• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.109-129
• /
• 2012

At this point, in Confucianism's schools debated about analysis for early theory and latterly it of nature between human and animal in Nongam Kim Changhyob's Confucianism. Oh Heeshang argued early theory about Shanguzaezungyongmunmok, written by Kim Changhyob, and establishment of theory about Yokuonyudozaelonshabyonnokbyon, written by him. Kim Changhup, brother of Kim Changhyob, argued so early theory about Shanguzaezungyongmunmok. O Yubong, student of Kim Changhyob, argued establishment of theory about Sobyon and Zabzee, written by Kim Changhyob. While, Yim Songzu argued early theory and establishment of theory about Zabzee. As a result, presenting researchers argued the same as. That is, they interpret early theory about difference of nature between human and animal in Kim Changhyob. they interpret about the same of nature between human and animal in it. However, Kim Changhyob wrote difference of nature between human and animal in Shanguzaezungyongmunmok. While, he wrote difference it and the same it in Yokuonyudozaelonshabyonnokbyon. He thought the same li between human and animal. However, he thought difference hyongki them. Furthermore, He wrote difference it and the same it in Zabzee. Therefore, they had depended on Kim Changhyob. As a result, posterity scholars interpreted early theory and establishment of theory about his theory. they depended on his authority. However, he changed himself theory.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.343-370
• /
• 2018

Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) completed "Siqibianzheng"("四七辨證") at the age of 72, and later had the argument over Runwuxingtongyilunzheng(人物性同異論爭) with his disciple, Lee Sik(李?). Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) had the position of Runwuxingyilun(人物性異論) and Lee Sik(李?) Runwuxingtonglun(人物性同論). Yet, the argument over Runwuxingtongyilunzheng(人物性同異論爭) had been forgotten and "Siqibianzheng"("四七辨證") could be acknowledged because Toegye school(退溪學派) and Yulgok school(栗谷學派) were conflicting and criticizing each other's stance at that time. It seems like Lee Hyeon-Il(李玄逸)'s "Liqulishilunsiduanqiqingshubian"("栗谷李氏論四端七情書辨") had a great influence on the completion of "Siqibianzheng" ("四七辨證"). Lee Yi(李珥)'s thought of Siduan(四端) and Qiqing(七情) was 'the position of Hunlun(渾淪)' that 'Qiqing(七情) includes Siduan(四端)', and Lee Hwang(李滉) had the 'position of Fenkai(分開)' that Siduan(四端) and Qiqing(七情) should be interpreted differently. Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) criticized the stance of Hunlun(渾淪) from the position of Fenkai(分開). What did Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) try to pursue through "Siqibianzheng"("四七辨證")? This fact tends to make us forget the controversy over Runwuxingtongyilunzheng(人物性同異論爭) between Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) and disciple Lee Sik(李?). Now we know the fact that Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) criticized Lee Yi(李珥) in "Siqibianzheng"("四七辨證"), but don't care much about the fact that Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) caused the controversy over Runwuxingtongyilun(人物性同異論). Why "Siqibianzheng"("四七辨證") has remained in our memory even though it was an important one? It might be because "Siqibianzheng"("四七辨證") had an impact on Lee Sik(李?), Shin Hu-Dam(愼後聃), and even Jeong Yak-Yong(丁若鏞) in the process of summarizing the arguments over Siduanqiqinglunzheng(四端七情論爭) since Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) regardless of whether Jeong Si-Han(丁時翰) had hoped it or not.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.23
• /
• pp.155-180
• /
• 2008

