본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

이인상(李麟祥)·김근행(金謹行)의 호사강학(湖社講學)에 대한 연구

A Study on the “Hosa Academic Group” of Lee In-sang and Kim Keun-haeng

김수진
규장각한국학연구원 (Kyujanggak Institute for Korean Studies)|2013.03|한국문화|제61호|pp. 157-177|DOI 10.22943/han.2013..61.006

0

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

Lee In-sang호락논쟁(湖洛論爭)이인상(李麟祥)김근행(金謹行)호사(湖社)서호사(西湖社)NeunghogwanYongjaeKim Keun-haengHosaSeohosaHorak debate
주제분류기타인문학

초록

The present paper contemplates the academic group Hosa(湖社), which was formed around the two main scholars, Neunghogwan(凌壺觀) Lee In-sang(李麟祥, 1710-1760) and Yongjae(庸齋) Kim Keun-haeng(金謹行, 1713-1784). This academic group, called “Hosa”(湖社) or “Seohosa”(西湖社), has not yet been introduced of its existence in academic circles. This paper therefore examines the background of its establishment, the composition of its members, and the debate between Lee In-sang and Kim Keun-haeng, the two pillars of the group. The present manuscript focused on the following two points in the examination of Hosa. First, it was consequential to concretely and specifically denote the significance of this group within the study of Lee In-sang. Secondly, it was important to shed light on how the establishment of Hosa and the flow of the debate connected with the history of ideas during the late Chosǒn period. For the former task, this paper states that the Hosa academic group clearly shows Lee In-sang’s whereabouts in his thirties, his relationship with friends and his personal opinion and perspective on the theory of mind and human nature. As for the latter one, this paper points out the intricate connection between the debate that opposed Lee In-sang and Kim Keun-haeng and the Horak debate(湖洛論爭). Examining Lee In-sang’s philosophical reasoning and his literary world based on the results of this study will be the objective and goal of my future tasks.

Abstract

The present paper contemplates the academic group Hosa(湖社), which was formed around the two main scholars, Neunghogwan(凌壺觀) Lee In-sang(李麟祥, 1710-1760) and Yongjae(庸齋) Kim Keun-haeng(金謹行, 1713-1784). This academic group, called “Hosa”(湖社) or “Seohosa”(西湖社), has not yet been introduced of its existence in academic circles. This paper therefore examines the background of its establishment, the composition of its members, and the debate between Lee In-sang and Kim Keun-haeng, the two pillars of the group. The present manuscript focused on the following two points in the examination of Hosa. First, it was consequential to concretely and specifically denote the significance of this group within the study of Lee In-sang. Secondly, it was important to shed light on how the establishment of Hosa and the flow of the debate connected with the history of ideas during the late Chosǒn period. For the former task, this paper states that the Hosa academic group clearly shows Lee In-sang’s whereabouts in his thirties, his relationship with friends and his personal opinion and perspective on the theory of mind and human nature. As for the latter one, this paper points out the intricate connection between the debate that opposed Lee In-sang and Kim Keun-haeng and the Horak debate(湖洛論爭). Examining Lee In-sang’s philosophical reasoning and his literary world based on the results of this study will be the objective and goal of my future tasks.

참고문헌 (38)

