198 [2011]
  • 「‘절차적’ 민주주의와 ‘실질적’ 민주주의의 지양: R. Dahl 과 J. Cohen의 민주주의론을 중심으로」
    박상혁 『철학사상』, 제49 권, pp. 265-287 [2013]
  • “하버마스의 형식화용론 연구: 입장변화를 중심으로”
    김동규 『사회와 철학』, 제17호, pp. 35-64 [2009]
  • “What is Authority?”
    Arendt, H. Between Past and Future, The Viking Press, pp. 91-142; (2005), 「권위란 무엇인 가?」, 『과거와 미래 사이』, 서유경 역, 푸른숲, pp. 195-234 [1960]
  • “Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung. Zu Richard Rortys pragmatischer Wende”
    Habermas, J. Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung, Suhrkamp, pp. 230-270; (2008), 「진리와 정당화」, 『진리 와 정당화』, 윤형식 역, 나남, pp. 287-336 [1999]
  • “Vom pragmatischen, ethischen und moralischen Gebrauch der praktischen Vernunft”
    Habermas, J. pp. 100-118; (1997), 「실천이성의 실용적, 윤리적, 도덕적 사용에 관하여」, 『담 론윤리의 해명』, 이진우 역, 문예출판사, pp. 123-146 [1991]
  • “Treffen Hegels Einw nde gegen Kant auch auf die Diskursethik zu?”
    Habermas, J. Erl uterungen zur Diskursethik, Suhrkamp, pp. 9-30; (1997), 「칸트에 대한 헤겔의 반박은 담론윤리에도 적용되는가?」, 『담론윤리의 해명』, 이진우 역, 문예출판사, pp. 15-40 [1991]
  • “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”
    Rawls, J. Political Liberalism, Expanded Edition, Columbia University Press, pp. 440-480; (2016), 「공적 이성의 재조명」, 『정치적 자 유주의』, 장동진 역, 동명사, pp. 626-696 [1997]
  • “The Basic Structure as Subject”
    Rawls, J. in: A. Goldman & J. G. Kim(eds.), Values and Morals, D. Reidel Publishing Company, pp. 47-72; (1988), 「주체로서의 기본 구조」, 『공정으로서의 정의』, 이한구 역, 서광사, pp. 221-260 [1978]
  • “Social Unity and Primary Goods”
    Rawls, J. in: A. Sen & B. Williams(eds), Utilitarianism and Beyond, Cambridge University Press, pp. 159-186; (1988), 「사회적 통합과 기 본적 가치」, 『공정으로서의 정의』, 이인탁 역, 서광사, pp. 335-374 [1982]
  • “Richtigkeit vs. Wahrheit : zum Sinn der Sollgeltung moralischer Urteile und Normen”
    Habermas, J. Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung, Suhrkamp, pp. 299-346; (2008), 「올바 름 대(對) 진리」, 『진리와 정당화』, 윤형식 역, 나남, pp. 373-430 [1999]
  • “Rekonstruktive vs. verstehende Sozialwissenschaften”
    Habermas, J. Moralbewu tsein und kommunikatives Handeln, Suhrkamp, pp. 29-52; (1996), 「재구성적 사회과학과 의미이해적 사회과학」, 『도덕의식 과 소통적 행위』, 황태연 역, 나남출판, pp. 43-72 [1983]
  • “Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on Rawls’s Political Liberalism”
    Habermas, J. The J ournal of Philosophy, Vol. 92, No. 3, pp. 109-131; (2000), 「이성의 공론적 사용을 통한 화해」, 『이질성의 포용』, 황태연 역, 나남, pp. 75-102 [1995]
  • “Political Liberalism: Reply to Habermas”
    Rawls, J. The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 92, No. 3, pp. 132-180; (2016), 「하버마스에 대한 응답」, 『정치적 자유주의』, 장동진 역, 동명사, pp. 540-625 [1995]
  • “Political Equality”
    Dworkin, R. Sovereign Virtue: the Theory and Practice of Equality, Harvard University Press, pp. 184-210; (2005), 「정치적 평등」, 『자유주의적 평등』, 염 수균 역, 한길사, pp. 301-336 [2000]
  • “Nachwort”
    Habermas, J. Faktizit t und Geltung, vierte Auflage, Suhrkamp, pp. 661-680; (2000), 「4판 후기」, 『사실성과 타당성』, 한상진 박영도 역, 나남, pp. 587-608 [1994]
  • “Moralbewu tsein und kommunikatives Handeln”
    Habermas, J. Moralbewu tsein und kommunikatives Handeln, Suhrkamp, pp. 127-206; (1996), 「도덕의식과 소통적 행위」, 『도덕의 식과 소통적 행위』, 황태연 역, 나남출판, pp. 167-258 [1983]
  • “Legitimationsprobleme im modernen Staat”
    Habermas, J. Zur Rekonstruktion des Historischen Materialismus, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1976, pp. 271-303; (1995), 「근대 국 가에서의 정당화의 문제」, 장은주 역, 관악사, pp. 95-144 [1976]
  • “Hermeneutische un analytische Philosophie. Zwei komplement re Spielarten der linguistischen Wende”
    Habermas, J. Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung, Suhrkamp, pp. 65-101; (2008), 「해석학적 철학과 분석철학」, 『진리와 정당화』, 윤형식 역, 나남, pp. 85-128 [1999]
  • “Gerechtigkeit und Solidarit t. Zur Diskussion ber >>stufe 6<<”, Erl uterungen zur Diskursethik, Suhrkamp, pp. 49-76; (1997), 「정의와 유대성: “단계 6”
    Habermas, J. 에 관한 논의」, 『담론윤리의 해명』, 이진우 역, 문예출판사, pp. 15-40 [1991]
  • “Erl uterungen zur Diskursethik”
    Habermas, J. Erl uterungen zur Diskursethik, Suhrkamp, 1991, pp. 119-226; (1997), 「담론윤리의 해명」, 『담론윤리의 해명』, 이진우 역, 문예 출판사, pp. 147-272 [1991]
  • “Einleitung: Realismus nach der sprachpragmatischen Wende”
    Habermas, J. Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung, Suhrkamp, pp. 7-64; (2008), 「서론: 언어화 용론적 전회 이후의 실재론」, 『진리와 정당화』, 윤형식 역, 나남, pp. 15-84 [1999]
  • “Eine genealogische Betrachtung zum kognitiven Gehalt der Moral”
    Habermas, J. Die Einbeziehung des Anderen: Studien zur politischen Theorie, Suhrkamp, pp. 11-64; (2000), 「도덕의 인지적 내용에 대한 계보학적 고찰」, 『이 질성의 포용』, 황태연 역, 나남, pp. 21-74 [1996]
  • “Drei normative Modelle der Demokratie”
    Habermas, J. Die Einbeziehung des Anderen: Studien zur politischen Theorie, Suhrkamp, pp. 277-292; (2000), 「민주주의의 세 가지 규범적 모델들」, 『이질성의 포용』, 황태연 역, 나남, pp. 279-294 [1996]
  • “Diskursethik – Notizen zu einem Begr ndungsprogramm”
    Habermas, J. Moralbewu tsein und kommunikativen Handeln, Suhrkamp, pp. 53-125; (1996), 「논의윤리학: 논증 프로그램을 위한 노트」, 『도덕의식과 소통적 행위』, 황태연 역, 나남출판, pp. 73-166 [1983]
  • “Die Philosophie als Platzhalter und Interpret”
    Habermas, J. Moralbewu tsein und kommunikatives Handeln, Suhrkamp, pp. 9-28; (1996), 「자리 지키는 자와 해석자로서의 철학」, 『도덕의식과 소통적 행위』, 황태연 역, 나남출판, pp. 17-42 [1983]
  • “Die Einheit der Vernunft in der Vielfalt ihrer Stimmen”
    Habermas, J. Nachmetaphysisches Denken, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, pp. 153-186; (2000), 「이성의 다양한 음 성들과 그 통일성」, 『탈형이상학적 사유』, 이진우 역, 문 예출판사, pp. 167-203 [1989]
  • “Der europ ische Nationalstaat – Zu Vergangenheit und Zukunft von Souver nit t und Staatb rgerschaft”
    Habermas, J. Die Einbeziehung des Anderen: Studien zur politischen Theorie, Suhrkamp, pp. 128-153; (2000), 「유럽 민족 국 가」, 『이질성의 포용』, 황태연 역, 나남, pp. 135-158 [1996]
  • “Arbeit und Interaktion. Bemerkungen zu Hegels Jenenser >Philosophie des Geistes<”
    Habermas, J. Technik und Wissenschaft als >Ideologie<, Suhrkamp, pp. 9-47; (1993), 「노동과 상호행위」, 『‘이데올로기’로서의 기술과 과학』, 하석용 이유선 역, 이성과현실사, pp. 9-54 [1968]
  • “>Vern nfig< versus >Wahr< oder die Moral der Weltbilder”
    Habermas, J. Die Einbeziehung des Anderen, Suhrkamp, pp. 95-127; (2000), 「‘이성’ 대 ‘진리’ 또는 세계관들의 도 덕」, 『이질성의 포용』, 황태연 역, 나남, pp. 103-134 [1996]
  • ber die wissenschaftlichen Behandlungsarten des Naturrechts, seine Stelle in der praktischen Philosophie und sein Verh ltnis zu den positiven Rechtswissenschaften
    Hegel, G. G. W. F. Hegel Werke in Zwanzig Banden. Band 2: J enaer Schriften. 1801-1807, Suhrkamp, pp. 434-539; (2004), 『자연법』, 김준수 역, 한길사 [1986]
  • Wood, A., (2010), “Kant’s Formulations of the Moral Law”, in: G. Bird(ed.), A Companion to Kant, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 291-307.
