⚖️

Normative Judgments in Social Science

Agent Progress
Built
Keywords
사회 과학의 규범적 판단 / 가치 개입 / 주관성 / 분석
Lesson #
S
Done
Section
Advanced Vocabulary
⚖️
TL;DR 🦄
  • ⚖️ 규범적 판단 (normative judgment) evaluates what should be, not just what exists.
  • 🔎 Social science writing often mixes 사실 분석 (fact-based analysis) with 가치 개입 (value involvement), so careful readers separate evidence from evaluation.
  • 🧭 Strong analysis identifies the writer’s standard: fairness, equality, efficiency, rights, public interest, legitimacy, or another value compass.
🔊
🎧 Iru Helper Note — Use
Korean Helper Widgets
Korean Helper Widgets to hear terms like 규범적 판단 (normative judgment), 가치 개입 (value involvement), and 주관성 (subjectivity) aloud. Abstract vocabulary gets less scary when it has a voice. 🎙️
 

🌈 The Big Picture

Social science studies real people, institutions, policies, and social problems. That means it often asks two different kinds of questions: What is happening? and What should be done about it? The first question is mostly descriptive; the second question invites 규범적 판단 (normative judgment). ⚖️
A 규범적 판단 (normative judgment) is an evaluation based on values, standards, or ideals. It appears when a writer says a policy is fair, a system is unjust, a reform is necessary, or a social practice is desirable. 🏛️
This lesson focuses on the vocabulary you need to notice those judgments in Korean social science texts: 가치 개입 (value involvement), 주관성 (subjectivity), 객관성 (objectivity), 분석 (analysis), 기준 (standard), and 정당성 (legitimacy/justification). 🧠

🎨 The Core Normative Judgment Family

  • 규범적 판단 (normative judgment) = a judgment about what is right, fair, desirable, necessary, or justified.
  • 기술적 서술 (descriptive statement) = a statement that describes what exists, happens, or can be observed.
  • 가치 개입 (value involvement) = values, assumptions, or standards entering an interpretation or conclusion.
  • 주관성 (subjectivity) = the influence of perspective, standpoint, preference, or value.
  • 객관성 (objectivity) = reliance on evidence, clear methods, and verifiable data.
  • 분석 (analysis) = breaking a claim into evidence, interpretation, value standard, and conclusion.
  • 판단 기준 (judgment standard) = the value or principle used to evaluate something.
  • 공정성 (fairness) = whether treatment, distribution, or process is fair.
  • 평등 (equality) = equal status, opportunity, or treatment.
  • 효율성 (efficiency) = achieving results without waste.
  • 공익 (public interest) = benefit for society as a whole.
  • 정당성 (legitimacy/justification) = whether an action, policy, or authority can be justified.
  • 당위성 (necessity/oughtness) = the quality of being something that should be done.
  • 정책 평가 (policy evaluation) = judging the effects, fairness, or justification of a policy.

🛠️ How They Work in a Sentence

  • 청년 실업률이 지난해보다 상승했다. (The youth unemployment rate rose compared with last year.) 📈
      • Notes: 청년 = youth/young adults, 실업률 = unemployment rate, 상승하다 = to rise. This is a 기술적 서술 (descriptive statement) because it reports a data-based change.
  • 정부는 청년 고용 정책을 더 적극적으로 확대해야 한다. (The government should expand youth employment policy more actively.) 🏛️
      • Notes: 정부 = government, 고용 정책 = employment policy, 확대하다 = to expand. The ending -아/어야 한다 (should/must) signals 규범적 판단 (normative judgment).
  • 필자는 공정성을 기준으로 복지 제도의 정당성을 평가한다. (The writer evaluates the legitimacy of the welfare system based on fairness.) ⚖️
      • Notes: 필자 = writer, 복지 제도 = welfare system, 평가하다 = to evaluate. Here, 공정성 (fairness) is the 판단 기준 (judgment standard).