  1. 李麟祥, "西湖社約序 , In 凌壺集 卷3", pp.225~515
  2. 金謹行, "西湖社式, 湖社講義, In 庸齋集 卷12", pp.416~448, 湖社講義
  3. 이종묵, "16세기 한강에서의 宴會와 詩會", 한국시가연구, 19, pp.298~ (2001)
  4. 麟祥, "洪子祖東哀辭, In 凌壺集 卷4", pp.537~
  5. 이태호, "그림으로 본 옛 서울", pp.120~156 (1995), 서울학연구소
  6. 李縡, "進士金公墓誌, In 陶菴集 卷44", pp.411~
  7. 沈潮, "靜坐窩集年譜, 靜坐窩集", pp.366~
  8. 김수진, "능호관 이인상 문학 연구", 박사, 국어국문학과 국문학전공, pp.2012
  9. 한글학회, "한국땅이름큰사전 하", pp.6032~ (1991)
  10. 沈潮, "靜坐窩集年譜, 靜坐窩集", pp.366~
  11. 安東金氏大同譜刊行委員會, "安東金氏世譜 卷5", pp.480~ (1982)
  12. "承政院日記", ~
  13. 南陽洪氏南陽君派大宗中會, "南陽洪氏南陽君派世譜 卷5", pp.787~792 (2003)
  14. "祭洪祖東箕海文, 庸齋集 卷14", 505~
  15. 靑松沈氏大同世譜刊行委員會, "靑松沈氏大同世譜 卷1", 214~ (2000)
  16. 沈潮, "祭沈聖游文, In 靜坐窩集 卷12", pp.323~324
  17. 完山李氏密城君派宗親會, "完山李氏密城君派世譜卷1", 223~ (1983)
  18. 韓元震, "答安士定, In 南塘集卷20", pp.455~
  19. 安東金氏大同譜刊行委員會, "安東金氏世譜 卷5", 480~484 (1982)
  20. 沈潮, "｢重陽翌日, 携聖游ˎ士登, 訪杏湖. 與主人兄弟, 月夜泛舟, 沿洄上下, 甚樂事也. 安士定亦來會, In 靜坐窩集 卷1", pp.79~
  21. 이규경, "동국도학전통도 변증설" (1981)
  22. "국역분류 오주연문장전산고", ~
  23. 韓元震, "與金常夫, In 南塘集 卷21", pp.474~
  24. 沈潮, "內篇, In 靜坐窩集 卷13", pp.336~
  25. 조성산, "조선후기 낙론계 학풍의 형성과 전개", pp.283~ (2007), 지식산업사
  26. 姜斅錫, "典故大方 卷3, In 文人錄", pp.214~ (1975), 아세아문화사
  27. 김수진, "家藏本 『雷象觀藁』 小考", 한국문화, (55), pp.65~86 (2011), 규장각한국학연구원
  28. "答李元靈論心純善書, 庸齋集 卷7", ~
  29. 韓元震, "答沈信夫, In 南塘集 卷14", pp.336~
  30. 최영진, "南塘", 巍巖 未發論辨의 再檢討 ― 退溪, 동양철학, pp.2008, (29)[DOI]
  31. 韓元震, "與金常夫, In 南塘集卷21", pp.474~
  32. 문석윤, "湖洛論爭 형성과 전개", pp.295~298 (2006), 동과서
  33. 이남영, "호락논쟁의 철학사적 의의", 제2회 동양문화국제학술회의논문집, pp.145~ (1980), 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원
  34. 한국사상사연구회, "인성물성론", pp.31~32 (1994), 한길사
  35. 朝鮮後期 人性·物性 論爭의 硏究, "이애희", 고려대학교 민족문화연구원, 247~250 (2004)
  36. 박희병, "이인상(李麟祥) <검선도>(劒僊圖)의 재해석", 국문학연구, (26), pp.33~55 (2012), 국문학회
  37. 이경구, "湖洛論爭을 통해 본 철학논쟁의 사회정치적 의미", 韓國思想史學, 26, pp.202~ (2006)
  38. 김준석, "朝鮮後期 政治思想史 硏究", pp.354~362 (2003), 지식산업사

관련 논문AI추천

한말 성리학계의 心說 論辯과 그 道德(敎育)論的 含意박학래인문과학연구소 · 인문과학연구논총2012 · 제33호Philosophical Implications of the Discussion of Mibal in the Horak Debate of the Late Joseon Period이천승한국학중앙연구원 · Korea Journal2011 · 제51권 제1호渼湖 金元行의 性理說 硏究 - 18세기 중반 洛論의 심성론에 유의하여박학래민족문화연구원 · 민족문화연구2016 · 제71호河西 金麟厚 先生의 生涯와 交遊 樣相김동하한국시가문화학회 · 한국시가문화연구2008 · 제21호Discursive Structures and Cultural Features of Nak-ron Thought in Late Joseon Korea조성산한국학중앙연구원 · Korea Journal2011 · 제51권 제1호조선후기 호론(湖論)과 낙론(洛論)의 논쟁과 교유신상후한국학중앙연구원 · 한국학2023 · 제46권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (12건)

함안 성산산성 221호 목간의 해독이승재pp. 3-32『삼한시귀감』(三韓詩龜鑑) 소재(所載) 최해(崔瀣)의 평점비평 연구김대중pp. 33-67고려 按察使의 연원과 ‘五道按察使’의 성립윤경진pp. 69-101謙齋 朴聖源의 禮學과 『禮疑類輯』의 성격김윤정pp. 103-131조선후기 지식인들의 南明王朝 인식우경섭pp. 133-155
원문 보기