• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.67
• /
• pp.9-34
• /
• 2017

This article examines the concept of 'Seongho-Studies'. The term 'SeonghoStudies' is generally used as a concept which means the overall academic world of Seongho, but it is not clear of what 'Seongho-Studies' really is. To define the term 'Seongho-Studies', characteristics of the Seongho's academic world should be found, and the characteristics have to be original. However, this work is not easy because of the immensity and the diversity of Seongho's academic world. This problem makes us find the concept of 'Seongho-studies' in the process Seongho made his academic world. We can define Seongho's academic attitudes and methods as 'scepticism and self-acquirement.' Thus 'Seongho-studies' is "All of Seongho's academic world that was achieved by the academic methods of scepticism and self-acquirement. It is exposing specific and practical thoughts on the subject based on his situation." This concept can have diverse explanations of Seongho and his followers' academic world, but this also carries various limits. Therefore the concept proposed in the article is one of the many essays for formulating a clear notion of 'Seongho-studies'.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.161-183
• /
• 2011

Lee Ik(李瀷) had put emphasis on the achievements by self-regulated academic learning through doubts, and at the same time that it was all-embracing. His academic attitude had set an example among the members of Seongho school(星湖學派), and his disciples had strived to emulate his style. The greatness of Seongho(星湖)'s study had been revealed by development of Seongho school(星湖學派) right after his death. He had argued that the six strokes of I-Ching should be read having it divided into inward and outward divine signs. He had stated his view clearly that the divine signs ranging from one stroke to six strokes were not connected, same as Shao yong(邵雍)'s method, but, the three strokes of inward divine sign as well as the three strokes of outward divine signs were independent from each other. Seongho(星湖) also had raised many questions about Shifa(筮法), and Bianyao(變爻) and Zhuzi(朱子)'s Shifa(筮法), or Yixueqimeng("易學啓蒙") "Kaobianzhan("考變占")". In view of the Shifa(筮法), Seongho(星湖) had helped Dasan(茶山) to present 'Shiguafa(蓍卦法)' by proposing different divination rule from Zhuzi(朱子)'s Method of Divination by Shiyi("筮儀"). Seongho(星湖) had not professed something significantly different from Zhuzi(朱子) in his I-xue. His study on I-xue had been accomplished under his goal of achievements by self-regulated academic learning through doubts. "Shiguakao("蓍卦攷")" is also same. I-xue of Seongho(星湖) had made a great contribution to form Dasan(茶山)'s I-xue in the later years.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.77-102
• /
• 2014

The study will examine SeongHo Lee Yik(星湖 李瀷)'s thought through his ZhongYongJiShu("中庸疾書"). The book is said that dealing with what was not dealt with in ZhongYongZhanJu("中庸章句") by one's own understanding gained through doubt(懷疑를 통한 自得) is ZhongYongJiShu("中庸疾書"). As with a metaphor of a peach in HouShuo("後說"), SeongHo(星湖) wrote ZhongYongJiShu("中庸疾書") based on his own understanding through skepticism. He divides the chapters of the book using a different method. Chapters 2 to 11 are considered as KongziZhongYong(孔子中庸) that is, quotes of Confucius, and chapters 12 to 30 as explanatory texts that offer explanations of the quotes. Chapter 1 is preface and chapter 33 closing remark. However, a clear explanation is required for the reason why chapter 1 should be preface and chapter 33 should be closing remark. SeongHo(星湖) offers an explanation for the appearance of ZhongYong("中庸") in the title of the book. He indicated that for giving life to the meaning of chapter 1, ZhongHe(中和) should have been used in the place of ZhongYong ("中庸"), but since it was the preface of KongziZhongYong(孔子中庸), Zhong Yong("中庸") was used from KongziZhongYong(孔子中庸). SeongHo(星湖) followed XingJiLi(性卽理) based on the interpretation of chapter 1 and chapter 20. In this way, he followed a Neo-Confucian proposition which is called XingJiLi(性卽理), defining Xing(性). That showed his interpretation was still based on Zhuzi(朱子). According to SeongHo(星湖), ZhongYong("中庸") is mainly on Cheng(誠), and he dealt with Cheng(誠) in ZhongYong("中庸"). Since Cheng(誠) is an important concept in the later part of the book, ZhongYongJiShu("中庸疾書") was focusing on Cheng(誠) for the later part. However, Cheng(誠) was a concept that was not paid much attention than KongziZhongYong(孔子中庸), so it is just a part of explanatory texts, according to SeongHo(星湖).