• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.68
• /
• pp.283-317
• /
• 2017

Issues over morality and profit usually address relations between moral principles and material gains. In the history of traditional Oriental philosophy, discussions about them were called "Yi-Li zhi bian." The ideas of Confucius and Mencius also contain various discussions about Yi-Li. Both Confucius and Mencius defined Yi as a value concept to represent "natural," "appropriate" or "just" and regarded Yi as an external moral principle on the one hand and an internal moral emotion on the other hand. They had, at the same time, differences, as well. While Confucius placed importance on the external and acquired nature of Yi as a goal of morality, Mencius argued for the internal and innate nature of Yi as the nature of morality partially while recognizing its externality overall. Such Yi is a general term for subjective moral emotions and objective moral principles. Li was a concept of fact to represent "gain," "profit" or "profit-making." Both of them were against private interest and emphasized public interest. As for their differences, Confucius was positive about Li to some degree by saying "One should think of Yi when making profit," whereas Mencius was almost negative about Li and perceived it to be for Yi by saying "One should give up even his own life for Yi." He meant Li's dependence on Yi and also Yi's absoluteness for Ri. Both of them found a mix of opposite features in Yi such as internality and externality, subjectivity and objectivity, specificity and generality, and uniqueness and universality and also in Li such as individuality and specialty and public and private interest. Those features have both disadvantages including theoretical irrationality and logical contradiction and advantages including ideological diversity and conceptual polysemy. If efforts are made to avoid their disadvantages and highlight their advantages, they will provide some elements to consult in the creation of new global ethics required today when East and West are becoming one. In the modern society, the Yi-Li issues can be divided into the issues of morality and economy, personal and social profit, and moral ideal and material gain. If these modern Yi-Li issues are combined with the traditional Yi-Li issues, two paths will emerge over the order of Yi-Li. Of the many perceptions of Yi-Li issues of Confucius and Mencius, the idea of "Yi First, Li Later" can be very useful for creating a new ethics theory to represent "humanism" that we all need today when everyone considers their own pursuit of profit and satisfaction of needs as the best values. Sound Yi-Li relations will be possible only through Yi's orientation toward externality based on internality and Li's pursuit of private interest on the premise of public interest according to the spirit of "Yi First, Li Later."

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.31
• /
• pp.143-171
• /
• 2011

Confucius asserted that the most humane life is to realize the value of 'benevolence(仁) as a human Virtue(德). Mencius also concurred that Confucius's explication of the good life was right. Confucian human mind & it's nature is comprised of benevolence, righteousness(義), propriety(禮) and wisdom(智). Confucianism proposed that we have to approach to other man as benevolence(仁). Mencius discussed about 'Four Virtues(四德)', the essential goodness of human, confirmed by 'Four Clues (四端)' to talk about the possibility of realizing the good life and a good state. On the other hand, he devised Politics of benevolence(仁政)' as a practical tool for it. Confucianism consider a human beings as human relationship. Confucius said, "benevolence(仁) is to love all men, and wisdom to know all men"In generally, Profit(利) is subject to righteousness in Confucianism. Therefore, Confucius said, "When you see Profit, think about Righteousness "But Confucius understands that Profit is ground for the constitution of 'Good life', and 'good State.'In Confucianism, Human Virtue is the root, Wealth is the result. In a State Gain is not to be considered propriety, its propriety will be found in righteousness.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.39
• /
• pp.29-52
• /
• 2013

Philosophy of respect righteousness advocated by Nammyung points to what first needs to be done to drive social changes. It is consistent with the Confucianism, which views the world from within oneself. After all, developing a proper view of the society starts from looking at oneself in the right perspective. The view that personal cultivation can develop into cultivation and eventually reform of the entire society is also present in Confucius' belief that one can only be at peace after disciplining oneself and observe good manners only after perseverance. Also, one can lead the world in peace only after disciplining one's body and mind. In other words, it suggests that individuals and the community where they belong to are not independent from one another. Rather, individuals gather to create a society and righteous individuals are the basis for righteous society. These principles of social system in Confucianism can be understood as a mutual or layered division and integration. The society is not conflicted with individuals or the nation but rather perceived as moral communities to co-exist. Hence, power of execution observed in the philosophy of respect and righteousness by Nammyung is identical to power of execution applied to the society. The power of execution shows up as 'the execution of righteousness' in Nammyung's philosophy of respect and righteousness. It is also demonstrated in the acts by Nammyung's disciples when the nation was at crisis. This is what differentiates Nammyung's new-Confucianism in Joseon Dynasty from Toegye or Yulgok as he tried to deliver 'the execution of righteousness.' It does not mean that neo-Confucian scholars did not emphasize the importance of execution, but Nammyung, in particular, warned how deceitful ideological or inner-directed thinking can be since they fail to come up with concrete solutions to social issues. In summary, Nammyung's moral discipline and training based on respect and righteousness cannot be evaluated in a state of vacuum separate from social and historical aspects but under the context of enlightening virtue and social execution. This can draw the conclusion that Nammyung's execution of respect and righteousness is in the starting point of the realistic 'theory of social reform' for creating a better world.