🧩 General Formation Rule

Many social science judgments are built from evidence + value standard + conclusion:
  • 자료 (data/evidence) + 분석 (analysis) → what the writer can support with evidence.
  • 기준 (standard) + 평가 (evaluation) → what the writer judges by a value.
  • -아/어야 한다 (should/must) → a common Korean signal of obligation or necessity.
  • 필요하다 (to be necessary), 바람직하다 (to be desirable), 정당하다 (to be justified), 부당하다 (to be unjustified/unfair) → common normative adjectives.
A useful reading pattern:
  • 사실 (fact) tells what is happening.
  • 해석 (interpretation) explains what it means.
  • 기준 (standard) shows what value is being used.
  • 규범적 판단 (normative judgment) says what should be accepted, changed, criticized, or defended. 🧭

📚 Cross-check note

Core terms such as 규범 (norm/standard), 판단 (judgment), 주관성 (subjectivity), 객관성 (objectivity), 분석 (analysis), and 정당성 (legitimacy/justification) were checked against standard Korean usage and Korean.go.kr / 국립국어원-style references. ✅

🪞 Synonym Alert

  • 규범적 판단 (normative judgment) vs. 가치 판단 (value judgment) — very close; 규범적 판단 emphasizes standards and oughtness, while 가치 판단 emphasizes value-based evaluation.
  • 기술적 서술 (descriptive statement) vs. 사실 서술 (factual description) — both describe reality; 기술적 서술 is more academic, while 사실 서술 sounds more directly fact-focused.
  • 정당성 (legitimacy/justification) vs. 타당성 (validity/appropriateness) — 정당성 asks whether something is justified; 타당성 asks whether reasoning, method, or basis is valid.
  • 주관성 (subjectivity) vs. 편향 (bias) — 주관성 is not always bad; 편향 usually implies a problematic slant.

⚠️ Pitfalls to Dodge

  • ❌ 규범적 = “normal” → ✅ 규범적 means normative, related to standards or what should be done. ⚖️
  • ❌ Every academic sentence is objective → ✅ Academic style can still contain 가치 개입 (value involvement) and 규범적 판단 (normative judgment). 👓
  • ❌ Data removes all subjectivity → ✅ Data may be objective, but selecting, interpreting, and prioritizing it can involve 주관성 (subjectivity). 📊
  • ❌ 가치 개입 always means “bad bias” → ✅ It can be responsible when the writer states the value standard clearly. 🪞
  • ❌ A fact automatically proves a policy recommendation → ✅ A recommendation also needs a value standard and reasoning bridge. 🌉
🎉 Once you can spot 규범적 판단 (normative judgment), social science texts stop sounding like mysterious marble statues and start showing their wiring: facts, values, standards, and conclusions. 🧠⚖️
 

Try this exercise

Instructions: Complete each sentence with the best Korean term from the lesson. Focus on whether the sentence reports facts, evaluates values, reveals perspective, or identifies a judgment standard.
1. 무엇이 더 바람직한지 평가하는 판단은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
A judgment that evaluates what is more desirable is a normative judgment. ⚖️
Answer
규범적 판단 — The clue is 바람직한지 (whether desirable), which asks about a value standard.
2. 현상이 실제로 어떻게 나타나는지 설명하는 문장은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
A sentence explaining how a phenomenon actually appears is a descriptive statement. 🔎
Answer
기술적 서술 — It describes reality instead of judging what should happen.
3. 연구자의 가치가 해석에 들어가면 ＿＿＿＿이 발생할 수 있습니다.
When a researcher’s values enter interpretation, value involvement can occur. 🧪
Answer
가치 개입 — Values entering interpretation = value involvement.
4. 개인의 관점이 강하게 반영되면 ＿＿＿＿이 커질 수 있습니다.
When a personal perspective is strongly reflected, subjectivity can increase. 👤
Answer
주관성 — Perspective, standpoint, and personal value point to subjectivity.
5. 검증 가능한 자료에 근거하면 연구의 ＿＿＿＿이 높아집니다.
When research is based on verifiable data, its objectivity increases. 📊
Answer
객관성 — Verifiable evidence supports objectivity.
6. 공정성을 중심으로 정책을 평가할 때 공정성은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
When policy is evaluated around fairness, fairness is the judgment standard. 🧭
Answer
판단 기준 — The value used to evaluate something is the judgment standard.
7. 정책이 사회 전체에 이로운지 묻는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard asking whether policy benefits society as a whole is public interest. 🌍
Answer
공익 — Benefit for society as a whole = public interest.
8. 어떤 제도가 정당한지 따지는 개념은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The concept that examines whether a system is justified is legitimacy. 🏛️
Answer
정당성 — 정당성 asks whether something can be justified.
9. 해야 한다는 결론에는 보통 ＿＿＿＿이 포함됩니다.
A conclusion saying something should be done usually includes oughtness. 🛠️
Answer
당위성 — Should-language signals necessity or oughtness.
10. 자료, 해석, 기준, 결론을 나누어 보는 과정은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The process of separating evidence, interpretation, standard, and conclusion is analysis. 🧠
Answer
분석 — Analysis breaks a claim into parts.
📚
Vocabulary Box
  • 규범적 판단 → normative judgment
  • 기술적 서술 → descriptive statement
  • 가치 개입 → value involvement
  • 주관성 → subjectivity
  • 객관성 → objectivity
  • 판단 기준 → judgment standard
  • 공익 → public interest
  • 정당성 → legitimacy/justification
  • 당위성 → necessity/oughtness
  • 분석 → analysis
Tip 💡 If the sentence asks “what should be valued or done,” look for a normative term.
🎯
Want more reps? Visit the Practice Hub when you're ready! 🚀
 
