조선 후기 경학연구의 회고와 과제

Abstract

This paper has pointed out the problems of classical studies research in South Korea through reflection, explored its future directions, and discussed its viewpoints and tasks from the perspective of a researcher. This study first pointed out the problems arising from the lack of clear categories of interpretation in the definition of classical studies and the category of Confucian scriptures by reviewing previous studies, and provided the researcher’s viewpoint to establish the categories of Confucian scriptures and their interpretation. This study then examined the research achievements of classical studies in general by reviewing previous studies and found that the fields of philosophy and literature took the lead in classical studies research in the nation. Most of these research efforts focused on classical scholars from the second half of the Joseon Dynasty, including those who broke away from Zhu Xi studies, such as Jeong Yak-yong, Yun Hyu, and Yi Ik, or those who showed a tendency toward Silhak (Practical Learning). A single scholar of the era studied many different scriptures extensively. Based on this, the study pointed out the following problems: 1) Research efforts were biased toward the scholars of the second half of the Joseon Dynasty and concentrated on the classical studies of Jeong Yak-yong. 2) They tried to draw a conclusion quickly in the direction of "semi-Zhu Xi studies," "post-Zhu Xi studies," and "post-Neo-Confucianism," while the theories of the classical scholars were not discussed in depth. 3) They did not accumulate the changing patterns through the scriptures and focused research on certain classical scholars. 4) They tried to find out the classical world of a single classical scholar in general as their research focused on certain classical scholars. 5) There was no specialized study of scriptures with very little research on specific scriptures. 6) They did not share their research results and developed their points only from the viewpoint of their respective fields, failing to establish a universal viewpoint. Pointing out these problems, the study proposed two major directions for future research in classical studies. One is to critically examine the characteristics and traditions of classical scholars who tried to accept, inherit, and develop Zhu Xi's theories. The other is to confirm Zhu Xi's established theories by sorting out public opinions, and to shed light on the characteristics and significance of scholars who tried to distinguish his theories from those of later generations in terms of classical studies. The study also provided the investigator’s viewpoints for the research of classical studies in South Korea: 1) There is a need to intensify the research of scriptures by specialized researchers of each scripture. 2) There is a need to find the characteristics of each theory in the streams of Chinese and Korean classical studies. 3) It is necessary to find out the significance of a scholar's characteristic theory in the field of classical studies. 4) It is necessary to develop a universal standpoint by exchanging research results among related academic fields instead of limiting the scope to the approaches or interpretative perspectives of a scholar's field. This study proposed the following research tasks for classical studies in South Korea: 1) an examination of the patterns of negotiation with classical studies in East Asia; 2) an examination of the changes in the systems and editions of scriptures; and 3) an examination of the changes in the trends of interpretation. Finally, the study suggested that it is time to explore the distinction of the Korean history of classical studies by period from the perspective of the history of classical studies.