중국과 한국사회에서 非合理的인 君臣倫理의 출현과 유가철학의 역할

Abstract

It is an undeniable truth that the San-Gang, along with the Wu-Lun, was the core of the ethics of Confucianism. However, in order to determine that San-Gang is at the core of the ethics of the philosophy of Confucianism, there must first be a discussion on what to designate as the core index of Confucianism. In doing so, various factors including the times and significant persons must be included. In this study, taking the various issues of significant persons and the historical setting into consideration, I chose the philosophy of Confucius and Meng Zi as the index. Whilst conducting this study, I discovered a few points of inquiry which were of importance. The contents of which are as follows. First, the sources of the San-Gang and Wu-Lun are clearly different. Why, then, do we connect the two terms as if one and utilize it as such in spite of this fact? Second, the philosophy of Confucianism began in the time of war, the age of Confucius, Meng Zi, and Xun Zi. Whereas Wu-Lun began with Confucius and Xun Zi, San-Gang began with Fa-Jia(Han Fei Zi), and not Confucius, Meng Zi, or Xun Zi. Then why is San-Gang considered product of Confucianism and not Fa-Jia? Third, there were many levels involved in San-Gang becoming the basic ethical order of Concucianism. The first is Han Chao, then Song Chao, and though there was criticism from ideologists of the philosophy of enlightenment towards the middle and end of the Ming dynasty but becomes the central code of ethics again at the beginning of Qing. External factors must have affected this such positioning of the San-Gang to some extent. What are those external factors? Fourth, in both China and Korea, the San-Gang were invariable teachings that were the standard for maintaining social order. However, in the modern society the two nations had very different approaches in terms of evaluating the values, criticizing and accepting the San-Gang. Whereas China discarded the San-Gang through self reflective contemplation and criticism, Korea still recognizes them as a pillar of traditional ethics and holds on to them. I searched the root causes for this phenomenon in the inner spirit as well as the outer environment. These issues will be discussed in full in this article. However, for such issues to be resolved, an accurate understanding of the transition process that the San-Gang, including the teaching stating that the sovereign is the foundation of the subject, must be established in advance. Therefore, I will establish the origins of the teaching stating that the sovereign is the foundation of the subject by looking at two different types of ethics between sovereign and subject found in Xien Qin Chinese philosophy. Next I will explain the establishment, employment, introspection, and criticism of the teaching stating that the sovereign is the foundation of the subject in Chinese history, and finally speak on the establishment of said teaching in Korea and the role played by Confucianism adding the general thoughts of modern Koreans on the matter based on several subject matters.