📦
🎯 Practice Hub — Normative Judgments in Social Science
 
Welcome to the social-science judgment lab! ⚖️ This Practice Hub helps you identify when Korean academic writing is describing reality, interpreting evidence, or making a value-based claim. You’ll practice the vocabulary that exposes a writer’s hidden compass: standards, subjectivity, objectivity, legitimacy, and public interest. 🧭
 
🔊 Audio reminder: Use
Korean Helper Widgets
Korean Helper Widgets whenever you want to hear a sentence or term aloud.
 
📝 Instructions: Fill each blank with the most natural term. Read the full sentence, decide whether it points to evidence, value, standpoint, standard, or conclusion, then open the Answer toggle to check the nuance.
 

Exercise 1 — Spot the Judgment Type ⚖️

A. 소득 격차가 확대되었다는 문장은 ＿＿＿＿에 가깝습니다.
The sentence saying income inequality widened is closer to a descriptive statement. 📈
Answer
기술적 서술 — It reports a social condition rather than saying what should be done.
B. 소득 재분배를 강화해야 한다는 문장은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The sentence saying income redistribution should be strengthened is a normative judgment. 💰
Answer
규범적 판단 — The ending -아/어야 한다 (should/must) signals a value-based conclusion.
C. 자료가 보여 주는 경향을 정리하는 일은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
Organizing the tendency shown by data is analysis. 📊
Answer
분석 — Here, analysis means separating and explaining what the evidence shows.
D. 공정하다는 말은 단순한 사실보다 ＿＿＿＿에 가깝습니다.
The word “fair” is closer to a value judgment than a simple fact. ⚖️
Answer
가치 판단 — Fairness is a value standard.
E. 통계로 확인 가능한 주장은 먼저 ＿＿＿＿과 관련됩니다.
A claim that can be checked with statistics first relates to objectivity. 📉
Answer
객관성 — Statistics and verifiability support objectivity.
F. 필자의 관점이 결론에 강하게 드러나면 ＿＿＿＿이 보입니다.
When the writer’s perspective appears strongly in the conclusion, subjectivity is visible. 👤
Answer
주관성 — A visible personal standpoint points to subjectivity.
G. 사회 전체의 이익을 기준으로 판단하면 ＿＿＿＿을 고려하는 것입니다.
If one judges based on the benefit of society as a whole, one is considering public interest. 🌍
Answer
공익 — 공익 means public benefit or public interest.
H. 정책의 근거가 충분한지 묻는 것은 ＿＿＿＿과 관련됩니다.
Asking whether the basis for a policy is sufficient relates to legitimacy. 🏛️
Answer
정당성 — 정당성 asks whether something is justified.
I. 무엇을 해야 한다는 성격은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The quality of saying what should be done is oughtness. 🛠️
Answer
당위성 — Should-language carries 당위성.
J. 어떤 가치를 기준으로 삼는지가 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
Which value is used as the standard is the judgment standard. 🧭
Answer
판단 기준 — The evaluating value is the standard for judgment.
📚
Vocabulary Box
  • 기술적 서술 → descriptive statement
  • 규범적 판단 → normative judgment
  • 분석 → analysis
  • 가치 판단 → value judgment
  • 객관성 → objectivity
  • 주관성 → subjectivity
  • 공익 → public interest
  • 정당성 → legitimacy/justification
  • 당위성 → oughtness/necessity
  • 판단 기준 → judgment standard
Tip 💡 “Is it happening?” points to description; “Is it desirable?” points to judgment.
 

