맹자와 고자의 대화 연구

Abstract

This study is intended to explore the metaphors and arguments of Mencius(孟子) and Gaozi(告子) to reveal the concept of human nature[人性論] that they were aiming for. As noted, Mencius argued for inherent nature of morality and Gaozi stood on the other. However, it is hard to say that their metaphors and arguments were accurate. In the first chapter of the 「Gaozi」pt.1, Gaozi said that making humanity and rightness[仁義] from human nature[人性] is the same as making samtaegi[桮棬: willow-basket] from a goribeodeul[杞柳; winnow willow]. However, Gaozi does not show a clear subject in the process of making humanity and rightness and making samtaegi. In other words, it is unclear whether making the samtaegi is an objective behavior, but creating humanity and rightness is also an objective behavior independent of moral agent. If the metaphors of Gaozi is accepted as it is, it can be seen that human moral acts are only possible through external motives and practices. However, the argument of Mencius who pointed out this did not distinguish the nature of the goribeodeul from the goribeodeul itself, which weaken the consistency of the argument. In chapter 2, compared personality to rapid currents flowing as human intentions, denying the distinction between good and bad. This argument of Mencius also results in a denial of human moral identity. If the rapids flow as intended and the absence of distinction between good and bad are the same, it implies that human good and bad can also be differentiated by external manipulation. This, like the arguments in the previous chapter, implies distrust of human moral identity. This is also inconsistent with Chapter 1's claim to that humanity and rightness are made from human nature by denying the distinction between good and bad. However, Mencius commits a kind of naturalistic fallacy by arguing that 'water flows downward is like the goodness of personality.‘ In Chapter 3, Gaozi argues for '生之謂性’ and Mencius's counterargument shows the mistake of confusing accidental and intrinsic attributes. In Chapter 4, Gaozi and Mencius disagree over fact and value judgments. This difference in perception comes from the difference between the two people's views on human nature.