  • Wood, A., (2008), Kantian Ethics, Cambridge University Press.
  • Wood, A., (2006), “Kant’s Formulation of the Moral Law”, in: A Companion to Kant, G. Bird(ed.), Blackwell Publishing, pp. 291-306.
  • Wood, A., (1999), Kant’s Ethical Thought, Cambridge University Press.
  • Wood, A., (1990), Hegel's Ethical Thought, Cambridge University Press.
  • Wolff, R., (1977), Understanding Rawls, Princeton University Press.
  • Wolff, R., (1973), The Autonomy of Reason : a Commentary on Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Harper & Row.
  • Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Mohr Siebeck; (1997), 『경제와 사회 I』, 박성환 역
    Weber, M. 문학과지성사 [1972]
  • Williams, B., (1982), “Persons, Character, and Morality”, Moral Luck, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-19.
  • White, S., (2012), “Property-Owning Democracy and Republican Citizenship”, in: M. O’Neill & T. Williamson, Property-Owning Democracy: Rawls and Beyond, Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 129-146.
  • Werner, M., (2003), Diskursethik als Maximenethik, K nigshause & Neumann.
  • Wenar, L., (2005), “The Unity of Rawls’s Work”, in: T. Brook & F. Freyhagen(eds.), The Legacy of Rawls, Continuum, pp. 22-33.
  • Wellmer, A., (1993), “Bedingungen einer demokratischen Kultur: Zur Debatte zwischen Liberalen und Kommunitaristen”, in: M. Brumlik & H. Brunkhorst, Gemeinschaft und Gerechtigkeit, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, pp. 173-198.
  • Weber, E., (2010), Rawls, Dewey, and Constructivism, Continuum.
  • Watkins, E. & W. Fitzpatrick, (2002), “O'Neill and Korsgaard on the Construction of Normativity”, The J ournal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 36, pp. 349-367.
  • Warnke, G., (2001), “Taking Ethical Debate Seriously”, n: W. Rehg & J. Bohman(eds.), Pluralism and the Pragmatic Turn, pp. 295-318.
  • Walzer, M., (1990), “A Critique of Philosophical Conversation”, in: M. Kelly(ed.), Hermeneutics and Critical Theory in Ethics and Politics, MIT Press, pp. 182-196.
  • Walzer, M., (1981), “Philosophy and Democracy”, Political Theory, Vol. 9, No.3, pp. 379-399.
  • Wall, S., (1998) Liberalism, Perfectionism and Restraint, Cambridge University Press.
  • Waldron, J., (2015), “The Strains of Commitment”, in: T. Hinton(ed.), The Original Position, Cambridge University Press, pp. 59-76.
  • Waldron, J., (2005), “Moral Autonomy and Personal Autonomy”, in: J. Christman & J. Anderson(eds.), Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism, Cambridge University Press, pp. 307-329.
  • Waldron, J., (1999), Law and Disagreement, Oxford Clarendon Press.
  • Unequal Democracy, Princeton University Pressl; (2012), 『불평등 민주주의』, 위선주 역
    Bartels, L. 21세기북스 [2008]
  • Timmons, M., (2006), “The Categorical Imperative and Universalizability”, in: C. Horn & D. Sch necker(eds.), Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 158-199.
  • Timmons, M., (2003), “The Limits of Moral Constructivism”, Ratio, Vol. XVI, no. 4, pp. 391-422.
  • Thomson, J. (1995), “Abortion: Whose Right?”, Boston Review, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 11-15.
  • Thompson, J., (1982), “Universal Pragmatics”, in: J. B. Thompson & D. Held(eds.), Habermas: Critical Debates, The MIT Press, pp. 116-133.
  • Theories of Justice, Vol. I
    Barry, B. University of California Press; (1993), 『正義論』, 이용필 역, 신유 [1989]
  • Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Band 2, Suhrkamp; (2006), 『소통행위이론 2권: 기능주의적 이성 비 판을 위하여』, 장춘익 역
    Habermas, J. 나남출판 [1981]
  • Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Band 1, Suhrkamp; (2006), 『소통행위이론 1권: 행위합리성과 사회 합리화』, 장춘익 역
    Habermas, J. 나남출판 [1981]
  • Theorie der juristischen Argumentation, Suhrkamp; (2007), 『법적 논증 이론』, 변종필 최희수 박달현 역
    Alexy, R. 고려 대학교 출판부 [1978]
  • The Sources of Normativity
    Korsgaard, C. Cambridge University Press; (2011), 『규범성의 원천』, 강현정 김양현 역, 철학과현실사 [1996]
  • The Rights of Others
    Benhabib, S. Cambridge University Press; (2008), 『타자의 권리』, 이상훈 역, 철학과현실사 [2004]
  • The Philosophy of Moral Development, Harper & Row; (2000), 『도덕발달의 철학』, 김민남 김봉소 진미숙 역
    Kohlberg, L. 교육과학사 [1981]
  • The Human Condition
    Arendt, H. The University of Chicago Press; (1996), 『인간의 조건』, 이진우 태정호 역, 한길사 [1958]
  • The Democratic Paradox, Verso; (2006), 『민주주 의의 역설』, 이행 역
    Mouffe, C. 인간사랑 [2000]
  • The Categorical Imperative: A study in Kant’s Moral Philosophy, Hutchinson’s University Library; (1990), 『칸트의 도덕철학』, 김성호 역
    Paton, H. 서광사 [1948]
  • Taylor, R., (2011), Reconstructing Rawls: the Kantian Foundations of Justice as Fairness, The Pennsylvania State University Press.
