CAJ | 학술논문

当代哲学家提出“道德运气”（moralluck）的说法使得“我们是否应该为自己的行为负责”的争论成为热门话题，因为如果我们的行为会受到运气的影响，则我们还需要为自己的行为负责吗？如果道德运气会影响行为的评价，则一个人是否能成为一个有道德的人，似乎也有运气的成分，然而如果我们说“圣人是靠运气”，这显然和我们一般的道德常识或传统的道德理论有所抵触。道德运气的概念是否因此破坏道德责任的基础，道德圣人作为一个道德理想是否因此失去意义。
당대철학가제출“도덕운기”（moralluck）적설법사득“아문시부응해위자기적행위부책”적쟁론성위열문화제，인위여과아문적행위회수도운기적영향，칙아문환수요위자기적행위부책마？여과도덕운기회영향행위적평개，칙일개인시부능성위일개유도덕적인，사호야유운기적성분，연이여과아문설“골인시고운기”，저현연화아문일반적도덕상식혹전통적도덕이론유소저촉。도덕운기적개념시부인차파배도덕책임적기출，도덕골인작위일개도덕이상시부인차실거의의。
The statement of ＂moral luck＂ proposed by contemporary philosophers leads to the debate ＂Whether we should be responsible for our actions ＂becoming a hot topic. Because if our behaviors are influ- enced by luck, need we be responsible for our behaviors？ ff moral luck can affect the evaluation of the behav- iors, then whether a person can become a moral person seems to be influenced by luck, too. However, the statement of ＂The sage is luck＂ is clearly inconsistent with the general moral common sense or traditional mor- al theory. Does the concept of ＂moral luck＂ therefore undermine the basis of moral responsibility？ Does the moral saint as a moral ideal therefore lose its meaning？