동아시아 공덕ㆍ사덕 담론과 근대 주체 기획

Abstract

One of the indicators revealing the conceptual change of morality in the modern transition period was the discourse on public and private virtues (公德, 私德). Historically, the division of the semantic range of virtue between public and private spheres appeared in the late 19th century. Traditionally, private virtue referred to personal attachment and favor, while public virtue meant the virtue and good deeds of an individual. Liang Qichao’s New People exercised a far-reaching influence on the modern public and private virtue discourse in Korea. It seems that Liang’s public virtue was inspired by the public virtue promotion movement in Meiji Japan which had been led by its government. Japan stressed public virtue in order to strengthen its emperor system and foster loyal people. Liang thought that the Chinese Confucianism had been carried away by private virtue, lacking public virtue, and considered patriotism as key to the spirit that new people should have. Although admitting later that unique Chinese culture could be highly useful and private virtue could provide the foundation of public virtue, he never abandoned the moral utility perspective that should work for national interests. In the Great Han Korea period, newspapers and journals accepted this idea, and argued that the lack of public virtue was an obstacle to modern national building. Public virtue referred to national spirit beyond the personal sphere, which the high ego (大我) or new people must carry. Public virtue was coupled with the rise of ‘society’, the public sphere in the space between individual, family, and nation, while the East Asian discourse on public virtue in the early 20th century tended to converge on the ideas of people and nation. Passing through the modern public and private virtue discourse, morality became confined into exclusive patriotism within a nation.