조선후기 호론(湖論)과 낙론(洛論)의 논쟁과 교유

Abstract

The Horak debate occurred among scholars from the Ho School located in Chungcheong Province and the Rak School located in the metropolitan area. Researchers of Korean philosophy consider it to be one of the two most important debates in Joseon neo-Confucianism, along with the Four-Seven Debate. One reason why the Horak Debate has not received the attention that the Four-Seven Debate has is the preconceived notion that the Horak Debate was driven by political and partisan conflicts. We cannot categorize the Horak Debate as a “purely academic debate without partisan interests,” but it is clear that the Horak Debate addressed issues of philosophical importance equal to the Four-Seven Debate. The depth and breadth of the topics covered in the debate suggest that the Horak Debate was more academically advanced and sophisticated than the Four-Seven Debate. However, the significance of the Horak debate can only be appreciated once a sufficient amount of research has been conducted. To do so, it will be necessary to set aside some of the preconceived notions that it was an idle debate on issues of insignificant academic ideas, or that it was a political power conflict disguised as a philosophical debate. In my view, envisioning the Horak controversy merely as a binary opposition reinforces these preconceptions. Conversely, examining the various forms of interactions among the Horak scholars from both sides without favoring conflict or friendship can provide a basis for a new attempt to challenge these preconceptions and reassess the significance of the debate. To provide such a foundation, this article will examine the aspects of friendship among the Horak scholars and focus on cases that have received less attention. Prior to examining these cases, I will analyze the philosophical implications of the Horak controversy to reassess the weight and seriousness of the debate. The philosophical implications of the Horak controversy are discussed first, as the ultimate goal of the paper is to emphasize the need for a proper re-evaluation of the debate. To do so, it will be necessary to set aside some of the preconceived notions that it was an idle debate on issues of insignificant academic ideas, or that it was a political power conflict disguised as a philosophical debate. Therefore, in Chapter 2, I first outline the core issues of the Horak controversy and its philosophical significance. Chapter 3 examines the circumstances that led to its intensification, and Chapter 4 presents examples of socialization and interaction among the Horak scholars who participated in this conflict. Ultimately, this article aims to discover and present new examples that will stimulate further research on the Horak debate.