This paper aims for a study on the theory that mind is Li(principle). The method of research is laid emphasis on searching for the historical development of the perception Theory in late Cho-Sun. First of all, I investigated a meaning of the perception theories of Ho-Rak school, that were criticized in the Cho-Sun academic world. The next, I investigated the theory of Li-ju-Ki-ja that was raised by Yi Sang Jung. He thought that Li is supervisor and Ki is assistance. And he put a construction on the Perception Theories of Toegye school. Yi Jin sang's theory of perception is the result of criticism against Ho-Rak school, and a fresh and in-depth construction of Yi Sang Jung's perception theory. His viewpoint was contradiction to the theory of Sim si Ki(the theory that Mind is made of Ki). And he rediscovered the human conscience that was born endowed from Heaven.
This article reveals their theoretical differences by examining the interpretation of the mind theory of Cho Geung-seop (1873~1933) and Kwak Jong-seok (1846~1919). The characteristic of Cho Geung-seop's mind theory is that it is simhapligi (心合理氣 the mind is a combination of principles and internal energy). It is a position to recognize the role and status of Gi as an action while also acknowledging Li as the presidency of mind. In this theory, Li can exist only when there is Gi, and the presidency mind is thereby possible. For this reason, Cho Geung-seop criticized Kwak Jong-seok, who insisted on simjeokli (心卽理 the mind is precisely principles) from the perspective of simhapligi. The characteristic of Kwak Jong-seok's theory of mind lies in simjeokli. Although the mind is not without Gi, it is because of Li that the mind can preside over one body such that it can be described as simjeokli. Accordingly, Kwak Jong-seok criticized Cho Geung-seop, who insisted on simhapligi from the perspective of simjeokli. In addition, their theories of mind leads to problems of perception, such as whether to see perception as a Gi or a Li. If Cho Geung-seop could be said to have interpreted the perception of deliberation as spiritual Gi, then Kwak Jong-seok interpreted the perception as spiritual Li. According to Cho Geung-seop, the perception of mind is possible due to "spiritual Gi," and at this time, the action of spiritual Gi is the perception of the mind. In the end, there is a perception action corresponding to spiritual Gi. Thereby, the mind should not be interpreted directly as a Li in Kwak Jong-seok's theory. According to Kwak Jong-seok, perception is possible by applying the novelty of Li to the mind. The perception of mind is not the action of spiritual Gi as it is in Cho Geung-seop's model, but it is rather the result of spiritual Li making it new. Accordingly, Kwak Jong-seok criticized Cho Geung-seop for not knowing simjeokli properly because he understood the perception of mind as an action of Gi.
The purpose of this paper is to identify the difference between Sangsan-Simhak(象山心學) and Yangming-Simhak(陽明心學). This means that the whole history of Sung Confucianism needs to be understood based on changing philosophical paradigm according to the times, not general perception which regards the whole history of Sung Confucianism as Li-Hak (理學) and Sim-Hak(心學). This kind of perception is caused by the general perception which divides Sung Confucianism into Sim-Hak and Li-Hak. We regard the former as Chung-Chu study and the latter as Liu-Yang study. Because of this, Sangsan study is recognized as the former stage study of Yangming study and can not be placed in independent position in whole history of Sung Confucianism. And Sang is regarded that it takes diametrical opposition with Chuhsi study. So it is said that there is no point of sameness among them. But Sangsan study was generated from 'Song-Hak(宋學)' based on paradigm of Li-Hak and Yangming study was generated from 'Ming-Hak(明學)' based on paradigm of Sim-Hak. The difference between 'Song-Hak' and 'Ming-Hak' is generated from proposition called 'Sim is Li (心卽理)' that most research has overlooked. To identify these things, this paper examine the philosophical difference between 'Song-Hak' and 'Ming-Hak' and analyze the proposition 'Sim is Li(心卽理)' that regards Sangsan study and Yangming study as same philosophical system. And this paper identify the philosophical difference between Sangsan study and Yangming study by examining the method that the concept of 'Sim is Li(心卽理)' is applied in moral cultivation. This paper shows that the difference of interpretation about the concept of Li(理), between 'Song-Hak' based on Li paradigm and 'Ming-Hak' based on Ki-Hak(氣學) paradigm, causes different meaning in 'Sim is Li(心卽理)'. Through these, this paper demonstrate the difference between the paradigm of 'Song-Hak' that Chuhsi study and Sangsan study have and the paradigm of 'Ming-Hak' that Yangming study has and the fact which Sangsan study is systematic philosophy of Sung Confucianism in itself not former stage of Yangming study.
