• Korean Journal of Oriental Medicine
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.71-83
• /
• 1996

Hyang-Yack-Ku-Keup-Bang(鄕藥救急方) is our own, medical work written about the middle of the time of Korea Dynasty. I restored and researched this book because it needed to be illuminated about its medico-historic value and then I came to some conclusions as follows. 1. Hyang-Yack-Ku-Keup-Bang was published in Dae-jang-do-kam(大藏都監) of Kanghaw island(江華島) about the middle of Korea Dynasty. Choi Ja-ha(崔自河) republished it on original publication ground in Euiheung(義興) of Kyungsang-Province(慶尙道) in July, Taejong's(太宗) 17th year of Chosen Dynasty (A.D.1417) and this book was published again in Chungcheng Province(忠淸道) in Sejong's(世宗) 9th year(A.D.1427). The book published in Taejong's days was in the possession of books department of Kung-nae-cheng(宮內廳) in Japan and was the oldest medical book of existing ones. 2. Bang-Jung-Hyang-Yack-Mock-Cho-Bu(方中鄕藥目草部) of this book was originally intended to be adjusted in each division with the title of Bang-Jung-Hyang-Yack-Mock(方中鄕藥目). But Herb part(草部) only followed editing progress of Jeung-Lew-Bon-Cho(證類本草), the rest is not divided into each part and is together arranged at the below of Herb part with the title of Bang-Jung-Hyang-Yack-Mock-Cho-Bu. The Korean inscriptions on some drugstuffs in this book are different between Native Name(鄕名) of three volumes of provisions and general-spoken(俗云) of Bang-Jung-Hyang-Yack-Mock-Cho-Bu. In this, it is estimated that the publishing time and editor of tile volume of provisions and Bang-Jung-Hyang-Yack-Mock-Cho-Bu are different. I think Choi Ja-ha compiled this behind three volumes of provisions when he published. 3. This book picked some prescriptions which consisted of obtainable drugs with ease in Korea in the books of Chell-Keum-Yo-Bang(千金要方), Oi-Dae-Bi-Yo(外臺秘要), Tae-Peong-Sung-Hye-Bang(太平聖惠方), Ju-Hu-Bang(?後方), Kyung-Hum-Yang- Bang(經驗良方) Bo-Je-Bon-Sa-Bang(普濟本事方) Bi-Ye-Baik-Yo-Bang(備預百要方) and so on and got together our own prescriptions. On the whole Bi-Ye-Baik-Yo-Bang was a chief referrence book, On this, other books referred to and corrected. 4. In provisions quoted from Hyang-Yack-Jip-Sung-Bang(鄕藥集成方), there are seven provisions; leg-paralysis part, coughing part, headache part, obstetrics part, etc. don't show in this book. This is why Choi Ja-ha published only certain texts on Dae-jang-do-kam edition his own posession. So we can think the existing edition has a little misses compared with original edition. 5. This book recorded only names of drugstuffs in animal drug department like fowls, crab, goldbug, earthworm, etc. and didn't tell us ways of taking those. This is effect of Buddhist culture on medicine. This is efforts to practice 'Don't murder';one of Five Prohibition of Buddhism. 6. Beacause this book was published at the time, when our originative medicine would be set forth. This followed the Chinese ways in Theory, Treatment, Prescription and used 'Hyang Yack' in Medication out of theory of Korean medicine, which was a transitional form. So this is all important material which tell us aspects of development of 'Hyang Yack' the middle of Korea Dynasty.and this is also the beginning of originative, medical works like Dong-Eui-Bo-Kam(東醫寶鑑), Dong-Eui-Su-Bo-Won(東醫壽世保元). 7. There are few contents based on 'Byen-Jeung-Lon-Chi(辨證論治)'in this book. So we can see this book is not for doctors who study medical thoughts but for general public who suffer from diseases resulted from war. Because this book was written for a first-aid treatmeant, this is an index of medical service for the people those days. And this is also an useful datum for first-aid medicine or military medicine in these modern days. 8. Nowadays, parts of learned world of Korean medicine disregard essential theories and want to explain Korean medicine only by the theories or the methods of Western medicine. Moreover they don't adopt Chinese and Japanese theorys & thoughts about Oriental medicine in our own style and just view in there level. What was worse, there is a growing tendency for them to indulge in a trimming policy of scholarship and to take others' ideas. I think these trends to ignore our own medical thoughts involving growth of 'Hyang Yack' in the middle of Korea Dynasty, Dong-Eui-Bo-Kam and Dong-Eui-Su-Se-Bo-Won. So we, as researchers of Korean medicine, must get out of this tendency, and take over brilliant tradition and try to develop originative Korean medicine.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.329-355
• /
• 2021

