17세기말 朴世采와 鄭齊斗의 양명학논변

Abstract

In the late 17th Century, it was the climax of debates on the Yang-ming School that Park, Sechae who criticized the Yang-ming School argued Jeong, Jedu who supported it. Park, Sechae criticized three issues of the Yang-ming School which were notions in the Ancient Text Great Learning(古本大學), the study of things and nature(格物), and the interpretation of self-actualization(致良知). Although they tried to understand the other party sincerely, they did not find the mutual agreement and only showed differences between the Confucianism and the Yang-ming School. However, as the difference has brought into relief, so their arguments have been delicate. After all, their arguments had the important meaning in that they proved differences of two schools’ position and logic. It was valuable results that they examined references of ‘the study of things and nature’(格物) and ‘self-actualization’(致良知) and analysed the problem owing to differences of method. And, their arguments showed differences that the Confucianism and the Yang-ming School recognized Buddhism and Taoism differently. For example, Park, Sechae criticized the Yang-ming School in that it was a kind of Taoism and Zen. But, Jeong, Jedu refuted Park’s argument, because the Yang-ming School was different from Buddhism and Taoism.