  • Tamplin, T., (2000) Motivating the Discursive Turn in Moral Theory, University of Illinois.
  • Talisse, R., (2009), Democracy and Moral Conflict, Cambridge University Press.
  • Talisse, R., (2005), “Dilemmas of Public Reason: Pluralism, Polarization, and Instability”, in: T. Brook & F. Freyhagen(eds.), The Legacy of J ohn Rawls, Continuum, pp. 107-123.
  • Talbott, W., (2005), Which Rights Should Be Universal? , Oxford University Press.
  • Taking Rights Seriously
    Ronald Dworkin Harvard University Press; (2010), 『법과 권리』, 염수균 역, 한길사 [1977]
  • Sunstein, C., (1999), “Deliberation, Democracy, Disagreement”, in: R. Bontekoe & M. Stepaniants, Justice and Democracy, University of Hawai’i Press, pp. 93-118.
  • Strukturwandel der ffentlichkeit, Luchterhand; (2001), 『공론장의 구조변동』, 한승완 역
    Habermas, J. 나남 [1965]
  • Street, S., (2008) “Constructivism about Reasons”, in: in: R. Shafer-Landau, Oxford Studies in Metaethics, Vol. 3 Oxford University Press, pp. 207-246.
  • Stratton-Lake, P., (2013), “Morality and Autonomy”, in: O. Senson(ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy, Cambridge University Press.
  • Stratton-Lake, P., (2000), Kant, Duty and Moral Worth, Routledge.
  • Stern, R., (2012), Understanding Moral Obligation: Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Cambridge University Press.
  • Stern, R., (2002), Hegel and the Phenomenology of Spirit, Routledge.
  • Stark, C., (2000), “Hypothetical Consent and Justification”, The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 97, No. 6, pp. 313-334.
  • Song, E., (2012), “Rawls’s Liberal Principle of Legitimacy”, The Philosophical Forum, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 153-173.
  • Smith, S., (2010), The Disenchantment of Secular Discourse, Harvard University Press.
  • Singer, P., (1974), “Sidgwick and Reflective Equilibrium”, Monist, Vol. LVIII, no. 3, pp. 490-517.
  • Simmons, A., (1999), “Justification and Legitimacy”, Ethics, Vol. 109, No. 4, pp. 739-771.
  • Shapiro, I., (1999b), “Enough of Deliberation: Politics Is about Interests and Power”, in: S. Macedo(ed.), Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, Oxford University Press, pp. 28-37.
  • Shapiro, I., (1999a), Democratic Justice, Yale University Press.
  • Shafer-Landau, R., (2005), Moral Realism: a Defence, Clarendon Press.
  • Seidler, V., (1986), Kant, Respect and Injustice: The Limits of Liberal Moral Theory, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  • Second Treatise of Government, Hackett Publishing Company; (1996), 『통치론』, 강정인 문지영 역
    Locke, J. 까치 [1980]
  • Schneewind, J., “Autonomy, Obligation, and Virtue”, in: P. Guyer(ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant, Cambridge University Press, pp. 309-341.
  • Schneewind, J., (2010), “Why Study Kant’s Groundwork?”, reprinted in: Essays on the History of Moral Philosophy, Oxford University Press, pp. 239-247.
  • Schneewind, J., (1998), The Invention of Autonomy, Cambridge University Press.
  • Scheffler, S., (1994), “The Appeal of Political Liberalism”, Ethics , Vol. 105, No. 1, pp. 4-22.
  • Sch nrich, G., (1994), Bei Gelegenheit Diskurs: Von den Grenzen der Diskursethik und dem Preis der Letztbegr ndung, Suhrkamp.
  • Scanlon, T., (2002), “Rawls on Justification”, in: S. Freeman(ed.), Cambridge Companion to Rawls, Cambridge University Press, pp. 139-167.
  • Sayre-McCord, G., (2000), “Contractarianism”, in: H. LaFollette(ed.), Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory, Blackwell Publishing, pp. 247-267.
  • Sandel, M., (1996), “Judgemental Toleration”, in: R. George(ed.), Natural Law, Liberalism and Morality,
  • Rummens, S., (2006), “Debate: The Co-originality of Private and Public Autonomy in Deliberative Democracy”, The J ournal of Political Philosophy, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 469-481.
  • Rostb ll, C., (2008) Deliberative Freedom: Deliberative Democracy as Critical Theory, State University of New York Press.
  • Rorty, R., (2001), “The Ambiguity of ‘Rationality’”, in: W. Rehg & J. Bohman(eds.), Pluralism and the Pragmatic Turn, pp. 41-52.
  • Rorty, R., (1991), “The Priority of Democracy to Philosophy”, Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth, Cambridge University Press, pp. 175-196.
  • Roderick, R., (1986), Habermas and the Foundations of Critical Theory, Macmillan.
  • Roberts, P., (2007), Political Constructivism, Routledge.
  • Ricoeur, P., (1990), “On John Rawls’s A Theory of Justice: Is a pure procedural theory of justice possible?”, International Social Science Journal 42, pp. 553-564.
  • Richardson, H., (2002), Democratic Autonomy, Oxford University Press.
  • Rentsch, T., (2000), Negativit t und praktische Vernunft, Suhrkamp.
  • Rentsch, T., (1999), Die Konstitution der Moralit t, Suhrkamp.
  • Reidy, D., (2013), “From Philosophical Theology to Democratic Theory: Early Postcards from an Intellectual Journey”, in: J. Mandle & D. Reidy(eds.), A Companion to Rawls, Wiley Blackwell, pp. 9-30.
  • Rehg, W., (1994), Insight and Solidarity, University of California Press.
  • Rehg, W., (1991), “Discource and the Moral Point of View: Deriving a Dialogical Principle of Universalization”, Inquiry, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 27-48.
  • Rehg, W., & J. Bohman, (1996), “Discourse and Democracy: The Formal and Informal Bases of Legitimacy in Habermas’ Faktizit t und Geltung”, The J ournal of Political Philosophy, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 79-99.
  • Regan, D., (2002), “The Value of Rational Nature”, Ethics, Vol. 112, No. 2, pp. 267-291.
  • Reath, A., (2015), “The ‘Kantian Roots’ of the Original Position”, in: T. Hinton(ed), The Original Position, Cambridge University Press, pp. 201-223.
  • Reath, A., (2013), “Kant’s Conception of Autonomy of the Will”, in: O. Senson(ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 32-52.
  • Reath, A., (2006c), “Legislating for a Realm of Ends: The Social Dimension of Autonomy”, reprinted in: Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory, Oxford Clarendon Press, pp. 173-195.
  • Reath, A., (2006b), “Legislating the Moral Law”, reprinted in: Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory, Oxford Clarendon Press, pp. 92-120.
  • Reath, A., (2006a), “Autonomy of the Will as the Foundation of Morality”, reprinted in: Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory, Oxford Clarendon Press, pp. 121-172.
  • Raz. J.(1986). The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Raz, J., (1990), “Facing Diversity: The Case of Epistemic Abstinence”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 3-46.
  • Rawls, J.. (1951), “Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics”, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 177-197.
  • Rawls, J., (2007), Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy, Harvard University Press.
  • Rawls, J., (2003a), Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, Harvard University Press.
  • Rawls, J., (1999c), “A Kantian Conception of Equality”, reprinted in: John Rawls Collected Papers, S. Freeman(ed.), Harvard University Press, pp. 267-285.
  • Rawls, J., (1999a), “Constitutional Liberty and the Concept of Justice”, reprinted in: S. Freeman(ed.), J ohn Rawls Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, pp. 73-95.