The objective of this paper is to reveal that the formation of Deleuze's system is a result of a back flow of the 'ideal of pure reason' in Kant's system. I will try to seize upon the keyword in his main book, Difference and Repetition, and examine the aspect of mutual transformation between Deleuze's transcendental empiricism and Kant's transcendentalism. When analyzing Deleuze's system, most researchers tend to focus on anti-Hegelianism, but it is proper that Kant be adopted as the start when tracing the way of deployment directly. Fundamentally, Deleuze is different from Hegel in his approach to observing entire ground of thought. Even if Deleuze surely has the capability of becoming in the dialectical context, his systemic environment wherein dialectics is applied is different even at the onset. While Hegel follows the way of origin and copy or a system that begins from a preceding point of origin, Deleuze follows a way of copy and recopy or a system that begins without a point of origin. This characteristic of Deleuze's system originates directly from idealistic play. In fact, we can anticipate and identify in his book that he refers to Kant who accepted the tradition of empiricism. Therefore, the main contents of this paper is to present an overview of Kant's influence on Deleuze's system. While tracing ideas back to Kant's system, the cohabitation of empiricism and rationalism, which Kant felicitously revoiced, there emerges a definitude of world recognition. This occurs through cohabitation, and this is both deconstructed and integrated by Deleuze, and therein definitude is turned into a vision of prosperity. To the vision of prosperity that spans definitude to recognition, a philosopher has the right to select a philosophical system because selection methodology in philosophy is not a problem of legitimacy so much as the needs of the times. Deleuze's choice resulted in the opening of pandora's box in an abyss and secret contents have in turn risen sharply.

• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.103-129
• /
• 2004

This article examines the Korean adolescents and adults' social representation and trust of Korean society and people using indigenous psychological analysis. Respondents were asked to write in an open-ended questionnaire their perception of the following five aspects: Korean politics, economy, society, culture and people. They were then asked to report why they trust or distrust Korean society. A total of 1,064 respondents (218 middle school students, 200 university students, 218 fathers of the middle school students, 218 mothers of the middle school students, and 210 teachers) completed a questionnaire developed by the present researchers. The data were collected during April to June, 2003. The results indicate that 94.5% of Koreans view the existing political system and politicians as being corrupt, inept, factional, and lacking in integrity. A vast majority (84.9%) recognize the existence of systemic problems in the Korean economy. A total of 78.2% see problems in Korean society being dominated by selfishness, factionalism, conservatism, and social uncertainty. For Korean culture, a majority of respondents report being proud of its cultural tradition, accomplishment, and creativity. At the same time, 45.7% report loss of cultural identity and pride due to external influences. More than half of the respondents report negative aspects of Korean people (i.e., selfish, lack of morality, rushed, and overly focused on their social image), while nearly half of the respondents report positive aspects of Korean people as being compassionate, cooperative, good-natured and hard-working. As for reason for trusting Korean society, around a third report "because it is our country," followed by its future potential, and the good-nature and willingness of Korean people to work hard. The reasons for distrusting Korean society is the dishonesty politicians, corruption, institutional ineptness, and economic uncertainty. These results indicate a low level of collective efficacy in influencing and affecting change in Korean society.