The eight most prominent students of Lee Jin Sang discussed and developed the doctrines of the Master while discussing with the surrounding Toegye scholars. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between the doctrines of Toegye and the doctrines of Hanju in their discussions. First, the two were originally aimed at the same scholarship, so they discussed in a friendly atmosphere and some of the Toegye scholars participated in Hanju group. but at a certain point, they were a violent atmosphere of confrontation. Next, I tried to clarify the confrontation between Juli and Jeugli. And I tried to explain that they had different thoughts about domination of li. In addition, I looked at the meaning of excessiveness and compromise, the key words to criticize others and defend oneself. Finally, I explained that the ultimate difference between the two schools is in the methods of mind cultivation.
Two schools represent the Li theory of nature in the 19th century. They are the Li's superintendence school of Lee Hangno, Ki Jungchin and Lee Jinsang and the Li and Ki's mutual superintendence school of Chun Woo. They share a theoretical concern about the blockage of Ki's free rein. However, their concepts of superintendence are very different. Thus, various disputes arise among them and consequently different solutions are proposed. The Li's superintendence school applies Li's power even in the actual world, which has completely dominated Ki by conferring dynamic power on Li. However, Chun Woo, a representative theorist of Li and Ki's mutual superintendence, accepts only Ki's dynamic power. By denying Li's dynamic power, he argues that there is no other thing than Ki which takes the lead in reality. His solution to block Ki's free rein is to make Ki(mind) a disciple of Li(standard or nature) and to make Ki follow Li's lead.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate Toegye's simhak in relation to spiritualism. In general, we call Chu Hsi's learning "lihak" (the learning of principle) while Wang Yangming's learning is described as "simhak" (the learning of mind). However, we sometimes call Toegye's learning "simhak" in spite of his respect for Chu Hsi's philosophy of li. Toegye's simhak is different from Wang Yangming's. Nonetheless, Toegye too, highlighted the existential meaning of truth. Toegye regarded simgyung (the book of mind) as one of the most important classics for self-cultivation. As is well known, Toegye's main concern was concentration on mind and heart cultivation. Toegye understood li as a spiritual being, which can actualize itself. The goal of simhak is to become a sage. For a sage, there is no contradiction between moral norm and human desire. To become a sage, Toegye developed the theory and practice of mind cultivation. Toegye's simhak has some common characteristics with Louis Lavelle's philosophy of spiritualism. Both Toegye and Louis Lavelle lay great emphasis on self reflection and spiritual life. In particular, Toegye developed the concrete method of mind cultivation. In the 21st century, human beings are confronted with spiritual crisis in many aspects. Toegye's simhak can be advanced as useful wisdom to keep one's mind in a peaceful and harmonious state.