  • Rawls, J., (1987), “The Basic Liberties and their Priority”, in: S. McMurrin(ed.), Liberty, Equality, and Law: Selected Tanner Lectures on Moral Philosophy, University of Utah Press.
  • Rawls, J., (1980), “Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory”, The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 77, No. 9, 1980, pp. 515-572.
  • Rawls, J., (1974), “Some Reasons for the Maximin Criterion”, American Economic Review, Vol. 64, No. 2, , pp. 141-46.
  • Rawls, J., (1968), “Distributive Justice: Some Addenda”, American Journal of Jurisprudence, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 51-71.
  • Rawls, J., (1955), "Two Concepts of Rules", The Philosophical Review, Vol. 64, No. 1, pp. 3-32.
  • Rawls, J., (1950), A Study in the Grounds of Ethical Knowledge: Considered with Reference to Judgments on the Moral Worth of Character , Princeton University Press.
  • Rauscher, F., (2002) “Kant’s Moral Anti-Realism”, Journal of the History of Philosophy, No. 40, pp. 477-499.
  • Quong, J., (2013), “On the Idea of Public Reason”, in: J. Mandle & D. Reidy(eds.), A Companion to Rawls, Wiley Blackwell, pp. 265-280.
  • Postone, M., (1996), “Political Theory and Historical Analysis”, in: C. Calhoun(ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere, The MIT Press, pp. 164-180.
  • Post-Democracy
    Crouch, Colin Polity Press; (2008), 『포스트 민 주주의』, 이한 역, 미지북스 [2004]
  • Political Liberalism, Expanded Edition
    Rawls, J. Columbia University Press; (2016), 『정치적 자유주의』, 장동진 역, 동명사 [1993]
  • Pohlmann, R., (1971), “Autonomie”, in: J. Ritter(ed.), Historische W rterbuch der Philosophie, Vol. I, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
  • Pogge, T., (1999), “The Categorical Imperative”, in: O. H ffe, Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten, Vittorio Klostermann, pp. 172-193.
  • Peters, B., (1996), “On Reconstructive Legal and Political Theory”, in: M. Deflem(ed.), Habermas, Modernity and Law, Sage Publications, pp. 101-134.
  • Perry, R., (1950), The General Theory of Value, Longmans.
  • Pedersen, J., (2008), “Habermas’ Method: Rational Reconstruction”, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 457-485.
  • O’Neill, O., (2013), “Postscript: Heteronomy as the Clue to Kantian Autonomy”, in: O. Senson(ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, 2013, pp. 282-288.
  • O’Neill, O., (2004), “Autonomy, Plurality and Public Reason”, in: N. Brender & L. Krasnoff, New Essays on the History of Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 181-194.
  • O’Neill, O., (2003), “Autonomy: The Emperor's New Clothes”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, Vol. 77, pp. 1-21.
  • O’Neill, O., (2000b), “Kant’s Justice and Kantian Justice”, Bounds of Justice, Cambridge University Press, pp. 65-80.
  • O’Neill, O., (2000a), “Agency and Autonomy”, Bounds of Justice, Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 29-49.
  • O’Neill, O., (1997), “Political Liberalism and Public Reason”, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 106, No. 3, pp. 411-428.
  • O’Neill, O., (1989d), “Constructivism in Ethics”, Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 206-218.
  • O’Neill, O., (1989c), “Universal Laws and Ends in Themselves”, Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 126-144.
  • O’Neill, O., (1989c), “Consistency in Action”, Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 81-104.
  • O’Neill, O., (1989b), “Reason and Autonomy in Grundlegung III”, Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 51-65.
  • O’Neill, O., (1989a), “Action, Anthropology, and Autonomy”, Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, 1989, pp. 66-80.
  • O’Neill, O., (1975), Acting On Principle, Columbia University Press.
  • O’Neill, M., (2012), “Free (and Fair) Markets without Capitalism: Political Values, Principles of Justice, and Property-Owning Democracy”, in: M. O’Neill & T. Williamson, Property-Owning Democracy: Rawls and Beyond, Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 75-100.
  • Ottmann, H., (1982), “Cognitive Interests and Self-Reflection”, in: J. B. Thompson & D. Held(eds.), Habermas: Critical Debates, The MIT Press, pp. 79-97.
  • Ott, K., (1996), “Wie begr ndet man ein Diskursprinzip der Moral? Ein neuer Verzuch zu ‘U’ und ‘D’”, Vom Begr nden zum Handeln: Aufs tze zur angewandten Ethik, Attempto Verlag.
  • On Violence, HBJ Book; (1999), 『폭력의 세기』, 김 정한 역
    Arendt, H. 이후 [1970]
  • Okin, S., (1993), “Review of Political Liberalism”, American Political Science Review, Vol. 87, pp. 1010-1011.
  • Norman, W., (1998), “‘Inevitable and Unacceptable?’ Methodological Rawlsianism in Anglo-American Political Philosophy”, Political Studies, XLVI, pp. 276-294.
  • Niquet, M., (1994), Nichthintergehbarkeit und Diskurs, Duncker & Humblot GmbH.
  • Nielsen, K., (1993), “Relativism and Wide Reflective Equilibrium”, The Monist, Vol. 76, No. 3, pp. 316-332.
  • Nelson, W., (1980), “The Very Idea of Pure Procedural Justice”, Ethics, Vol. 90, No. 4, pp. 502-511.
  • Neiman, S., (1997), The Unity of Reason: Rereading Kant, Oxford University Press.
  • Narveson, J., (2009), “Rawls’s Social Contract: Not Really”, in: S. Young(ed.), Reflections on Rawls, Ashgate, pp. 91-110.
  • Nagle, T., (1973), “Rawls on Justice”, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 82, No. 2., pp. 220-234.
  • Murdoch, I., (2001), “The Sovereignty of Good over other Concepts”, The Sovereignty of Good, pp. 75-102.
  • Mulhall, S., & A. Swift, (2002), "Rawls and Communitarianism", in: S. Freeman(ed.), Cambridge Companion to Rawls, Cambridge University Press, pp. 460-487.
  • Mind, Self, and Society
    Mead, G. University of Chicago Press; (2010), 『정신 자아 사회』, 나은영 역, 2010 [1972]
  • Milo, R., (1995), “Contractarian Constructivism”, The J ournal of Philosophy, Vol. 92, No. 4, pp. 181-204.
  • Mielchen, D., (2010), ber die (Un-)M glichkeit der Legitimation offener Gesellschaften: Ein Diskurs anhand von J ohn Rawls und J rgen Habermas, Tectum Verlag.
  • Michelman, F., (2001), “Morality, Identity and ‘Constitutional Patriotism’”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 253-271.
  • Michelman, F., (2000), “Human Rights and the Limits of Constitutional Theory”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 63-76.
  • Michelman, F., (1997), “How Can the People Ever Make the Laws? A Critique of Deliberative Democracy”, reprinted in: J. Bohman & W. Rehg(eds.), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reasons and Politics, The MIT Press, pp. 145-172.
  • Meade, J., (1964), Efficiency, Equality and the Ownership of Property, George Allen & Unwin LTD.
  • McConnell, M., (2007), “Secular Reason and the Misguided Attempt to Exclude Religious Argument from Democratic Deliberation”, J ournal of Law, Philosophy and Culture, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 159-174.
  • McCarthy, T., (2013), “The Burdens of Modernized Faith and Postmetaphysical Reason in Habermas’s ‘Unfinished Project of Enlightenment’”, in: C. Calhoun et al.(eds.), Habermas and Religion, Polity Press, pp. 205-223.