Exercise 2 — Value Standards in Policy 🏛️

A. 복지 제도가 약자를 보호해야 한다는 주장은 ＿＿＿＿을 포함합니다.
The claim that a welfare system should protect vulnerable people includes a normative judgment. 🛡️
Answer
규범적 판단 — The phrase 보호해야 한다 (should protect) is a should-claim.
B. 정책이 자원을 낭비하지 않는지 평가하는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard evaluating whether policy does not waste resources is efficiency. ⚙️
Answer
효율성 — Efficiency concerns avoiding waste and achieving results.
C. 모든 시민에게 같은 기회를 주어야 한다는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard saying all citizens should receive equal opportunity is equality. 🧑‍🤝‍🧑
Answer
평등 — Equal opportunity is a classic equality standard.
D. 절차와 분배가 공평한지 묻는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard asking whether process and distribution are fair is fairness. ⚖️
Answer
공정성 — Fair procedure and distribution point to fairness.
E. 사회 전체의 이익을 우선한다는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard of prioritizing society’s overall benefit is public interest. 🌍
Answer
공익 — 공익 means benefit for the public as a whole.
F. 정책을 평가할 때 사용하는 가치나 원칙은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The value or principle used when evaluating policy is a judgment standard. 🧭
Answer
판단 기준 — A value used for evaluation becomes the standard.
G. 제도의 근거가 설득력 있는지 묻는 말은 ＿＿＿＿을 묻는 말입니다.
Asking whether a system’s basis is persuasive asks about legitimacy. 🏛️
Answer
정당성 — 정당성 concerns justification.
H. 정책 효과를 수치로 확인하는 작업은 ＿＿＿＿을 높입니다.
Checking policy effects with numbers increases objectivity. 📊
Answer
객관성 — Verifiable measurements support objectivity.
I. 연구자의 이념이 해석에 영향을 주면 ＿＿＿＿이 나타날 수 있습니다.
If a researcher’s ideology affects interpretation, subjectivity can appear. 🪞
Answer
주관성 — Ideological influence is a form of standpoint.
J. 가치가 해석 과정에 들어가는 현상은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The phenomenon of values entering the interpretation process is value involvement. 🔍
Answer
가치 개입 — This phrase names value entry into interpretation.
📚
Vocabulary Box
  • 복지 제도 → welfare system
  • 보호하다 → to protect
  • 규범적 판단 → normative judgment
  • 효율성 → efficiency
  • 평등 → equality
  • 공정성 → fairness
  • 공익 → public interest
  • 판단 기준 → judgment standard
  • 정당성 → legitimacy/justification
  • 객관성 → objectivity
  • 주관성 → subjectivity
  • 가치 개입 → value involvement
Tip 💡 Policy writing often hides its real debate inside the judgment standard.
 