Writing is a process and work of expressing one's own feelings and thoughts that are not contained in rigid forms; however, the literary trend and environment during the Late Joseon was not so tolerant. A revivalist approach to writing was dominant during this period, which was summarized in the expression that "Prose must be written in the style of Qin and Han; and Poetry in that of High Tang. "Hence, it was practically a taboo to express one's raw emotions and disregard the custom and regulations of writing. Nevertheless, literati, who got tired of the dogmatic rule of Neo-Confucianism at the time that refused to see the changing world and the pseudo-archaic writing that merely imitated the outside and was empty inside, attempted new styles of writing to escape from the model or example and what was familiar. Lee Yong-hyu, who was in the middle of such transformations, learned the trends of Late Ming and Early Qing through the newly imported Chinese books and created his own style that reflected his personality. His writings refused the Neo-Confucian system of thoughts, which was a dominant ideology of the time, paid attention to the human nature and emphasized the restoration of the self. His writing could be described as being anti-pseudo-archaic and criticized the pretentious trend of the time. He argued that in order to restore the true self, one must recover the innocent mind that was bestowed on human by heaven/nature (cheon-li, 天理), and for this purpose, one must straighten out one's mind (sim, 心). His argument is similar to that of "Yangming School of Mind," which could be represented by the phrase, "Mind is the Principle (心卽理)." Yangming School claimed that moral principle existed within one's mind; and this was in stark contrast with the Neo-Confucian idea that "principle (li)"was external and transcendent, and was spoken by the great Confucian masters and written down in Confucian Classics. By denying the externality of the principle and underscoring its immanence, the idea that centralized Confucian Classics and canons was dismantled. Lee Yong-hyu's writing styles that denied the model and emphasized the restoration of the self was influenced by such thoughts. However, one must neither hastily judge that he is an advocate of Yangming School of Mind, nor determine the anti-pseudo-archaic writers' ideological basis as the philosophy of Yangming School. Once it is rigidly defined, be it Zhu Xi's philosophy or Wang Yangming's philosophy, it becomes another model that one must abide by, and again the self disappears. Thus, Lee Yong-hyu defied any kind of model that claimed authenticity or precedence and wished that people would live independently as oneself, and left such claims and wishes in writing. That is the reason, after more than two hundred years later, we still read his writings.
This thesis is based on two points in Min-yisheng's idea: 1, knowing, consciousness, and differentiation of mind, according to which 2, Zheng-jidou's dividually observe to the same and different points of liangzhi and consciousness. Min-yisheng and the scholar on Yangming Theory named Zheng-jidou are arguing about the rights and wrongs of the Yangming Theory, the key concept of which is the same and different points of liangzhi and consciousness. At the extension of this argument, Min-yisheng also argues with Jin-chagnxie about the same and different points of knowing and consciousness. When argue with Zheng-jidou about Yangming Theory, Min-yisheng disproves the saying of "mind is principle" and "syncretism of consciousness and behavior" as well as defines liangzhi, which is the key concept of Yangming Theory, as a consciousness different from the natural principle. While disputing with Zheng-jidou about the relation between liangzhi and consciousness, Min-yisheng begins to pay attention to the relation between knowing and consciousness focused in the academy at that time. And as a result of that he also has a dispute with Jin-chagnxie about the same and different points of knowing and consciousness. The dispute between Min-yisheng and Jin-chagnxie is actually about how to look at the relation of knowing and consciousness, from the point of "non-mixed" or the point of "inseparable". Jin-chagnxie emphasizes on the un-mixed of knowing and consciousness while Min-yisheng, from the point of "inseparable", sees the consistency of the two. This thesis focuses on the argumentation of "the same and different points of liangzhi and consciousness" and "the same and different points of knowing and consciousness", the difference of the two positions and the historical meaning of this argument in ideologies.
