四七論辨에서 中節의 의미와 善의 근거

Abstract

This paper analyses Four-Seven Debates argued by Joseon Confucianists and approaches the each significances of Goodness of them. According to this paper, There were two opinions in Four-Seven Debates, one was to absolutize Four Beginnings(四端) and the other was to relativize them, the former inevitably bought about dualization of Goodness, but the latter could brought down the value of Goodness. This paper, first, researches Toegye's argument and looks into Gobong and Yulgok's criticism against Toegye. Toegye tried to absolutize Four Beginnings, but caused dualization of Goodness in turn. Gobong and Yulgok condemned his dualization of Goodness and tried to unify of Goodness. And second, this paper analyses Nongam's theory of Four-Seven Debates and Namdang's criticism against Nongam. According to this paper, Nongam tried to compromise Toegye with Yulgok. Nongam set up monism of Four-Seven in the ontological field, but suggested the dualism of Four-Seven in the ethical field. It could be criticised as philosophical contradiction. Namdang criticised this point and suggested new moral emotion theory. It was to destruct Four-Seven frame and to hold on new standard of moral emotion, that is, appropriateness(中節)