退溪와 高峯의 四七論辨을 통해본 讀書法 論爭

Abstract

Toegye and Gobong continued their argument on the Sachilnonbyeon for over 8 years. As Gobong questioned Toegye‘s Liqi-Ontological interpretation of Sadanchiljung, their argument became a fierce one. Thus, it may safely be said that this argument is 'Sachil argument'. As they themselves wanted to have advantage over the Sachil argument, they interpreted Jungyong and Sadanchiljungron of Maengja in their own perspective. It resulted that Sachil argument fell under the category of a method of reading. In the course of the argument, the two scholars showed obvious difference in opinion about aim of reading, attitude of reader, and function of reading. Toegye, considering Sadanchiljung as a matter of consistency between Sodangyun and Soyiyun, focused on 'to know the principle'. On the other hand, Gobong, considering Sadanchiljung as things of Sodangyun, focused on 'to know the things'. As Toegye thought that reading is needed to find out 'what is supposed to be', he is interested in the indispensible aspect of reading. As Gobong thought that reading is needed to find out 'what is to be', he is interested in the existential aspect of reading. This argument of a method of reading owes greatly a debate culture of the Sachilnonbyeon. The influences of the debate culture of the Sachilnonbyeon on the argument of a method of reading are two; to present a theoretical background for the types of a method of reading, to give the aesthetic features for the types of method of reading.