• 중국학논총
• /
• no.65
• /
• pp.61-82
• /
• 2020

本文是筆者繼<"漢字·漢語"教學方案試探>後的第二個研究。通過對包括四字成語'教學相長'各漢字和各漢字在內的相關詞彙的分析及韓中比較, 摸索出在'漢字·漢語'教學中的活用方案。本文的研究成果大致可歸納爲以下兩方面的教學方案 : 首先是通過對教, 學, 相, 長各漢字形·音·義分析的漢字教學方案。第一, 通過對各漢字的字形分析, 提出了運用漢字繪畫特性及對制字原理的理解的漢字書刊教學方案。第二, 通過對各漢字的韓中語音比較分析, 利用漢字的韓語發音和現代漢語普通話發音之間的關系及相關音變規律, 進行現代漢語漢字的語音教學。第三, 通過對各漢字的本義及引申義等意義分析, 提出了可以打好漢語詞彙學習基礎的漢字字義教學方案。下面是基於常用詞彙形·音·義分析的漢語詞彙教學方案, 包括教, 學, 相, 長各字的, 同時以"新HSK詞彙大綱"所提出的漢語詞彙爲標准, 對相應的韓國漢字詞進行了比較分析, 並作成'比較分析表'。在此基礎上, 進一步探索和提出漢語詞彙教學方案的必要性和可能性。 以上結果以後將不斷修改和完善, 最終通過連作研究, 將積累的成果彙編成利用"漢字·漢語"教學方案的漢語教材。

• 중국학논총
• /
• no.64
• /
• pp.1-22
• /
• 2019

副词'還'有很多义项, 但是到目前为止很少人提到这些义项之间有什麽样的联係. 本文注意到, 有两個研究把'还'看做表'量级'的副词. Liu(2000)和高增霞(2002)认为, 虽然'还'的义项很多, 可是这些义项都有一個共同點, 即'表增量'. 但是我们发现在很多句子中'还'还可以表示'减量'. 因此本文认为, '还'既可以表示'增量', 也可以表示'减量'. 當'还'表'增量'时, 包含'还'的句子和被比较的命题都会被解释为'具有同样的属性'. 當'还'表'减量'时, 包含'还'的句子和被比较的命题会被解释为'具有不同的属性'. 表'勉强過得去'義的'还', 看起来好像不属於'表增量', 也不属於'表减量'. 本文认为, 表'勉强'义的'还'属於'表减量', 因为包含'勉强'义'还'的句子和被比较的命题會被解释为'具有不同的属性'.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.7-41
• /
• 2011

Theories of Li-Ki mutual dynamism and piety represent philosophical thoughts of Toege School. The theory of Li-Ki mutual dynamism reflects conflicts of Heavenly Law and Human Desire or Principled Mind and Selfish Mind on the private level, but conflicts of Virtuous Gentleman and Materialistic Person on the social level. The theory of piety is for establishments of Heavenly Law's Superintendence and Virtuous Gentleman's Leading Power in life. Toege's followers keep this theoretical stream Their perception of reality has two distinct features: one is that they focus on the fundamental distinguished from the incidental: the other is that they don't tolerate any compromise between righteousness and interest, They think they can make a beautiful world without any compromise between righteousness and material interest if trying hard on the fundamental. Their propensities are very different from those of Yulgok school who sought an appropriate compromise between principle and reality or between the Eastern and the Western party distinguishing an argument of the fundamental from an argument of the incidental.

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2017.05a
• /
• pp.377-378
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 외국인 유학생대상 한국세시풍속문화 체험교육콘텐츠 개발의 필요성을 제고하여 한국문화교육 실시에 필요한 실용적인 체험교육콘텐츠 개발에 목적을 두었다. 한국세시풍속문화 체험교육콘텐츠는 계절별로 나누었으며. 콘텐츠별 분류는 의례, 음식, 놀이, 예술, 축제 등의 다섯 분류로 나누었다. 콘텐츠의 분류는 오덕(五德)의 의미를 담아 의례에는 예(禮), 음식에는 의(義), 놀이에는 지(智), 예술에는 인(仁), 축제에는 신(信) 등으로 재조직하여 분류하였고, 그에 맞추어 교육콘텐츠를 개발하였다. 본 연구를 통해 개발된 외국인 유학생 대상 한국세시풍속문화 체험교육콘텐츠가 실용적으로 확산되기를 기대한다.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.126
• /
• pp.377-401
• /
• 2013

