인위(유위)의 정치에 대한 노자의 비판

Abstract

This paper examines Lao Tzu's critique of the politics of action and inaction. The collapse of the stable slave-based feudal system in the Western Zhou caused great social turmoil, but another way to look at it is that the emperors were engaged in a unifying war to establish a centralized, unified state. While they developed industries to win the war, the war took a toll in terms of human lives and economic destruction, leaving the people in dire straits. The typical solutions to this social chaos and disorder were the establishment of the humanistic ethical code of the Confucians and the rule of law of the Legalists, who espoused extreme humanism. However, Lao Tzu criticized these solutions as creating problems such as oppression, bondage, restraint, interference, domination, and control over the lives of individuals. The gist of Lao Tzu's criticism is that politics based on the principles of humanism, such as Confucianism and legalism, are unnatural, artificial, and contingent, and therefore cannot be a fundamental solution. The following section of this paper has been devoted to the criticism of the improper ruling behavior of actual rulers. The actual politics of the tyrannical rulers of the time is also an artificial or contingent politics. Their theories and governing behaviors put yokes on people's minds and shackles on their hands and feet, restraining their freedom. Therefore, the people did not trust the rulers, whom Lao Tzu criticized. Lao Tzu also criticized rulers for their economic plunder, irrational stubbornness and arrogance, boasting, and fake learning and skill. Lao Tzu's criticism of the politics of reality is a prerequisite for the politics of the ideal of Inaction.