  • McCarthy, T., (1995), “Legitimacy and Diversity: Dialectical Reflections on Analytical Distinctions”, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 17, pp. 1083-1125.
  • McCarthy, T., (1994), “Kantian Constructivism and Reconstuctivism”, Ethics, Vol. 105, No. 1, pp. 44-63.
  • McCarthy, T., (1991), “Practical Discourse: On The Relation of Morality to Politics”, Ideals and I llusions, The MIT Press, pp. 181-200.
  • McCarthy, T., (1982), “Rationality and Relativism: Habermas’s Overcoming of Hermeneutics”, in: J. Thompson & D. Held(eds), Habermas: Critical Debates, MIT Press, pp. 57-78.
  • McCarthy, T., (1978), The Critical Theory of J rgen Habermas, The MIT Press.
  • Maliks, R., (2009), “Prussian Polis: Kant’s Democratic Republicanism”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 427-445.
  • Mahoney, J., (2001), “Rights without Dignity? Some Critical Reflections on Habermas’s Procedural Model of Law and Democracy”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol. 27, pp. 21-40.
  • Maffettone, S., (2004), “Political Liberalism: Reasonableness and Democratic Practice”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp. 541-577.
  • Mackenzei, C. & N. Stoljar, (2000), “Introduction: Autonomy Refigured”, in: C. Mackenzei & N. Stoljar(eds.), Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self, Oxford University Press.
  • Lyons, D., (1989), “Nature and Soundness of Contract and Coherence Arguments”, in: N. Daniels(ed), Reading Rawls, Stanford University Press, pp. 141-168.
  • Lukes, S., (1982), “Of Gods and Demons: Habermas and Practical Reason”, in: J. B. Thompson & D. Held(eds.), Habermas: Critical Debates, The MIT Press, pp. 134-148.
  • Luhmann, N., (1971), “Systemtheoretische Argumentationen. Eine Entgegnung auf J rgen Habermas”, in: J. Habermas, D. Henrich & N. Luhmann(eds.), Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologi – Was leistet die Systemforschung? , Suhrkamp, pp. 291-405.
  • Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, 2nd edition
    Sandel, M. Cambridge University Press; (2012), 『정의의 한계』, 이양 수 역, 멜론 [1998]
  • Lenoble, J., (1998), “Law and Undecidability: Toward a New Vision of the Proceduralization of Law”, in: M. Rosenfeld & A. Arato(eds.), Habermas on Law and Democracy, University of California Press, pp. 37-81.
  • Lehrer, K., (2003), “Reason and Autonomy”, in: E. Paul et al.(eds.), Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 177-198.
  • Legitimationsprobleme im Sp tkapitalismus, Suhrkamp; (1983), 『후기 자본주의 정당성 연구』, 장석주 역
    Habermas, J. 청하 [1973]
  • Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, R. Beiner(ed.), The University of Chicago Press. L. Bartels, Unequal Democracy
    Arendt, H. Princeton University Press, 2008; (2000), 『칸트 정치철학 강의』, 김선욱 역, 푸른숲 [1992]
  • Larmore, C., (2008), Autonomy of Morality, Cambridge University Press.
  • Larmore, C., (1999), “The Moral Basis of Political Liberalism”, The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 96, No. 12, pp. 599-625.
  • Larmore, C., (1996b), “The Foundations of Modern Democracy: Reflections on J rgen Habermas”, reprinted in: The Morals of Modernity, Cambridge University Press, pp. 205-222.
  • Larmore, C., (1996a), “Beyond Religion and Enlightenment”, reprinted in: The Morals of Modernity, Cambridge University Press, pp. 41-64.
  • Larmore, C., (1990), “Political Liberalism”, Political Theory, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 339-360.
  • Lafont, C., (2004), “Moral Objectitivity and Reasonable Agreement”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 27-51.
  • Lafont, C., (2003), “Procedural Justice? Implications of the Rawls-Habermas Debate for Discourse Ethics”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 163-181.
  • Lafont, C., (2002b), The Linguistic Turn in Hermeneutic Philosophy, Trans. J. Medina, MIT Press.
  • Lafont, C., (2002a), “Realismus und Konstruktivismus in der kantianischen Moralphilosophie - das Beispiel der Diskursethik”, Deutsche Zeitschrift f r Philosophie, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 39-52.
  • Laden, A., (2003), “The House that Jact Built: Thirty Years of Reading Rawls”, Ethics, Vol. 113, No. 2, pp. 367-390.
  • Laden, A., (1991), “Games, Fairness, and Rawls’s A Theory of Justice”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 189-222.
  • Kukathas, C. & P. Pettit, (1990), Rawls: A Theory of Justice and its Critics, Stanford University Press.
  • Kuhlmann, W., (1985), Reflexive Letztbegr ndung, Alber.
  • Krasnoff, L., (2013), “Constructing Practical Justification”, in: M. Timmons & S. Baiasu(eds.), Kant on Practical Justification, Oxford University Press, pp. 87-109.
  • Korsgaard, C., (2009), Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity, Oxford University Press.
  • Korsgaard, C., (2008), “Realism and Constructivism in Twentieth-Century Moral Philosophy”, The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology, Oxford University Press, pp. 302-326.
  • Korsgaard, C., (1996c), “Kant’s Formula of Universal Law”, reprinted in: Creating the Kingdom of Ends, Cambridge University Press, pp. 77-105.
  • Korsgaard, C., (1996b), “Kant’s Analysis of Obligation: The Argument of Groundwork I ”, reprinted in: Creating the Kingdom of Ends, Cambridge University Press, pp. 43-76.
  • Klosko, G., (2009), “Rawls’s Public Reason and American Society”, in: S. Young(ed.), Reflections on Rawls, Ashgate, pp. 23-44.
  • Kerstein, S., (2002), Kant’s Search for the Supreme Principle of Morality, Cambridge University Press.
  • Kelly, T. & S. McGrath, (2010), “Is Reflective Equilibrium Enough?”, Philosophical Perspectives, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 325-354.
  • Katzner, L., (1982), “The Original Position and the Veil of Ignorance”, in: H. Blocker & E. Smith(eds.), J ohn Rawls’ Theory of Social Justice, Ohio University Press, pp. 42-70.
  • Kappel, K., (2006), “The Meta-Justification of Reflective Equilibrium”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, Vol. 9, pp. 131-147.
  • Kain, P., (2004), “Self-Legislation in Kant's Moral Philosophy”, Archiv f r Geschichte der Philosophie, Vol. 86, No. 3, pp. 257–306.
  • Kain, P., (1999) Self-Legislation and Prudence in Kant’s Moral Philosophy: A Critical Examination of Some Constructivist Interpretations, University of Notre Dame.
  • Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical
    Rawls, J. Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 223-251; (1988), 「공정으로서의 정의: 형이상학적 입장이냐 정치적 입장이냐」, 『공정으로서의 정의』, 이한구 역, 서광사, pp. 106-146 [1985]
  • Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, E. Kelly(ed.)
    Rawls, J. Harvard University Press; (2016), 『공정으로서의 정의: 재 서술』, 김주휘 역, 이학사 [2003]
  • Justice as Fairness
    Rawls, J. The Philosophical Review, Vol. 67, No. 2, pp. 164-194; (1988), 「공정으로서의 정의」, 『공정으로서의 정의』, 황경식 역, 서광사, pp. 11-44 [1958]
  • Joyce, R., (2002), The Myth of Morality, Cambridge University Press.
  • Johnson, R., (2007), “Value and Autonomy in Kantian Ethics”, in: R. Shafer-Landau, Oxford Studies in Metaethics, Vol. 2, Oxford University Press, pp. 133-148.
