• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.34
• /
• pp.89-112
• /
• 2009

Park Se-dang who has the pen name of Seogye is a man in the 17th century. Then, Joseon Dynasty is try to restore the state which became impoverished by two wars. When Sung Confucianism of Chu-tz was dogmatized, Seogye analyzed independently the scriptures and was regarded as a traitor against Sung Confucianism. Therefore, this paper discussed the understanding of Seogye's works and its social reflection through the research data about Seogye. Although Seogye has blue blood in his veins, he belonged to a non-mainstream group in the faction of Seo-in and had a liberal inclination. That he has shuned in the school of Sung Confucianism owed to Sabyeunrok of his work, and its main reason is his criticism against Song Si-yeul. He argued the two principles different from Chu-tz's three principles. Also, he not accepted the Chu-tz's theory and was similar to the Wang Yangming school in the issue of gaining knowledge by the study of things Now to conclude, Seogye outstretched the liberal inclination in Sung Confucianism apart from the interpretation of scriptures. He was not indulged in Sung Confucianism of Chu-tz that was gradually ossifying at that time and took his own line. And he devoted himself to the study of practical learning and the education for younger scholars, and had acted as mediator between the Sung Confucianism of Chu-tz and the Practical Science that was in full bloom in the period of King Young-jo and King Jeong-jo.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.43
• /
• pp.55-80
• /
• 2014

Park, Se-dang criticized or accepted Zhuxi's annotation with his own way of understanding Confucian classics. His way of understanding Zhuxi can explain through the motive of writing his book, sabyeonrok and his basic view of scripture interpretation in the book. He thought one can achieve learning from lower to upper level. That means it is good for one to study from text easy to reach and attain, grasp. But if one begin to study from text or contents hard to understand, that will make to lose the proper way or province to the value of learning. This is what Park, Se-dang's basic point of interpreting Confucian classics, called 'learning from lower to upper level.' Park, Se-dang gave high praise Cheng Hao and Cheng Yi and Zhuxi who recreated confucianism into world from darkness. He thought Cheng-Zhu school corrected confucian's ways of learning went wrong from Chinese Han. So we need to reconsider the assessment of his view as anti?post-Zhuxi. He also thought there were a lot of way to understand Confucian classics. He insisted Zhuxi's way of annotating Confucian classics was one of them, and so as his. He understood Zhuxi's thought in this way of thinking and his academic method of 'learning from lower to upper level.' Therefore to interpretate Confucian classics new way he criticised or accepted Zhuxi's way of annotating scripture though his own way of understanding Confucian classics and academic method of 'learning from lower to upper level.'

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.55
• /
• pp.59-84
• /
• 2014

This research is an attempt to newly interpret his academic evaluation and understand Seo Kye Bak Se-Dang's Sa Byeun Rok The Doctrine of the Mean. In academic world, his academic Characteristic was considered as anti-Neo-confucianism, out of Jung Ju Hak, out of Seong Ri Hak, and Sil Hak. His understanding of The Doctrine of the Mean was pretty critical, because he had unique academic characteristic to interpret Chinese classics rather than anti-Neo-confucianism, out of Jung Ju Hak, out of Seong Ri Hak, and Sil Hak. Especially, he took practical study with six Chinese classics as the central figure and it was a creative thing with philosophical method. He tried to find out original meaning which was essential thought of Confucianism, and pointed out disharmony for consistency about meaning of The Doctrine of the Mean when Jung Ja and Ju Ja interpreted The Doctrine of the Mean. It appeared as an effort of trying agreement between name and its duty, and role and function in things and act. In addition, he thought The Doctrine of the Mean as trying to follow nature, and it was the way of people to practice in bright side of mind. It is different from Ju Ja's thought which explains principle about people and things, and it has strong reality which is foundation of practice and allows dynamic energy of human life. Therefore, practice style of The Doctrine of the Mean develops filial duty as center of mass and appears manifestation of human's independence through how people pracice it. To sum up, he traced The Doctrine of the Mean as reality, practice, and physical science rather than ideal, theoretical, and metaphysical philosophy. It developed the spirit of study as understanding world as the center of human, thinking over the way of people, and studying the essence of Confucianism with practice of thought.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.121-156
• /
• 2015

Memorials in Joseon Dynasty created a arena where the intellectual and political power met. This thesis traces the process of a certain political faction's rebuilding of the political structure of the elite groups by leading the intellectual controversies through memorials, especially those about the evaluations of Pak Setang(朴世堂) and I Gyeongseok(李景奭). This is what happened: Song Siyeol(宋時烈) submitted a memorial which disputed I Gyeongseok's petition, which provoked complete controversies around the memorials between Noron(老論) and Soron(少論). This led to the academic censorship against Sabyeonrok written by Pak Setang. The analysis of act of writing and submission of memorials by Noron and the role of the Kim Family of An-dong(安東 金門) specifically is the main topic here. The members of Soron ceaselessly criticized Song Siyeol, while the Kim Family strongly defended him. The trigger of the strife was a letter written by Kim Chang-Heup(金昌翕), a member of the Kim Family and the Kims played a significant role in the background during the process of political fights using memorials. The series of memorials criticized or supported certain political figure or his writings, but the opinions of Noron and Soron were directly opposite to each other. Even though the expressed difference was the result of the existing political factions, however, it also caused the new power structure of elite groups. The expressions and logics used in the arguments also have its significance. The Noron's memorials evaluated the contemporary people and their writings based on Chu-Hsi and Song Siyeol, who was regarded as a identical figure of Chu-Hsi. The arguments and writing strategies in this regard gained political strength enough to reorganize the intellectual society by changing alignment of political parties, and this led to the rebuilding of academic environment afterward.