Exercise 3 — Subjectivity, Objectivity, and Evidence 🔎

A. 같은 자료를 다른 연구자가 확인할 수 있으면 ＿＿＿＿이 강화됩니다.
If another researcher can verify the same data, objectivity is strengthened. 📚
Answer
객관성 — Repeatable verification supports objectivity.
B. 개인의 경험이 결론에 영향을 미치면 ＿＿＿＿이 개입될 수 있습니다.
If personal experience affects the conclusion, subjectivity can be involved. 👤
Answer
주관성 — Personal experience points to subjective influence.
C. 자료 자체보다 해석의 방향에 가치가 들어가면 ＿＿＿＿이 생깁니다.
If values enter the direction of interpretation rather than the data itself, value involvement occurs. 🧭
Answer
가치 개입 — Values entering interpretation = value involvement.
D. 사례를 나누어 원인과 결과를 살피는 과정은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The process of dividing cases and examining causes and results is analysis. 🧠
Answer
분석 — Analysis breaks a phenomenon into meaningful parts.
E. 현상을 평가하지 않고 설명하면 ＿＿＿＿에 가깝습니다.
If one explains a phenomenon without evaluating it, it is closer to a descriptive statement. 🔎
Answer
기술적 서술 — No value judgment yet: descriptive.
F. 현상을 바람직하지 않다고 평가하면 ＿＿＿＿에 가깝습니다.
If one evaluates a phenomenon as undesirable, it is closer to a normative judgment. ⚠️
Answer
규범적 판단 — Undesirable is an evaluative word.
G. 자료 선택 과정에서도 연구자의 ＿＿＿＿이 드러날 수 있습니다.
Even in the process of selecting data, the researcher’s subjectivity can appear. 🗂️
Answer
주관성 — Choosing what counts as relevant data can reflect standpoint.
H. 명확한 방법과 공개된 자료는 연구의 ＿＿＿＿을 돕습니다.
Clear methods and open data help the objectivity of research. 📖
Answer
객관성 — Transparency helps objectivity.
I. 가치 기준을 밝히지 않으면 숨은 ＿＿＿＿이 문제가 될 수 있습니다.
If the value standard is not stated, hidden value involvement can become a problem. 🌫️
Answer
가치 개입 — Hidden values can make evaluation look neutral.
J. 근거와 결론 사이의 논리적 연결을 살피는 것은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
Examining the logical connection between basis and conclusion is analysis. 🔗
Answer
분석 — Analysis checks how evidence leads to a conclusion.
📚
Vocabulary Box
  • 확인하다 → to verify/check
  • 자료 → data/materials
  • 객관성 → objectivity
  • 경험 → experience
  • 주관성 → subjectivity
  • 가치 개입 → value involvement
  • 분석 → analysis
  • 기술적 서술 → descriptive statement
  • 규범적 판단 → normative judgment
  • 근거 → basis/evidence
  • 결론 → conclusion
Tip 💡 Objectivity is strengthened by verification; subjectivity appears through standpoint and interpretation.
 

Exercise 4 — Build the Analytical Chain 🧠

A. 사실, 해석, 기준, 결론을 차례로 나누는 것은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
Dividing fact, interpretation, standard, and conclusion in order is analysis. 🧩
Answer
분석 — This is exactly the reading process for complex claims.
B. 저소득층 지원이 필요하다는 말에는 ＿＿＿＿이 있습니다.
The statement that support for low-income groups is necessary contains oughtness. 🛟
Answer
당위성 — Necessity language points to what should be done.
C. 그 정책이 법적·도덕적으로 받아들일 만한지 묻는 것은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
Asking whether the policy is legally and morally acceptable is legitimacy. ⚖️
Answer
정당성 — 정당성 asks whether something is justified.
D. 분배가 한쪽에 치우치지 않았는지 보는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard asking whether distribution is not one-sided is fairness. ⚖️
Answer
공정성 — Fair distribution is a fairness issue.
E. 기회가 특정 집단에게만 주어지지 않는지 묻는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard asking whether opportunity is not given only to a specific group is equality. 🧑‍🤝‍🧑
Answer
평등 — Equal access and opportunity point to equality.
F. 비용보다 효과가 충분한지 묻는 기준은 ＿＿＿＿입니다.
The standard asking whether the effect is sufficient compared with the cost is efficiency. ⚙️
Answer
효율성 — Costs and effects belong to efficiency.
G. 사회 전체의 이익이라는 말은 ＿＿＿＿을 가리킵니다.
The phrase “benefit of society as a whole” indicates public interest. 🌍
Answer
공익 — Public benefit = public interest.
H. 어떤 가치로 평가하는지 밝히는 것은 ＿＿＿＿을 드러내는 일입니다.
Stating which value is used for evaluation reveals the judgment standard. 🧭
Answer
판단 기준 — The standard tells readers which value is guiding the judgment.
I. 자료는 같아도 결론이 다르면 ＿＿＿＿의 차이를 의심할 수 있습니다.
If the data is the same but the conclusion differs, one can suspect a difference in subjectivity. 🪞
Answer
주관성 — Different standpoints can produce different conclusions from similar data.
J. 자료로 확인된 변화는 우선 ＿＿＿＿로 정리할 수 있습니다.
A change verified by data can first be organized as a descriptive statement. 📈
Answer
기술적 서술 — Verified change is first described before evaluation.
📚
Vocabulary Box
  • 분석 → analysis
  • 사실 → fact
  • 해석 → interpretation
  • 기준 → standard
  • 결론 → conclusion
  • 당위성 → oughtness/necessity
  • 정당성 → legitimacy/justification
  • 공정성 → fairness
  • 평등 → equality
  • 효율성 → efficiency
  • 공익 → public interest
  • 판단 기준 → judgment standard
  • 주관성 → subjectivity
  • 기술적 서술 → descriptive statement
Tip 💡 The analytical chain is: evidence first, interpretation second, value standard third, conclusion last.
 

