A Philosophical Analysis of the Concept “Bal/Fa 發” in the Four-Seven Debate between Toegye and Gobong
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Four-Seven Debate was an attempt to explain human feelings in terms of their ontological basis. In this article, I intend to offer a better understanding of the debate by analyzing some of the conceptions that play a significant role in it. I choose this method for three reasons: this line of approach to the debate has been very rare though not completely new; the conclusion derived by such an approach has been inaccurate and indecisive; and the philosophical connotation of the word “bal 發” (fa in Chinese pronunciation) has not been well recognized. In what follows, I begin with analyzing and examining the three candidates for the meaning of the word “bal” in the context of the six Propositions introduced in the Four-Seven Debate concerning the relationship between the Four-Seven and i-gi (li-qi in Chinese pronunciation). In consequence, I arrive at the conclusion that there is no universal translation of bal that fits all the Propositions and also that Gobong’s final Proposition concerning the aforesaid relationship returns the Four-Seven Debate to the starting point.
Abstract
The Four-Seven Debate was an attempt to explain human feelings in terms of their ontological basis. In this article, I intend to offer a better understanding of the debate by analyzing some of the conceptions that play a significant role in it. I choose this method for three reasons: this line of approach to the debate has been very rare though not completely new; the conclusion derived by such an approach has been inaccurate and indecisive; and the philosophical connotation of the word “bal 發” (fa in Chinese pronunciation) has not been well recognized. In what follows, I begin with analyzing and examining the three candidates for the meaning of the word “bal” in the context of the six Propositions introduced in the Four-Seven Debate concerning the relationship between the Four-Seven and i-gi (li-qi in Chinese pronunciation). In consequence, I arrive at the conclusion that there is no universal translation of bal that fits all the Propositions and also that Gobong’s final Proposition concerning the aforesaid relationship returns the Four-Seven Debate to the starting point.
참고문헌 (32)
- "Cheonmyeong dosol 天命圖說(Discourse on the Diagram of the Mandate of Heaven)", ~
- "Gobongjip 高峯集(Collected Works of Gobong)", ~
- "Liji 禮記(Book of Rites)", ~
- "Mengzi 孟子(Book of Mencius)", ~
- "Toegyejip 退溪集(Collected Works of Toegye)", ~
- "Zhongyong 中庸(Doctrine of the Mean)", ~
- "Zhongyong zhangju 中庸章句(Commentaries on the Doctrine of the Mean)", ~
- "Zhuzi jizhu 朱子集註(Collected Annotations of Master Zhu)", ~
- "Zhuzi yulei 朱子語類(Classified Conversations of Master Zhu)", ~
- Chan, Wing-tsit, "A Sourcebook in Chinese Philosophy" (1963), Princeton University Press
- Cheng, Chung-ying, "A New Interpretation of Yi Toegye’s Four-Seven Theory in Lightof Mencius and Zhu Xi", Journal of Toegye Studies, 52, pp.99~118 (1986)
- Choi, Young-Jin, "the Historical Mode of Confucian Thought in the Joseon Dynasty" (2005), Sungkyunkwan University Press
- Chung, Edward Y. J., "The Korean Neo-Confucianism of Yi T’oegye and Yi Yulgok: A Reappraisal of the “Four-Seven Thesis” and Its Practical Implications for Self-Cultivation" (1995), State University of New York Press
- Fu, Charles Wei-Hsun, "Toegye’s Thesis on the Four Beginnings and Seven Feelings", Korea Journal, 25(7), pp.16~24 (1985)
- Jin, Xi-de, "The ‘Four-Seven Debate’ and the School of Principle in Korea", Philosophy East and West, 37(4), pp.347~360 (1987)
- Jeon, Ho-Geun, "The First Conflict for Korean Way of Improving Zhu Xi’s Theory of Mind and Nature, In Korean Philosophy Viewed through Controversies", pp.149~179 (1995), Yemun Seoweon
- 정상봉, "주희철학과 한국사칠논변", 동서철학연구, 29(29), pp.207~224 (2003), 한국동서철학회
- Kalton, Michael C., "The Four-Seven Debate: An Annotated Translation of the Most Famous Controversy in Korean Neo-Confucian Thought" (1994), State University of New York Press
- Kim, Ki-Hyun, "Toegye’s Four-Seven Theory, In The Four-Seven Debate", pp.49~68 (1992), Seogwangsa
- 리기용, "‘사칠리기논변’ 논고", 동서철학연구, 53(53), pp.355~379 (2009), 한국동서철학회
- Legge, James, "The Chinese Classics" (1970), Hong Kong University Press
- Nam, Ji-Man, "The Semantic Change of the “Arousal of Ki” in Gobong Ki Dae-seung’s Four-Seven Theory", Confucian Studies, 14, pp.5~24 (2007)
- Sadan Chiljeong Nonjaeng Yeongutim (SCNY), "The Four-Seven Debate between Toegye and Gobong and between Yulgok and Ugye" (2008), Korean Studies Information Co., Ltd
- Mingran Tan, "An Investigation and Assessment of Yi Toegye’Li-Qi Dualism", Korea Journal, 46(2), pp.155~183 (2006), 유네스코한국위원회
- Tu, Wei-ming, "(Toegye’s Creative Interpretation of Zhu Xi’s Philosophy of Principle", Journal of Toegye Studies, 35, pp.35~57 (1982)
- Tu, Wei-ming, "Yi Toegye’s Perception of Human Nature: A Preliminary Inquiry into the Four-Seven Debate in Korean Neo-Confucianism, In The Rise of Neo-Confucianism in Korea", pp.261~282 (1985), Columbia University Press
- Yoo, Weon-ki, "The Hylomorphism of Aristotle and T’oegye", Journal of East Asian Social Thoughts, 11, pp.207~233 (2005)
- 유원기, "조선 성리학의 논리적 특성", 동서철학연구, 53(53), pp.45~68 (2009), 한국동서철학회
- 유원기, "주희 미발론에 있어서 미발의 ‘주체’와 ‘성격’", 철학논총, 56(2), pp.255~275 (2009), 새한철학회
- Yoon, Sa-Soon, "Toegye’s View of Human Nature as Fundamentally Good", Korea Journal, 25(7), pp.4~15 (1985)
- Yoon, Sa-Soon, "Toegye’s View of Human Nature as Fundamentally Good", Journal of Toegye Studies, 45, pp.27~46 (1985)
- Yoon, Sa-Soon, "A Contemporary Interpretation of Toegye’s Philosophy of I and Gi", Journal of Toegye Studies, 110, pp.119~144 (2001)