This essay is dealing with Yang-Ming Studies' fundamental ideas, which are the goal of learning, the cultivation theory, and the ultimate goal in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue. The first, what is the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue: It is generally accepted idea that the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue is to be a sage. But there are different suggestions about the ideas above. The reason is like this: Zhu-Zi-Studies was eager to be a sage through its cultivation theory. Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue criticized the cultivation theory in Zhu-Zi-Studies. Therefore, some people don't agree with the idea that the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue is to be a sage. In this essay, I try to demonstrate that the goal of learning in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue is to be a sage. The second, What is the major cultivation theory in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue: The core cultivation theory is the Zhi-Ling-Zhi(Fulfillment Innate Knowledge of Goodness). For this, there is no question, but it is difficult how to learn and practice Zhi-Ling-Zhi in the daily life. I try to explain the right meaning and practice over Zhi-Ling-Zhi. The third, what is the ultimate goal in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue: It is general method in examine Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue that is comparing with Zhu-Zi-Studies. So there is a natural tendency focusing on the differences and similarity between Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue and Zhu-Zi-Studies. But If I say, what is the ultimate goal in Yang-Ming-Xin-Xue? That is the realization of Ren, Which is the harmony with all things in heaven and earth.
In this article, I researched Nam Dae-nyeon's(1887~1958) thought of Neo-confucian theories, interpretation of confucian canons, and evaluation of historical figures. First, from the side of Neo-confucian theories, he asserted that Qi(氣) had behaviors and Li(理) had not. About his teacher Jeon Wu's(田愚) theories, he thought that those were in tradition of Confucius(孔子) and Mencius(孟子), but not emphasized presidence of mind. And he criticized the theory of mind was Li(理). Second, from the side of interpretation of Confucian canons, Nam Dae-nyeon's study centered on Four Books(四書). This showed he was in tradition of Neo-confucianism. Through this studies he emphasized the importance of Confucian Ren(仁) and Filial piety(孝), self-consciousness as gentry(士). Third, from the side of evaluation of historical figures, Nam Dae-nyeon evaluated many Chinese and Korean scholars, for example, Qu Yuan(屈原), Lu Zhong-lian(魯仲連), Zhen De-xiu(眞德秀), Lu Long-qi((陸?其), Zhang Lu-xiang (張履祥) of China, and Jeong Mong-ju(鄭夢周), Zho Kwang-jo(趙光祖), Yi Hwang(李滉), Yi Yi(李珥), Jeon Wu(田愚) of Korea. And his criteria for evaluation of historical figures was fidelity and insight.
이메일무단수집거부
본 웹사이트에 게시된 이메일 주소가 전자우편 수집 프로그램이나
그 밖의 기술적 장치를 이용하여 무단으로 수집되는 것을 거부하며,
이를 위반시 정보통신망법에 의해 형사 처벌됨을 유념하시기 바랍니다.
[게시일 2004년 10월 1일]
이용약관
제 1 장 총칙
제 1 조 (목적)
이 이용약관은 KoreaScience 홈페이지(이하 “당 사이트”)에서 제공하는 인터넷 서비스(이하 '서비스')의 가입조건 및 이용에 관한 제반 사항과 기타 필요한 사항을 구체적으로 규정함을 목적으로 합니다.
제 2 조 (용어의 정의)
① "이용자"라 함은 당 사이트에 접속하여 이 약관에 따라 당 사이트가 제공하는 서비스를 받는 회원 및 비회원을
말합니다.
② "회원"이라 함은 서비스를 이용하기 위하여 당 사이트에 개인정보를 제공하여 아이디(ID)와 비밀번호를 부여
받은 자를 말합니다.
③ "회원 아이디(ID)"라 함은 회원의 식별 및 서비스 이용을 위하여 자신이 선정한 문자 및 숫자의 조합을
말합니다.
④ "비밀번호(패스워드)"라 함은 회원이 자신의 비밀보호를 위하여 선정한 문자 및 숫자의 조합을 말합니다.
제 3 조 (이용약관의 효력 및 변경)
① 이 약관은 당 사이트에 게시하거나 기타의 방법으로 회원에게 공지함으로써 효력이 발생합니다.
