• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.9-38
• /
• 2018

Joseon Neo-Confucianism had important disputes throughout its hundred years of history. Starting in mid-16th century, Four-Seven Dispute focused on 'Qing (情, emotion)' while Horak Dispute that emerged in early 18th century put emphasis on whether people and things have the same 'Xing (性, nature).' These two disputes lasted until late Joseon. In that process, their issues were clearly recognized and consequently, characteristics of Joseon Neo-Confucianism were well demonstrated. With Western power surging in since mid-18th century, Joseon Neo-Confucianism should develop logic to cope with the Western power. One of responding logics was Zhulilun (主理論, theory of reason) in Neo-Confucianism. Diverse discussions particularly on 'Xin (心, mind)' were expansively made. From the notion of Xin Tong Xing Qing (心統性情) that Xin converges with Xing and Qing, an argument that Xin should be seen as 'Li (理, reason)' and another that Xin is basically 'Qi (氣, force of nature)' were up against each other. The academia heated up with issues raised such as whether Xin and Mingde (明德, bright virtue) are the same notion and whether Mingde should be seen as 'Li' or 'Qi', etc. Defining morality dispute in the late Joseon along with Four-Seven Dispute and Horak Dispute as 'three major disputes in Joseon Neo-Confucianism,' this paper focuses on clarifying their status, actuality and significance. Morality dispute was not only a theoretical dispute. It has significance in the aspect of 'topicality.' It directly and indirectly affected movements against Western and Japanese power, loyal troop's activities and independence movement as well. Compared to Four-Seven Dispute and Horak Dispute, morality dispute is more complex and expansive. In addition, it requires systematic organization of data. Intercomparison of three major disputes is one of key topics to determine characteristics of Joseon Neo-Confucianism.