전우의 性師心弟說에 대한 한주학파와 간재학파 간의 논쟁 일고

Abstract

This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of the debate between the Hanju School in Yeongnam(嶺南) and the Gangae(艮齋) School in Honam regarding the theory of sincerity proposed by Ganje Jeon Woo田愚, which was established in the early Japanese colonial period. Gangae criticized Hanju(寒洲) Lee Jin-sang's(李震相) theory and presented his own theory of Sincerity. In response to the criticisms from the Hanju School, the Gangae School was also engaged in counter-critique, leading to a prolonged debate between the scholars between the Yeongnam and Honam regions. Previous studies on Yikisimseong theory including theories like Simjeokli(心卽理) and Sincerity have been extensively investigated, which were primarily from the analytical perspective and identified distinctive features and differences in their arguments, yielding valuable research outcomes. This paper focuses on the debate between the Hanju and Gangae School, the two major lineages of late Joseon Neo-Confucianism, in the context of the theory of sincerity. It closely examines the significance and perspectives of the philosophical debate conducted by two representative schools in their respective regions amidst the national crisis. It also explores the common perspective driven by academic exchange and fusion between the Ganje with Nosa(蘆沙) school and Hanju firmly stemmed in Right-side Geynsang region as Honam Confucianism. Ultimately, the paper intended to see the possibility of positive academic communication and unification between two schools, hidden behind the confrontational aspects of the debate. First and foremost, attention is drawn to the fact that both schools fundamentally share the philosophical aim of governing human minds to restore their innate nature and fulfill heavenly mandates.In terms of admitting that their theories indeed adapted different approaches but aimed at a identical objective,this commonality allows for a more constructive debate with the possibility of achieving desirable outcomes. Historically, Neo-Confucianism has been an excellent philosophy and educational system, and it played a significant role in shaping society. However, the debates surrounding it tended to lack convergence, were divisive, and often followed partisan lines. The debate between these two schools revealed similar feature in this context, where it appears to have originated from concerns within each school about the potential impact of the other school's theory on their core doctrines. The debate provoked from two schools regarding Sincerity as most prominent part in Simseong theory became a representative academic discussion enough to highlight and adorne the pinnacle of Confucian scholarship in Joseon, which had been passed down for centuries, while the debate fell short of consolidating national consciousness during unprecedented crises and historical transitions. Furthermore, despite the apparent sharp opposition between the two doctrines, there were many intersections in their similar ideologies, indicating that there was not necessarily complete philosophical opposition between the two schools, but rather a certain degree of intellectual fusion. However, beyond purely academic debates, there were also elements of factional rivalry and political emotions at play to some extent, whichmay have lead to the debates between the two schools remaining unresolved without no noticeable fusion. Nonetheless, it's worth noting that the debate mainly aimed at academic scrutiny and subseqeuntly confirmed that, throughout such debate process, there were no personal attacks or excessive criticisms beyond scholarly exploration.