② 당 사이트는 이 약관을 개정할 경우에 적용일자 및 개정사유를 명시하여 현행 약관과 함께 당 사이트의
초기화면에 그 적용일자 7일 이전부터 적용일자 전일까지 공지합니다. 다만, 회원에게 불리하게 약관내용을
변경하는 경우에는 최소한 30일 이상의 사전 유예기간을 두고 공지합니다. 이 경우 당 사이트는 개정 전
내용과 개정 후 내용을 명확하게 비교하여 이용자가 알기 쉽도록 표시합니다.
제 4 조(약관 외 준칙)
① 이 약관은 당 사이트가 제공하는 서비스에 관한 이용안내와 함께 적용됩니다.
② 이 약관에 명시되지 아니한 사항은 관계법령의 규정이 적용됩니다.
제 2 장 이용계약의 체결
제 5 조 (이용계약의 성립 등)
① 이용계약은 이용고객이 당 사이트가 정한 약관에 「동의합니다」를 선택하고, 당 사이트가 정한
온라인신청양식을 작성하여 서비스 이용을 신청한 후, 당 사이트가 이를 승낙함으로써 성립합니다.
② 제1항의 승낙은 당 사이트가 제공하는 과학기술정보검색, 맞춤정보, 서지정보 등 다른 서비스의 이용승낙을
포함합니다.
제 6 조 (회원가입)
서비스를 이용하고자 하는 고객은 당 사이트에서 정한 회원가입양식에 개인정보를 기재하여 가입을 하여야 합니다.
제 7 조 (개인정보의 보호 및 사용)
당 사이트는 관계법령이 정하는 바에 따라 회원 등록정보를 포함한 회원의 개인정보를 보호하기 위해 노력합니다. 회원 개인정보의 보호 및 사용에 대해서는 관련법령 및 당 사이트의 개인정보 보호정책이 적용됩니다.
제 8 조 (이용 신청의 승낙과 제한)
① 당 사이트는 제6조의 규정에 의한 이용신청고객에 대하여 서비스 이용을 승낙합니다.
② 당 사이트는 아래사항에 해당하는 경우에 대해서 승낙하지 아니 합니다.
- 이용계약 신청서의 내용을 허위로 기재한 경우
- 기타 규정한 제반사항을 위반하며 신청하는 경우
제 9 조 (회원 ID 부여 및 변경 등)
① 당 사이트는 이용고객에 대하여 약관에 정하는 바에 따라 자신이 선정한 회원 ID를 부여합니다.
② 회원 ID는 원칙적으로 변경이 불가하며 부득이한 사유로 인하여 변경 하고자 하는 경우에는 해당 ID를
해지하고 재가입해야 합니다.
③ 기타 회원 개인정보 관리 및 변경 등에 관한 사항은 서비스별 안내에 정하는 바에 의합니다.
제 3 장 계약 당사자의 의무
제 10 조 (KISTI의 의무)
① 당 사이트는 이용고객이 희망한 서비스 제공 개시일에 특별한 사정이 없는 한 서비스를 이용할 수 있도록
하여야 합니다.
② 당 사이트는 개인정보 보호를 위해 보안시스템을 구축하며 개인정보 보호정책을 공시하고 준수합니다.
③ 당 사이트는 회원으로부터 제기되는 의견이나 불만이 정당하다고 객관적으로 인정될 경우에는 적절한 절차를
거쳐 즉시 처리하여야 합니다. 다만, 즉시 처리가 곤란한 경우는 회원에게 그 사유와 처리일정을 통보하여야
합니다.
제 11 조 (회원의 의무)
① 이용자는 회원가입 신청 또는 회원정보 변경 시 실명으로 모든 사항을 사실에 근거하여 작성하여야 하며,
허위 또는 타인의 정보를 등록할 경우 일체의 권리를 주장할 수 없습니다.
② 당 사이트가 관계법령 및 개인정보 보호정책에 의거하여 그 책임을 지는 경우를 제외하고 회원에게 부여된
ID의 비밀번호 관리소홀, 부정사용에 의하여 발생하는 모든 결과에 대한 책임은 회원에게 있습니다.