Suam(遂庵) Kwon Sang-Ha(權尙夏) was a very important character in the late Chosoen Dynasty. He was a representative of the academic circles(school of Uam) and political circles(Nolon; 老論) after Uam(尤庵) Song Si-Yeol(宋時烈, 1607-1689). He represented learning and thought and undertaking of his academic circles and political circles, and handed down to his pupils. He thought his mission was "lighting the laws of heaven and aligning the human mind," "stopping the heretical study and repulsing uncivilization", to reform good virtues of humanity and justice. Kwon Sang-Ha was a successor of Song Si-Yeol, He succeeded learning and thought of his teacher and practiced "Upright"(直) and the Thought of ChunChu(春秋). He emphasized "Upright" as a fundamental principle, like his teacher. He thought ChuHsi(朱熹, 1130-1200) was the master who had inherited the spirit of Confucianism and Chosoen was the only country to successfully inherit this spirit of Confucianism. He declared any study counter to the study of ChuHsi as a rebellious pursuit. Therefore he rejected all other studies. He tried to "stop the heretical 'ism' and repulse uncivilization" and present this ideology as 'the Right way of Human Society(世道)'. He made efforts to reorganize books of ChuHsi to make perfect Book of righteousness with Song Si-Yeol. And he established Hwayang shrine, MandongMyo(萬東廟), Deabodan(大報壇) etc, in memory of fidelity and large rightness. Kwon Sang-Ha did these undertaking to establish 'Public morals and the Right way of Human Society(世道)' with self-confidence. In Dispute on the nature of man and animal(人物性同異論), he gives his approval to Han Won-Jin's opinion. Han Won-Jin's opinion was "the nature of man and animal is Different"(人物性異論). Whenever serious political accidents occurred, he took the lead to protect his teacher, Song Si-Yeol. The reason he did this was not because of his personal feelings for his teacher, but because of promoting 'Public morals(世道)' and 'Confucianism.' Kwon Sang-Ha regarded Mind control Law of "Upright" and the thought of ChunChu as his moralities, and was concerned about real politics and opposed social irregularities. Kwon Sang-Ha succeeded Song Si-Yeol's thought of "Upright" and volition of making an inroad on the Chung(淸), and gave to his political circles(Nolon; 老論) as a law of mind and mission.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.35-73
• /
• 2009

This thesis aims at making clear correlation between the controversy that the nature of people and things is equal or different each other and Sung Confucianism, which is closed and discriminative. For this aim, I am looking closely at philosophy-reason prose that deals with the nature of people and things, from the early days of Chosun when Sung Confucianism became a new trend of thought to the later days when the controversy that the nature of people and things is equal or different had begun in earnest. This philosophy-reason prose has had gradual and important change. There are four different view points toward the nature of people and things. According to the first view point, people are the nucleus of the world. For the second one, things are thought to be important enough to be valued, but people are still the only core of the world. The third view point is that people and things are equally important and they are all the core of the world. Finally, the fourth view point regards people inferior to things and it says that things need to instruct people by scolding their bad behavior. There is a correlation between the view point of the nature of people and things and the attitude of an author. If some scholars think that people are the most important nucleus of the world, they tend to consider Sung Confucianism as the only school. On the contrary, other scholars who think that people and things are equal tend to respect other schools with open mind. In conclusion, the heated debates of the 18th century was an acute pain to destroy the closed and discriminative character of Sung Confucianism. It has contributed to innovate the thought toward the nature of people and things and the reformism of practical science have also done important role in the process of modernism's being groped by itself.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.129-158
• /
• 2008

After Four-Seven debate in late 16C, Korean Neo-Confucian scholars had developed their theories on human nature and morality such as Insimdosimsoel (theories on the moral emotion and desire), Inmulsoengron(theories on human nature and animal nature), Mibalsimcheron(theories on the calm mind as the embodiment of morality). Confucian scholars had been active member of society since acceptance of Neo-Confucianism. They had the plans of social reforms on the basis of moral self cultivation from the elite Confucians to commoners. So the Confucian scholar took part in the foundation of new Confucian kingdom, the Joseon Dynasty(1392). Kwon gun(1352~1409), the famous Neo-Confucian scholar wrote Iphakdosoel(pictogram for beginer of Neo-Confucianism) which emphasized the importance of moral self cultivation and that the mandate of heaven in human nature is identical with Li, the moral principle which the origin of the human intrinsic moral ability as the basis of unity with man and heaven. He thought that ethical life is identical with mandate of heaven, so he insisted all the member of society should follow Li, the moral principle which the origin of human morality and social goodness. Also he emphasized the morality was the intrinsic and most important value of human being. Therefore ethical life became essential part of self cultivation. Joeng Ji-un(1509~1561) wrote the Chunmyongdosoel (pictogram of mandate of Heaven), the start point of Four-Seven debate in mid 16C. Joeng followed Kwon's theoretical line. He emphasized the importance of moral self cultivation and the human intrinsic moral ability. He wrote that the Four moral emotions arise from Li, the moral principle of mind, while Seven emotions arise from Ki, vital force of body. He insisted that human being should control Ki, the vital force to follow the Li, the moral principle of mind. This Korean Confucian scholars developed theories of morality and self cultivation. This theories not only show the philosophical speculation of Korean Confucian scholars but also show the social idealism and moral utopianism which grounded on the human morality. So they had trust in human morality which can guide human being into the right track to the good and peaceful society. These tendencies are main characteristics of Korean Neo-Confucianism which has seen from the begining of acceptance of Neo-Confucianism. Some modern philosophical criticism which insist the Korean Neo-Confucian theories such as Four-Senven theories was indulged in academic discussion are not only neglect the historical realty but also ignore the potential of Korean Neo-Confucian heritage.