• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.7-41
• /
• 2011

Theories of Li-Ki mutual dynamism and piety represent philosophical thoughts of Toege School. The theory of Li-Ki mutual dynamism reflects conflicts of Heavenly Law and Human Desire or Principled Mind and Selfish Mind on the private level, but conflicts of Virtuous Gentleman and Materialistic Person on the social level. The theory of piety is for establishments of Heavenly Law's Superintendence and Virtuous Gentleman's Leading Power in life. Toege's followers keep this theoretical stream Their perception of reality has two distinct features: one is that they focus on the fundamental distinguished from the incidental: the other is that they don't tolerate any compromise between righteousness and interest, They think they can make a beautiful world without any compromise between righteousness and material interest if trying hard on the fundamental. Their propensities are very different from those of Yulgok school who sought an appropriate compromise between principle and reality or between the Eastern and the Western party distinguishing an argument of the fundamental from an argument of the incidental.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.185-222
• /
• 2014

Nog-Moon Yim Seong-Joo(녹문 임성주) is a philosopher of late Choseon Dynasty of the 18th Century. He concluded that the debates between the school of Ho and that of Rack originated from the seclusion of Li(理) and Ki(氣), and theorized the new Li and Ki theory according to his own perspective. The prime point of Nog-Moon's Philosophy is said to be Li-Ki dongshil(理氣同實), Mind and Nature ilchi(心性一致) ; he proves his prime potints based on his pure and clean Ki substance. Thus Li-Ki is reduced to monism from dualism, and Mind-Nature(心 性) is reduced to mind. Since the basis of the existence of Mind is Ki(氣), Nog-moon's theory of Substance is concluded to be Ki-monism. Nog-Moon presents his great philosophy of Ki monism suggested by Jeong Myeong-Do's monistic methodology; he explains the universality of Substance and the diversity of Phenomenon with the logical structure of ilwonbunsu(一原分殊). The characteristics of Nog-Moon's philosophy is that ilwon(一原) and bunsu(分殊) are bonnyeon(本然) identical, which means Substance and Function(體用) are identical, or bonmalilchi(本末一致). It means Mind and Nature are bonnyeon(本然) identical, Ki and Mind and Nature are identical. With the expression of seongrihak (性理學) Gijil(氣質) is not different from bonnyeon(本然). Therefore 1 define the philosophy of Nog-Moon had been built on the context of a sage.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.349-386
• /
• 2014

Noju Oh Hui-sang(1763-1833) is one of the neo-Confucian scholars representing with Hong Chik-pil the Kiho-Nak School from the late 18th to the early 19th century. He did sincerely not only succeed theories of Kiho School originated from Yulgok, but also strengthened the main view of the Nak faction by clarifying the theoretical stance of it derived from Kim Chang-hyop. Not only he does suggest critical points of view against Ho faction in terms of Horak Controversy, but also criticizes heterodox account, which raised by an inner circle of Nak faction. In this vein, Oh established the neo-Confucian ways of realization of morality and ideal society by setting up his own points of view on mind and bright virtues that are followed by various issues of Horak Controversy. My paper will examine the values of Oh's account of Nature-Principle in the light of intellectual historical context by paying a special attention to his critical views of Ho faction. Oh's main idea is how to systematize practical foundation of realizing morality. Thus, he wants to theoretically explain both the practice of morality and the reality of pure moral mind in order to establish concrete practices of them in the real world. In doing so, he pays attention to mutual inclusive relationship between Principle and Matter(ki:氣). The mutual inclusive relationship between them can be exactly applied into the relationship between mind and Nature. So, the realityof moral principle explicitly implies the pure goodness of moral agency. Furthermore, his elucidation of logical relationship between mind and Nature and its values via the ontological understanding of them is to set up a system of cultivation, i.e., realizing practical foundation of pure moral mind. In conclusion, we can evaluate that Oh's account of Nature-Principle, at least, aims not only at establishment of moral agency and its reality in a theoretical dimension, but also at a guarantee of their realization in the world.