③ 회원은 당 사이트 및 제 3자의 지적 재산권을 침해해서는 안 됩니다.
제 4 장 서비스의 이용
제 12 조 (서비스 이용 시간)
① 서비스 이용은 당 사이트의 업무상 또는 기술상 특별한 지장이 없는 한 연중무휴, 1일 24시간 운영을
원칙으로 합니다. 단, 당 사이트는 시스템 정기점검, 증설 및 교체를 위해 당 사이트가 정한 날이나 시간에
서비스를 일시 중단할 수 있으며, 예정되어 있는 작업으로 인한 서비스 일시중단은 당 사이트 홈페이지를
통해 사전에 공지합니다.
② 당 사이트는 서비스를 특정범위로 분할하여 각 범위별로 이용가능시간을 별도로 지정할 수 있습니다. 다만
이 경우 그 내용을 공지합니다.
제 13 조 (홈페이지 저작권)
① NDSL에서 제공하는 모든 저작물의 저작권은 원저작자에게 있으며, KISTI는 복제/배포/전송권을 확보하고
있습니다.
② NDSL에서 제공하는 콘텐츠를 상업적 및 기타 영리목적으로 복제/배포/전송할 경우 사전에 KISTI의 허락을
받아야 합니다.
③ NDSL에서 제공하는 콘텐츠를 보도, 비평, 교육, 연구 등을 위하여 정당한 범위 안에서 공정한 관행에
합치되게 인용할 수 있습니다.
④ NDSL에서 제공하는 콘텐츠를 무단 복제, 전송, 배포 기타 저작권법에 위반되는 방법으로 이용할 경우
저작권법 제136조에 따라 5년 이하의 징역 또는 5천만 원 이하의 벌금에 처해질 수 있습니다.
제 14 조 (유료서비스)
① 당 사이트 및 협력기관이 정한 유료서비스(원문복사 등)는 별도로 정해진 바에 따르며, 변경사항은 시행 전에
당 사이트 홈페이지를 통하여 회원에게 공지합니다.
② 유료서비스를 이용하려는 회원은 정해진 요금체계에 따라 요금을 납부해야 합니다.
제 5 장 계약 해지 및 이용 제한
제 15 조 (계약 해지)
회원이 이용계약을 해지하고자 하는 때에는 [가입해지] 메뉴를 이용해 직접 해지해야 합니다.
제 16 조 (서비스 이용제한)
① 당 사이트는 회원이 서비스 이용내용에 있어서 본 약관 제 11조 내용을 위반하거나, 다음 각 호에 해당하는
경우 서비스 이용을 제한할 수 있습니다.
- 2년 이상 서비스를 이용한 적이 없는 경우
- 기타 정상적인 서비스 운영에 방해가 될 경우
② 상기 이용제한 규정에 따라 서비스를 이용하는 회원에게 서비스 이용에 대하여 별도 공지 없이 서비스 이용의
일시정지, 이용계약 해지 할 수 있습니다.
제 17 조 (전자우편주소 수집 금지)
회원은 전자우편주소 추출기 등을 이용하여 전자우편주소를 수집 또는 제3자에게 제공할 수 없습니다.
제 6 장 손해배상 및 기타사항
제 18 조 (손해배상)
당 사이트는 무료로 제공되는 서비스와 관련하여 회원에게 어떠한 손해가 발생하더라도 당 사이트가 고의 또는 과실로 인한 손해발생을 제외하고는 이에 대하여 책임을 부담하지 아니합니다.
제 19 조 (관할 법원)
서비스 이용으로 발생한 분쟁에 대해 소송이 제기되는 경우 민사 소송법상의 관할 법원에 제기합니다.
[부 칙]
1. (시행일) 이 약관은 2016년 9월 5일부터 적용되며, 종전 약관은 본 약관으로 대체되며, 개정된 약관의 적용일 이전 가입자도 개정된 약관의 적용을 받습니다.