  • Johnson, P., (2006), Habermas: Rescuing the Public Sphere, Routledge.
  • Is Democracy Possible Here?
    Dworkin, R. Princeton University Press; (2012), 『민주주의는 가능한가』, 홍한별 역, 문학과 지성사 [2006]
  • Intuition and Construction: the Foundation of Normative Theory
    Seung, T. Yale University Press; (1999), 『직관과 구성』, 김주성 역, 나남출판 [1993]
  • In a different voice
    Gilligan, C. Harvard University Press; (1997), 『다른 목소리로』, 허란주 역, 동녘 [1982]
  • Holmes, S., (1993), “John Rawls and the Limits of Tolerance”, The New Republic< Vol. 11, pp. 39-47.
  • Hills, A., (2008), “Kantian Value Realism”, Ratio, XXI 2, pp. 182-200.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (2013), “Kantian Autonomy and Contemporary Ideas of Autonomy”, in: O. Senson(ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 15-31.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (2002), “Kantian Analysis: From Duty to Autonomy”, reprinted in: Human Welfare and Moral Worth, Oxford University Press, pp. 13-36.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (2000b), “The Problem of Stability in Political Liberalism”, reprinted in: Respect, Pluralism, and Justice: Kantian Perspectives, Oxford University Press, pp. 237-259.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (2000a), “Kantianism”, in: H. LaFollette(ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2000, pp. 227-246.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (1992), “Kant’s Theory of Practical Reason”, The Monist, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 363-383.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (1991), “The Importance of Autonomy”, reprinted in: Autonomy and Self-Respect, Cambridge University Press, pp. 43-51.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (1989), “Kantian Constructivism in Ethics”, Ethics, Vol. 99, No. 4, pp. 752-770.
  • Hill, Jr., T., (1973), “The Hypothetical Imperative”, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 82, No. 4, pp. 429-450.
  • Herman, B., (1993) “Moral Deliberation and the Derivation of Duties”, The Practice of Moral Judgment, Harvard University Press, pp. 132-158.
  • Henrich, D., (1982), “Das Problem der Grundlegung der Ethik bei Kant und in spekulativen Idealismus”, reprinted in: Selbstverh ltnisse: Gedanken und Auslegungen zu den Grundlagen der klassischen deutschen Philosophie, Philipp Reclam, pp. 6-56.
  • Heller, A., (1984), “The Discourse Ethics of Habermas: Critique and Appraisal”, Thesis Eleven, No. 10/11, 1984, pp. 5-17.
  • Hegel
    Taylor, Charles Cambridge University Press; (2014), 『헤 겔』, 정대성 역, 그린비 [1975]
  • Hedrick, T., (2010), Rawls and Habermas: Reason, Pluralism, and the Claims of Political Philosophy, Stanford University Press.
  • Heath, J., (2001), Communicative Action and Rational Choice, The MIT Press.
  • Heath, J., (1995), “The Problem of Foundationalism in Habermas’s Discourse Ethics”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 77-100.
  • Hayfa, T., (2008), The Problem of Public Justification in Political Philosophy: Rawls, Rorty, and Habermas, VDM Verlag.
  • Haslett, D., (1987), “What is Wrong with Reflective Equilibria?”, The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 37, No. 148, pp. 305-311.
  • Hart, H, (1973), “Rawls on Liberty and its Priority”, The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 534-555.
  • Hare, R., (1989), “Rawls’ Theory of Justice”, in: N. Daniels(ed), Reading Rawls, Stanford University Press, pp. 81-107.
  • Hampton, J., (1993), “The Moral Commitment of Liberalism”, in: D. Copp(eds.), The Idea of Democracy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 292-313.
  • Hampton, J., (1980), “Contracts and Choices: Does Rawls Have a Social Contract Theory?”, J ournal of Philosophy, Vol. 77, pp. 315-338.
  • Hampshire, S., (1993), “Liberalism: The New Twist”, New York Review of Books, pp. 43-47.
  • Habermas, J., (2013), “Stichworte zu einer Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats”, Im Sog der Technokratie, Suhrkamp, pp. 67-81.
  • Habermas, J., (2011), “Reply to My Critics”, in: J. Finlayson & F. Freyenhagen, Habermas and Rawls, Routledge, pp. 283-304.
  • Habermas, J., (2006), “Political Communication in Media Society”, Communication Theory, Vol. 16, pp. 411-426.
  • Habermas, J., (2005b), “Zur Architektonik der Diskursdifferenzierung”, Zwischen Naturalismus und Religion, Suhrkamp, pp. 84-105.
  • Habermas, J., (2005a), “Kommunikatives Handeln und detranzendentalisierte Vernunft”, Zwischen Naturalismus und Religion, Suhrkamp, 2005, pp. 27-83.
  • Habermas, J., (2001), “Constitutional Democracy: A Paradoxical Union of Contradictory Principles?”, Political Theory, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp. 766-781.
  • Habermas, J., (1996e), “On the Cognitive Content of Morality”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Vol. 96, pp. 335-358.
  • Habermas, J., (1984b), “Was Hei t Universalpragmatik?”, Vorstudien und Erg nzungen zur Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Suhrkamp, pp. 353-440.
  • Habermas, J., (1984a), “Wahrheitstheorien”, Vorstudien und Erg nzungen zur Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Suhrkamp, pp. 127-186.
  • Habermas, J., (1982), “A Reply to my Critics”, in: J. B. Thompson & D. Held(eds.), Habermas: Critical Debates, The MIT Press, pp. 219-283.
  • Habermas, J., (1976a), “Zwei Bemerkungen zum praktischen Diskurs”, Zur Rekonstruktion des historischen Materialismus, Suhrkamp, pp. 338-345.
  • H sle, V., , Hegels System: der Idealismus der Subjektivit t und das Problem der Intersubjektivit t, Band 1, Felix Meiner; (2007), 『헤겔의 체계. 1. 체계의 발전과 논리학』, 권대중 역
    한길사 [1988]
  • H ffe, O., , Gerechtigkeit, Beck; (2004), 『정의』, 박종대 역
    이 제이북스 [2001]
  • Guyer, P., (2013), “Constructivism and Self-Constitution”, in: M. Timmons & S. Baiasu(eds.), Kant on Practical Justification, Oxford University Press, pp. 176-200.
  • Guyer, P., (2002), “Life, Liberty, and Poverty: Rawls and Kant”, in: Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness, Cambridge University Press, pp. 262-286.
  • Gutmann, A., & D. Thompson, (1997), Democracy and Disagreement, Harvard University Press.
  • Greenawalt, K., (1993), “On Public Reason”, Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 549, pp. 669-689.
  • Gould, C., (1990), “On the Conception of the Common Interest: Between Procedure and Substance”, in: M. Kelly(ed.), Hermeneutics and Critical Theory in Ethics and Politics, Mit Press, pp. 253-273.
  • Gottschalk-Mazouz, N., (2000), Diskursethik: Theorien, Entwicklungen, Perspektiven, Akademie Verlag.
  • Geuss, R., (1981), The Idea of a Critical Theory: Habermas and Frankfurt School , Cambridge University Press.
  • Gerhardt, V., (1995), Immanuel Kants Entwurt >Zum ewigen Frieden<, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
  • George, P., (1997), “Public Reason and Political Conflict: Abortion and Homosexuality”, The Yale Law J ournal , Vol. 106, No. 8, pp. 2475-2504.
  • Gauthier, D., (1977), “The Social Contract as Ideology”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 130-164.