Exercise 5 — Mixed Mastery + Pitfall Patrol 🛡️

A. 규범적이라는 말은 보통이라는 뜻이 아니라 ＿＿＿＿과 관련됩니다.
The word “normative” does not mean ordinary; it relates to standards. ⚖️
Answer
기준 — ❌ 규범적 = normal → ✅ 규범적 relates to standards, norms, and what should be done.
B. 논문체 문장도 ＿＿＿＿을 포함할 수 있습니다.
Even academic-style sentences can include normative judgment. 📄
Answer
규범적 판단 — ❌ Academic style is always neutral → ✅ Academic writing can still evaluate.
C. 객관적 자료를 사용해도 해석에는 ＿＿＿＿이 남을 수 있습니다.
Even if objective data is used, subjectivity can remain in interpretation. 🪞
Answer
주관성 — ❌ Data removes all perspective → ✅ Interpretation can still reflect standpoint.
D. 가치 기준을 공개하면 ＿＿＿＿이 반드시 나쁜 것은 아닙니다.
If the value standard is disclosed, value involvement is not necessarily bad. 🔍
Answer
가치 개입 — ❌ Value involvement always means bad bias → ✅ It can be responsible when transparent.
E. 사실만으로 정책 결론이 자동으로 증명되지는 않고 ＿＿＿＿이 필요합니다.
A policy conclusion is not automatically proven by facts alone; a judgment standard is needed. 🌉
Answer
판단 기준 — ❌ Fact automatically proves recommendation → ✅ A value standard connects fact to recommendation.
F. 측정 가능한 변화는 먼저 ＿＿＿＿로 확인합니다.
A measurable change is first confirmed through objectivity. 📏
Answer
객관성 — Measured and verifiable evidence supports objectivity.
G. 정책이 모두에게 이로운지 묻는 것은 ＿＿＿＿의 질문입니다.
Asking whether policy benefits everyone is a question of public interest. 🌍
Answer
공익 — Society-wide benefit points to public interest.
H. 그 결정이 받아들일 만한 근거를 갖는지 묻는 것은 ＿＿＿＿의 질문입니다.
Asking whether the decision has acceptable grounds is a question of legitimacy. 🏛️
Answer
정당성 — Acceptable grounds and justification point to legitimacy.
I. 해야 한다, 필요하다, 바람직하다는 말은 ＿＿＿＿을 드러냅니다.
Words like should, necessary, and desirable reveal oughtness. 🛠️
Answer
당위성 — These are classic signals of what should be done.
J. 사실과 평가를 나누어 읽는 습관은 좋은 ＿＿＿＿의 시작입니다.
The habit of reading facts and evaluations separately is the beginning of good analysis. 🧠
Answer
분석 — Separating fact, value, standard, and conclusion is the core skill.
📚
Vocabulary Box
  • 기준 → standard
  • 규범적 판단 → normative judgment
  • 주관성 → subjectivity
  • 가치 개입 → value involvement
  • 판단 기준 → judgment standard
  • 객관성 → objectivity
  • 공익 → public interest
  • 정당성 → legitimacy/justification
  • 당위성 → oughtness/necessity
  • 분석 → analysis
  • 필요하다 → to be necessary
  • 바람직하다 → to be desirable
Tip 💡 Pitfall patrol: facts are the floor, but values decide which staircase the argument climbs.
 
🎉 You now have the social-science X-ray goggles: 기술적 서술 shows the facts, 규범적 판단 shows the value conclusion, 주관성 shows the viewpoint, and 판단 기준 shows the hidden compass. Go analyze those arguments like a tiny academic detective. 🕵️⚖️