여헌 장현광과 성호 이익의 성리설 비교 연구 ---사단칠정론과 인심도심론을 중심으로 ----

Abstract

In his Sadan Chiljeong Theory (four–seven debate), Jang Hyeon‐gwang (Yeoheon; 1554‐1637) stated that, because Sadan and Chiljeong are emotion (情) manifested from human nature (性), not only Sadan but Chiljeong must issue from principle.(理發) This is different from Toigye’s view that Sadan should be that principle issues and material force follow while Chiljeong should be that material force issue and principle mounts it, and from Yulgok’s view that both Sadan and Chiljeong should be that material force issue and principle mounts it. In addition, in distinguishing between morality and immorality, Yeoheon did not separated Sadan from Chiljeong but applied the public and the private derived from Insim Dosim (the mind of Way and human mind) Theory only to Chiljeong and suggested new standards, namely, public Chiljeong(公七情) and private Chiljeong(私七情). Like Jang Hyeon‐gwang, Yi Ik (Seongho; 1681‐1763) also argued that not only Sadan but also Chiljeong should issue from principle. In order to distinguish Sadan from Chiljeong strictly, however, he concentrated on the concept of corporal force (形氣) causing private wills and considered Sadan as principle issuance without the medium of corporal force Chiljeong as principle issue with the medium of corporal force. He also criticized Yeoheon for not being clear in this point. In addition, Seongho once established a new theory called ‘Jungbal(重跋)’ as an attempt to set new criteria of good and evil with the standard of the public and the private, dismissing the established frame of Sadan and Chiljeong. Seongho renounced the theory of Jungbal but the theory was handed down to Yi Byeong‐hyu, Kwon Cheol‐sin and Lee Gi‐yang and reached Choeong Yag‐yong. The present researcher discussed and compared Yeoheon’s and Seongho’s theories from the viewpoint of the history of philosophy.