  • Gaus, G., (2011), The Order of Public Reason, Cambridge University Press.
  • Gaus, G., (2003), Contemporary Theories of Liberalism, Sage Publications.
  • Gaubatz, K., (1996), “Kant, Democracy, and History I”, J ournal of Democracy, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 136-150.
  • Galvin, R., (2009), "Universal Law Formulas", in: T. Hill, Jr.(ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Kant's Ethics, Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 52-82.
  • Galston, W., (1993), “Two Concepts of Liberalism”, Ethics, Vol. 105, No. 3, pp. 516-534.
  • Galston, W., (1982), “Moral Personality and Liberal Theory”, Political Theory, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 492-519.
  • G. W. F. Hegel Werke in Zwanzig Banden. Band 7: Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, Suhrkamp; (2008), 『법철학』, 임석진, 역
    Hegel, G. 한길사 [1986]
  • G nther, K., (1988), Der Sinn f r Angemessenheit, Suhrkamp.
  • Friedrich, C., (1974), Limited Government, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
  • Freyenhagen, F., (2011) “Empty, Useless, and Dangerous? Recent Kantian Replies to the Empty Formalism Objection”, Bulletin of the Hegel Society of Great Britain, vol. 63, pp. 95-118.
  • Freeman, S., (1993), “Political Liberalism and the Possibility of a Just Democratic Constitution”, Chicago Kent Law Review, Vol. 549, pp. 619-668.
  • Freeman, S., (1992), “Original Meaning, Democratic Interpretation, and the Constitution”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 3-42.
  • Freeman, S., (1990), “Reason and Agreement in Social Contract Views”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 122-157.
  • Forst, R., (2007b), “Moralische Autonomie und Autonomie der Moral: Zu einer Theorie der Normativit t nach Kant”, Das Recht auf Rechtfertigung, Suhrkamp, pp. 74-99.
  • Forst, R., (2007a), “Die Rechtfertigung der Gerechtigkeit: Rawls’ Politischer Liberalismus und Habermas’ Diskurstheorie in der Diskussion”, Das Recht auf Rechtfertigung, Suhrkamp, pp. 127-187.
  • Forst, R., (1994), Kontexte der Gerechtigkeit: politische Philosophie jenseits von Liberalismus und Kommunitarismus, Suhrkamp.
  • Flikschuh, K., (2013), “Personal Autonomy and Public Authority”, in: O. Senson(ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 169-190.
  • Faktizit t und Geltung, vierte Auflage, Suhrkamp; (2000), 『사실성과 타당성』, 한상진 박영도 역
    Habermas, J. 나남 [1994]
  • Ethik und Dialog, Suhrkamp; (2009), 『대화윤리 를 향하여』, 김동규 박종식 역
    Wellmer, A. 한울 [1986]
  • Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong
    Mickie, John Penguin Books; (1990), 『윤리학: 옳고 그름의 탐구』, 진교훈 역, 서 광사 [1977]
  • Estlund, D., (2008), Democratic Authority, Princeton University Press.
  • Eshet , A., (1974), “Contractarianism and the Scope of Justice”, Ethics, Vol. 85, No. 1, pp. 38-49.
  • Elster, J., (1986) “The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory”, in: J. Elster & A. Hylland, Foundations of Social Choice Theory, Cambridge University Press, pp. 103-132.
  • Elgin, C., (1996), Considered Judgment, Princeton University Press.
  • Dworkin, G. 1988. The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. Cambridge University Press.
  • Du contrat social, GF Flammarion; (1988), 『사 회 계약론』, 정성환 역
    Rousseau, J. 홍신문화사 [2001]
  • Doppelt, G., (1998), “Rawls’ Kantian Ideal and the Viability of Modern Liberalism”, Inquiry, Vol. 31, pp. 413–449.
  • Doppelt, G., (1989), “Is Rawls's Kantian Liberalism Coherent and Defensible”, Ethics, Vol. 99, No. 4, pp. 815-851.
  • Distributive Justice
    Rawls, J. reprinted in: S. Freeman(ed.), John Rawls Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, pp. 130-153; (1988), 「분배적 정의」, 『공정으로서의 정 의』, 이한구 역, 서광사, pp. 147-180 [1999]
  • Die geistesgeschichtliche Lage des heutigen Parlamentarismus, Duncker & Humblot; (2012), 『현대 의 회주의의 정신사적 상황』, 나종석 역
    Schmitt, C. 도서출판길 [1985]
  • Democracy and distrust. A theory of judicial review
    Ely, J. H. Harvard University Press; (2006), 『민주주의와 법 원의 위헌심사』, 전원열 역, 나남 [1980]
  • Deligiorgi, K., (2012), The Scope of Autonomy, Oxford University press.
  • Dean, R., (2006), The Value of Humanity in Kant’s Moral Theory, Oxford University Press.
  • Darwall, S., A. Gibbard & P. Railton, (1997) “Toward Fin de si cle Ethics: Some Trends”, in: S. Darwall, A. Gibbard & P. Railton(eds.), Moral Discourse and Practice, Oxford University Press, pp. 3-47.
  • Darwall, S., (1995), The British Moralist and the Internal ‘Ought’: 1640-1740, Cambridge University Press.
  • Darwall, S., (1982), “Is There a Kantian Foundation for Rawlsian Justice?”, in: H. Blocker & E. Smith(eds.), J ohn Rawls’ Theory of Social Justice, Ohio University Press, pp. 311-345.
  • Daniels, N., (1996), “Reflective Equilibrium and Archimedean points”, reprinted in: Justice and Justification, Cambridge University Press, pp. 47-65.
  • Daniels, N., (1979), “Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics”, The J ournal of Philosophy, Vol. 76, No. 5, pp. 256-282.
  • Dahl, R., (2001), How Democratic is the American Constitution? , Yale University Press.
  • Dahl, R., (1961), Who Governs?: Democracy and Power in an American City, Yale University Press.
  • Cummiskey, D., (1996), Kantian Consequentialism, Oxford University Press.
  • Cronin, C., (2006), “On the Possibility of a Democratic Constitutional Founding: Habermas and Michelman in Dialogue”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 343-369.
  • Critic, Norm, and Utopia
    Benhabib, S. Columbia University Press; (2008), 『비판, 규범, 유토피아』, 정대성 역, 울력 [1986]
  • Copp, D., (2013) “Is Constructivism an Alternative to Moral Realism?” in: C. Bagnoli(ed.), Constructivism in Ethics, Cambridge University Press, pp. 108-132.
  • Cooke, M., (1994), Language and Reason, MIT Press.
  • Cooke, M., (1992) “Habermas, Autonomy and the Identity of the Self”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol. 18, pp. 269-291.
  • Constant, B., (1988), “The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with That of the Moderns”, in: Benjamin Constant Political Writings, Trans. B. Fontana, Cambridge University Press, pp. 307-328.
  • Cohen, J., (2009), “Truth and Public Reason”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2009, pp. 2-42.
  • Cohen, J., (2003), “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy”, reprinted in: D. Matravers & J. Pike, Debates in Contemporary Political Philosophy, Routledge, pp. 342-360.
  • Cohen, J., (2002b), “The Pursuit of Fairness”, Boston Globe, pp. 1-5.
  • Cohen, J., (2002a), “For a Democratic Society”, in: S. Freeman(ed.), Cambridge Companion to Rawls, Cambridge University Press, pp. 86-138.
  • Cohen, J., (1999), “Reflections on Habermas on Democracy”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 385-416.
  • Cohen, J., (1994), “Pluralism and Proceduralism”, Chicago-Kent Law Review, LXIX, pp. 589-618.
