• 대순사상논총
• /
• 제37집
• /
• pp.263-295
• /
• 2021

지금까지는 주돈이의 <태극도>가 『주역참동계』에서 연원한다는 학설이 정설처럼 인식되었다. 그러나 최근 몇몇 학자들은 기존의 학설에 의문을 제기하면서 새로운 논쟁이 일었다. 이들은 <태극도>의 『주역참동계』 연원설에서 청대 학자들이 근거로 사용한 책들과 도상이 주돈이 이후의 것이거나, <태극도>에 기초해서 후대에 그려진 것임을 주장한다. 반면에 최근 학자들의 주장에서 <태극도>의 『주역참동계』 연원설을 최초로 제기한 남송 시대의 주진(朱震)과 양갑(楊甲)의 학설은 해명하지 못하였다. 이들 남송 시대 학자들은 주돈이와 주희 사이에서 활동했던 인물들이다. 이러한 문제를 다른 각도에서 접근해 보았다. 주돈이의 <태극도>는 태극-음양-오행의 체계를 골자로 한다. 따라서 이 체계가 탄생하는 과정에서 『주역참동계』가 직접 연관이 있음을 해명하고자 하였다. 태극-음양-오행의 체계 형성 과정은 한대의 종교적 사상적 영향에 의한 것이다. 한무제의 태일신(太一神) 신학체계에서 태일-음양-오행의 체계가 신학적으로 정립된다. 동중서에 의해 유학의 육예(六藝) 해석에 음양오행이 도입되며, 이는 한대 역학자들이 『주역』 해석에 오행을 개입하게 하는 사상적 흐름을 형성한다. 그러나 한대 역학자들은 음양재 이설을 중심으로 하였기에 태일-음양-오행의 체계를 형성하지 못했다. 그러나 동한시기에 쓰여진 『주역참동계』는 한 대 역학자들이 『주역』을 해석한 다양한 『역위(易緯)』 이론과 연단 이론을 결합하면서, 태일-음양-오행의 체계를 사상적으로 형성한다. 이때 『주역참동계』는 '감리위역설(坎離爲易說)'을 중심으로 한 역학 이론을 적용했기 때문이었다. 물론 『주역참동계』와 그 주석들에는 <태극도>와 같은 도상은 나타나지 않는다. 하지만 '감리위역설'을 중심으로 한 태일-음양-오행의 체계가 나타날 뿐만 아니라, <태극도>를 구성하는 도상의 부분들을 그려낼 수 있는 내용은 존재한다. 이 체계에서 '태극'이 아니라 '태일'이 사용되었다. 하지만 '태일'을 '태극'으로 해석할 사상적 이론은 등장하고 있었다. 한대 역학자들은 역에 원기(元氣) 개념을 적용하였고, 공영달에 의해 태극이 '원기'이자 '태일(太一)'이라고 정의하기에 이른다. 이러한 논의를 통해, 『주역참동계』가 <태극도>와 같은 도상을 담고 있지 않아도 태일(태극)-음양-오행의 체계를 형성하고 있으며. <태극도> 도상의 부분들을 그림으로 그려낼 수 있음을 해명하였다.

• Asia Marketing Journal
• /
• 제15권4호
• /
• pp.131-159
• /
• 2014

Corporate rebranding has been evident in the qualitative corporate rebranding studies as an imposed organizational change that induces mixed reactions and ambivalent attitudes among consumers. Corporate rebranding for the established and familiar corporate brands leads to more ambivalent attitudes as these companies represent larger targets for disparaging information. Consumers are found to hold both positive and negative reactions toward companies and brands that they are familiar with. Nevertheless, the imposed change assumption and ambivalent attitude, in particular corporate rebranding, have never been widely explored in the quantitative corporate rebranding studies. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive empirical examination of the ambivalence towards rebrandingrebranded brand attitude-purchase intention relationships. The author proposes that corporate rebranding for familiar corporate brands is a double-edged sword that not only raises the expectation for better performance, but also induces conflicted and ambivalent attitudes among consumers. These consumers' ambivalent attitudes are influenced by both the parent brands-related and general attitude factors which further affect their rebranded brand attitude and purchase intention. A total of 156 useable questionnaires were collected from Malaysian working adults; and two established Malaysian airfreight operators were utilized as the focal parent brands. The study found a significant impact of prior parent brand attitudes on ambivalence towards rebranding (ATR). The parent brand attitudes served as anchors in influencing how new information was processed (Mazaheri et al., 2011; Sherif & Hovland, 1961) and closely related to behavioral intention (Prislin & Quellete, 1996). The ambivalent attitudes experienced were higher when individuals held both positive and negative reactions toward the parent brands. Consumers also held higher ambivalent attitudes when they preferred one of the parent brands; while disliked the other brand. The study also found significant relationships between the lead brand and the rebranded brand attitude; and between the partner brands and ATR. The familiar but controversial partner brand contributed significantly to the ambivalent attitudes experienced; while the more established lead brand had significant impact on the rebranded brand attitude. The lead and partner brands, though both familiar, represented different meanings to consumers. The author attributed these results to the prior parent brand attitudes, the skepticism and their general ambivalence toward the corporate rebranding. Both general attitude factors (i.e. skepticism and general ambivalence towards rebranding) were found to have significant positive impacts on ATR. Skeptical individuals questioned the possibility of a successful rebranding (Chang, 2011) and were more careful with their evaluations toward 'too god to be true' or 'made in heaven' pair of companies. The embedded general ambivalent attitudes that people held toward rebranding could be triggered from the associative network by the ambiguous situation (Prislin & Quellete, 1996). In addition, the ambivalent rebranded brand attitude was found to lower down purchase intention, supporting Hanze (2001), Lavine (2001) and van Harreveld et al. (2009)'s studies. Ambivalent individuals were found to prefer delay decision making by choosing around the mid-ranged points in 'willingness to buy' scale. The study provides several marketing implications. Ambivalence management is proven to be important to corporate rebranding to minimize the ambivalent attitudes experienced. This could be done by carefully controlling the parent brands-related and general attitude factors. The high ambivalent individuals are less confident with their own conflicted attitudes and are motivated to get rid of the psychological discomfort caused by these conflicted attitudes (Bell & Esses, 2002; Lau-Gesk, 2005; van Harreveld et al., 2009). They tend to process information more deeply (Jonas et al., 1997; Maio et al., 2000; Wood et al., 1985) and pay more attention to message that provides convincible arguments. Providing strong, favorable and convincible message is hence effective in alleviating consumers' ambivalent attitudes. In addition, brand name heuristic could be utilized because the rebranding strategy sends important signal to consumers about the changes that happen or going to happen. The ambivalent individuals will pay attention to both brand name heuristic and rebranding message in their effort to alleviate the psychological discomfort caused by ambivalent attitudes. The findings also provide insights to Malaysian and airline operators for a better planning and implementation of corporate rebranding exercise.