일반적으로 성리학에서는 개인의 이익보다 도덕적 선택을 우선하라고 요구한다. 그러나 "주역"에서는 결코 이익을 죄악시 하지 않는다. 이 글은 성리학자이면서 역학자인 주자의 이익과 도덕에 대한 입장을 추적하는 연구이다. 주자가 소옹의 결정론적 세계관과 도덕적 자유의지를 강조하는 이천의 관점을 결합함으로써 완성하고자 한 것은 "주역"의 서(筮) 속에서 리(理)를 확인할 수 있다는 것이었다. 점서(占筮)의 결과가 그렇게 나오는 것은 그에 해당하는 이치가 있기 때문이라는 말이다. 그런데 "주역"의 리(理) 즉 역리(易理)란 오랜 경험과 관찰을 통해 확보된 사회적 존재로서 인간의 심리적 행위적 경향성의 총합이다. 그리고 그 구체적인 내용은 바로 상황적 합리성과 타자와의 조화로움이다. 이 리(理)는 우주와 사회의 정해진 질서로서 우리에게 주어진다. 개인은 이 주어진 질서에 따를 수 있는 자유와 함께 따르지 않을 수 있는 자유를 지닌다. 때문에 정해진 질서와 그 속에서의 개인의 자유의지는 양립가능한 것으로 받아들여지고, 그런 의미에서 주자는 약한 결정론자라고 할 수 있다. 성리학은 우주의 질서로부터 부여받은 당위의 법칙에 자발적으로 동의할 것을 요구한다. 그것이 가장 올바른 선택이면서 동시에 자신에게 가장 이로운 선택이기 때문이다. 주자는 상황적 합리성과 타자와의 조화로운 관계에서만이 자신의 진정한 이익을 추구할 수 있다고 생각한다. 타자와의 유기적 관계를 부정하고 유아적(唯我的) 이익만 추구하려는 자는, 사회적 존재로서 인간이 지니는 심리적 행위적 경향성을 무시한 어리석은 자이다. 이렇게 주자에게서 이익[리(利)]은 상황적 합리성[의(宜)]이 되고 또 그것은 바로 도덕[의(義)]이 된다. 참다운 의미에서의 합리적인 판단은 도덕적 선택을 불러온다.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.50
• /
• pp.363-389
• /
• 2016

Any moral ideas get integrity upon their practices. Because in human society systems, morality have capability among human interactions, for it gives moral standards(good or bad/ right or wrong) to them. And when the society system is Korean, Koreans surely have developed unique styles of moral practice and moral education in their traditional ages. So reinterpretating and categorizing the moral tradition for taking advantage of it in contemporary context, make sense. In this study, Korean moral tradition is focused in its scope, as 'Confucian moral tradition in semi-modern era'. For convenience of study and the potentials of effective revision, Korean tradition have been resized. In Confucian moral tradition, semi-modern Korean moral ideas could be presented as ren(仁) and yi(義). Furthermore, ren and yi could be practiced with several moral virtues, like xiao(孝), di(弟), ci(慈), zhi(直) qin(勤) gian(儉). When compared with contemporary moral education idea systems, the traditional system can have affinity with the systems in moral ideas division('with-self morality', 'with-others morality', 'with-universe and transcendence morality'). And several fusion-style, integration-based education practices can be developed and applied at contemporary school moral education.

• Journal of Korean Medical classics
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.31-45
• /
• 2019

Objectives : This paper aims to suggest alternative interpretations to previous ones of 'Daedong-eo-Hyeobui(大同於協義)' and 'Gakrip-eo-Cheonri(各立於擅利)' in the chapter 'Theories on Nature and Conduct(性命論)' in Donguisusebowon(東醫壽世保元) which have been found to be inadequate. Methods : Previous interpretations were thoroughly examined, then evaluated based on the narrative form and logical probability of the Donguisusebowon(東醫壽世保元). Afterwards, correct interpretations of the contents were suggested based on the context of the chapter 'Theories on Nature and Conduct(性命論).' Results & Conclusions : Of 'Daedong-eo-Hyeobui(大同於協義)', Daedong(大同) should be interpreted as 'to gather largely' instead of 'all the same.' Hyeobui(協義) should be interpreted as 'to submit willingly' and not 'to cooperate to Ui(義).' In the case of 'Gakrip-eo-Cheonri(各立於 擅利)', Gakrip(各立) means for people of same minds to rise against evil individually while Cheonri(擅利) refers to the evil of coveting for gains individually. There are other cases where existing interpretations have been erroneous other than the suggested examples, which prompts thorough re-evaluation of the text.