  • Cohen, G., (2008), Rescuing Justice and Equality, Harvard University Press.
  • Christman, J., (2009), The Politics of Persons: Individual Autonomy and Socio-historical Selves, Cambridge University Press.
  • Chambers, S., “Justice or Legitimacy, Barricades or Public Reason? The Politics of Property-Owning Democracy”, in: M. O’Neill & T. Williamson, Property-Owning Democracy: Rawls and Beyond, Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 17-32.
  • Cassirer, E., (1991), “Kant and Rousseau”, Rousseau, Kant, Goethe, Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, pp. 3-62.
  • Carleheden, M., & R. Gabri ls, (1996), “An Interview with J rgen Habermas”, Theory, Culture & Society, Vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1-17.
  • Care, N., (1969), “Contractualism and Moral Criticism”, Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 23, pp. 85-101.
  • Bubner, R., (1992), “Das sprachliche Medium der Politik”, Antike Themen und ihre moderne Verwandlung, Suhrkamp, pp. 188-202.
  • Bubner, R., (1982), “Habermas's Concept of Critical Theory”, in: J. B. Thompson & D. Held(eds.), Habermas: Critical Debates, The MIT Press, pp. 42-56.
  • Brink, D., (1989), Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics, Cambridge University Press.
  • Brink, B., (2005), “Liberalism without Agreement: Political Autonomy and Agonistic Citizenship”, in: J. Christman & J. Anderson(eds.), Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism, Cambridge University Press, pp. 245-271.
  • Brettschneider, C., (2007), Democratic Rights: The Substance of Self-Government, Princeton University Press.
  • Brandt, R., (1979), A Theory of the Good and the Right, Oxford Clarendon Press.
  • Bernstein, J., (2010), “Habermas’s Kantian Pragmatism”, The Pragmatic Turn, Polity Press, pp. 168-199.
  • Bernstein, J., (1996), “The Retrieval of The Democratic Ethos”, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 17, pp. 1125-1146.
  • Bernstein, J., (1995), Recovering Ethical Life: J rgen Habermas and the Future of Critical Theory, Routledge.
  • Benhabib, S., (1996b), “Models of Public Space: Hannah Arendt, the Liberal Tradition, and J rgen Habermas”, in: C. Calhoun(ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere, The MIT Press, pp. 73-98.
  • Benhabib, S., (1996a), “Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy”, in: S. Benhabib(ed.), Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political , Princeton University Press, pp. 67-94.
  • Benhabib, S., (1992b), “Autonomy, Modernity, and Community: Communitarianism and Critical Social Theory in Dialogue”, in: A. Honneth et al.(eds), Cultural-Political Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, The MIT Press, pp. 39-62.
  • Benhabib, S., (1992a), “In the Shadow of Aristotle and Hegel: Communicative Ethics and Current Controversies in Practical Philosophy”, Situating the Self, Polity Press, pp. 23-67.
  • Benhabib, S., (1990), “Communicative Ethics and Current Controversies in Practical Philosophy”, in: S. Benhabib & F. Dallmayr(eds.), Communicative Ethics Controversy, The MIT Press, 1990, pp. 330-370.
  • Benhabib, S., (1982), “The Methodological Illusions of Modern Political Theory. The Case of Rawls and Habermas”, Neue Hefte f r Philosophie, Heft 21, pp. 47-74.
  • Beiser, F., (1992), Enlightenment, Revolution, and Romanticism: The Genesis of Modern German Political Thought, 1790-1800, Harvard University Press.
  • Baynes, K., (2016), Habermas, Routledge.
  • Baynes, K., (2002), “Deliberative Democracy and the Limits of Liberalism”, in: R. Schomberg & K. Baynes(eds.), Discourse and Democracy, State University of New York Press, pp. 15-30.
  • Baynes, K., (2001), “Practical Reason, the ‘Space of Reasons,’ and the Public Reason”, in: W. Rehg & J. Bohman(eds.), Pluralism and the Pragmatic Turn, pp. 53-86.
  • Baynes, K., (1992), The Normative Grounds of Social Criticism: Kant, Rawls, and Habermas, State University of New York Press.
  • Baxter, H., (2014), “Habermas’s Sociological Theory of Law and Democracy”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 225-234.
  • Barry, B., (1995), “John Rawls and the Search for Stability”, Ethics, Vol. 105, No. 4, pp. 874-915.
  • Aune, B., (1979), Kant’s Theory of Morals, Princeton University Press.
  • Apel, K., (1999b), "Die Kommunikationsgemeinschaft als transzendentale Voraussetzung der Sozialwissenschaften", Transformation der Philosophie. Band 2: Das Apriori der Kommunikationsgemeinschaft, Suhrkamp, pp. 220-263.
  • Apel, K., (1999a), "Von Kant zu Peirce: Die semiotische Transformation der Transzendentalen Logik", Transformation der Philosophie. Band 2: Das Apriori der Kommunikationsgemeinschaft, Suhrkamp, pp. 157-177.
  • Apel, K., (1988), "Die transzendentalpragmatische Begr ndung der Kommunikationsethik und das Problem der h chsten Stufe einer entwicklungslogik des moralischen Bewu tseins", Diskurs und Verantwortung, Suhrkamp, pp. 306-369.
  • Anscombe, G., (1958), “Modern Moral Philosophy”, Philosophy, No. 33, No. 124, pp. 1-19.
  • Anderson, J., & A. Honneth, (2005), “Autonomy, Vulnerability, Recognition, and Justice”, in: J. Christman, Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism, Cambridge University Press, pp. 127-149.
  • Ameriks, K., (2013), “Vindicating Autonomy”, in: O. Senson(ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 53-70.
  • Allison, H., (2011), Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Oxford University Press.
  • Allen, A., (2012), “The Unforced Force of the Better Argument: Reason and Power in Habermas’ Political Theory”, Constellations, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 353-368.
  • Allen, A., (2008), The Politics of Our Selves: Power, Autonomy, and Gender in Contemporary Critical Theory, Columbia University Press.
  • Alexy, R., (1994), “Basic Rights and Democracy in J rgen Habermas’s Procedural Paradigm of the Law”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 227-238.
  • Aiken, H., (1962), “The Concept of Moral Objectivity”, Reason and Conduct, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., pp. 134-170.
  • Ackerman, B., (1994), “Political Liberalisms”, Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 91, No. 7, pp. 364-386.
  • Ackerman, B., (1989), “Constitutional Politics/Constitutional Law”, The Yale Law J ournal, Vol. 99, No. 3, pp. 453-547.
  • A Theory of Justice, revised edition; (2002), 『정의 론』, 황경식 역
    Rawls, J. 이학사 [1999]
  • A Theory of Justice
    Rawls, J Harvard University Press; (1977), 『사회정의론』, 황경식 옮김, 서광사 [1971]
  • (Chung, H. G.), , 「소통적 합리성과 권력 그리고 사회구성」, 김재현 외, 『하버마스의 사상: 주요 주제와 쟁점들』
    정호근 나남출판, pp. 123-146 [1996]
  • (Chung, H. G.), , 「소통적 규범정초 기획의 한계」, 정호근 외, 『하 버마스: 이성적 사회의 기획, 그 논리와 윤리』
    정호근 나남출판, pp. 113-140 [1997]
  • (Chung, H. G.), , 「근대성의 변증법과 비판적 이성의 기능 및 가능성」
    정호근 『철학』, 제43권, pp. 389-416 [1995]
  • (Chung, H. G.), , Kritik der Moderne. “Zwischen Philosophie und Wissenschaft”: zur Kritik der Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns von J rgen Habermas
    정호근 Albert-Ludwigs-Universit t [1994]