• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.145
• /
• pp.1-43
• /
• 2018

This article intends to look for the desirable form of Confucian familism in the era of the 4th Industrial Revolution. First of all, the concept of the fourth industrial revolution is a very vague concept. Therefore, it would be more meaningful to analyze the situation of the family in present Korean society and to find an alternative to it in Confucian familism. But the problem is that it is very burdensome to bring out the Confucian familism idea again. Since Confucian Confucianism was criticized in 1915 during the New Cultural Movement, many people have criticized Confucian familism as patriarchal and authoritarian, and thus an anti-democratic value that seriously damaged the equality of men and women. Therefore, the discussion starts with looking at the justification of such an evaluation. I wanted to see if their evaluation of Confucian familism is legitimate or an unjustified evaluation resulting from misunderstanding, and if it is an inappropriate evaluation, where they are based. In addition, I examined whether the cause of such an evaluation was attributed to the subject who made the evaluation, or because the spectrum of significance contained in the Confucian familism thought formed over 2500 years was too wide. I sought to reassess criticism of the existing Confucian familism by looking for answers to these questions. Through such a reevaluation, I has found that the wrong criticism of Confucian familism was because we saw the Confucian scholarship and the Confucian scholarship without distinguishing the ideological Confucianism from the Qin(秦) Dynasty. In the end, I tried to show that Confucian familism can function as an alternative to resolve family problems that are occurring in today's Korean society through the illuminating work of the ideas of Confucian familism.

• Korea journal of population studies
• /
• v.30 no.3
• /
• pp.157-178
• /
• 2007

This study examines the features of Korean kinship relationships from the comparative perspectives. Based on ISSP (international Social survey program) data, it analyzes the degree of kinship contact and the source of instrumental and emotional social supports. The results show that the contact frequency among Korean kin is relatively low, and the instrumental social supports are more active than emotional social supports. Focusing on the fact that the lower contact frequency among Korean kin cannot be easily explained either the degree of Economic development nor the familism tradition, this study suggests that the hierarchical collectivism inhered in confucian tradition is responsible for the sparse kinship contact. Regarding social supports, results confirm the strong instrumental familism among Koreans. The relationship between hierarchical collectivism and lower emotional support from kin is also discussed. In addition, this study notes that lower extent of emotional support among kin cannot be identified with lower social solidarity among them.

• Journal of Families and Better Life
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.87-99
• /
• 2002

This is a study of discourses on the family used during the Enlightenment period in Korea. To this end, 1 have conducted a qualitative analysis of the editorials taken from the Taehan Maeil Sinbo of that period. The major findings are as follows: First, these Enlightenment period discourses claimed that civilized nations evolved from a family in primitive society. This concept of family is different from the concept of family in a Confucian society. Civilized societies believed the family is less important than the nation. At that time, Korean Press used the term bumoguk (Parental nation) to refer to the nation in an attempt to equate national loyalty to filial piety. Second, the Enlightenment period claimed that the nation belonged in the Public sphere while the family belonged in the private sphere. However, it was stated that it was the duty of the family to discipline the members and make them into good citizens. Finally, Enlightenment discourses used familyism as the basis of their arguments.