지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
1.
The author read many books on Jooja and Toigye which is very rare in our literary cycle. He wrote a thesis on Lee Jin-Sang’s Sungri theory based on my reading. This book is designed to supplement the thesis and 『Hanjuhaengrok』 was translated and attached to it as an appendix. Our readers have opportunities to look at his theories in detail and his daily life shown to the eyes of his son. Though he began to study his theory, He is pleased with presenting my impressions from the examination.
2.
Hanju Lee Jin-Sang’s status in Joseon Confucianism in the 19th century is unique. He thought that there are evil practices in understanding the nature of Sim(心) based on Ki(氣) in Kiho Scholastic Cycle and to overcome the evil practices, he explained the meaning of Leeki(理氣) and Sim in various aspects and presented a proposition titled ‘Sim-Jeuk-Ri(心卽理)’ as a new reflective alternative. However, his reflection was not accepted positively by the junior scholars of Toigye and rather it was criticized as it repeated Yangmyeong’s terms. Thought it was defended by Gwak Jong-Seok, the doubt against Hanju’s theory did not disappear. Previous studies focused on finding out history of the criticism imposed on Hanju rather than whether his ideas are proper themselves. Andthe studies to look at the historical context objectively made the criticism justified.
3.
The author was careful in showing the historic context of the criticism on Hanju, but he paid more attention to identifying what proper values his theory has. That is, he compared Jooja’s theory with Toigye’s to look at whether Hanju’s ideas show the intent of the two confucian scholars dearly and properly. Ahead of perspective of the previous studies focusing on examination of historical context, he looks at original justification of Hanju’s theories, which progresses the horizon of Hanju’s theories. As a result of the examination, it is judged that he progressed another step, carefully preventing Hanju’s ideas from being biased toward to theories of Toigye. In this respect, the author repositioned his status, suggesting that Hanju is on the peak of Korean Confucianism in theoretical progress of Confucianism.(page 197). This is a new perspective which is different from that of previous studies.
The author read many books on Jooja and Toigye which is very rare in our literary cycle. He wrote a thesis on Lee Jin-Sang’s Sungri theory based on my reading. This book is designed to supplement the thesis and 『Hanjuhaengrok』 was translated and attached to it as an appendix. Our readers have opportunities to look at his theories in detail and his daily life shown to the eyes of his son. Though he began to study his theory, He is pleased with presenting my impressions from the examination.
2.
Hanju Lee Jin-Sang’s status in Joseon Confucianism in the 19th century is unique. He thought that there are evil practices in understanding the nature of Sim(心) based on Ki(氣) in Kiho Scholastic Cycle and to overcome the evil practices, he explained the meaning of Leeki(理氣) and Sim in various aspects and presented a proposition titled ‘Sim-Jeuk-Ri(心卽理)’ as a new reflective alternative. However, his reflection was not accepted positively by the junior scholars of Toigye and rather it was criticized as it repeated Yangmyeong’s terms. Thought it was defended by Gwak Jong-Seok, the doubt against Hanju’s theory did not disappear. Previous studies focused on finding out history of the criticism imposed on Hanju rather than whether his ideas are proper themselves. Andthe studies to look at the historical context objectively made the criticism justified.
3.
The author was careful in showing the historic context of the criticism on Hanju, but he paid more attention to identifying what proper values his theory has. That is, he compared Jooja’s theory with Toigye’s to look at whether Hanju’s ideas show the intent of the two confucian scholars dearly and properly. Ahead of perspective of the previous studies focusing on examination of historical context, he looks at original justification of Hanju’s theories, which progresses the horizon of Hanju’s theories. As a result of the examination, it is judged that he progressed another step, carefully preventing Hanju’s ideas from being biased toward to theories of Toigye. In this respect, the author repositioned his status, suggesting that Hanju is on the peak of Korean Confucianism in theoretical progress of Confucianism.(page 197). This is a new perspective which is different from that of previous studies.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
한주학파의 성리학에 대한 심재 조긍섭의 비판
한국학논집
2018 .03
-
寒洲 李震相의 철학사상과 그 현실적 구현 : 한주학파의 성격 규명과 관련하여
한국학논집
2010 .06
-
寒洲 李震相의 詩文學 硏究
대동문화연구
2009 .01
-
면우 곽종석의 성리설 - 한주 성리설의 계승을 중심으로
南冥學硏究
2009 .01
-
주자.퇴계의 「이일」에 대한 해석
철학연구
1980 .10
-
眞巖 李炳憲의 現實認識과 儒敎復原論
南冥學硏究
2006 .01
-
立巖 南廷瑀의 交遊關係와 學問世界
南冥學硏究
2013 .01
-
19세기 심설논쟁의 발단양상에 관한 연구 - 한주 이진상과 만구 이종기의 서신 내용을 중심으로
한국철학논집
2018 .01
-
퇴계철학의 인간학적 이해 : 퇴계 리기론 중에 리의 능동성 문제를 중심으로(上)
철학논총
2000 .07
-
주문팔현과 퇴계학자들의 토론에서 드러나는한주학의 특징
한국철학논집
2018 .01
-
Case theory
영어영문학
1987 .10
-
寒洲 李震相의 理學的 ‘心卽理說’ 攷察
한국학논집
2015 .09
-
『퇴계언행록』의 형성과정과 제자들의 ‘퇴계’ 인식
퇴계학논집
2015 .01
-
심산 김창숙의『謹次三峰書堂十二詠』연구 : 한주 이진상의 사상에 입각한 이해
국어교육연구
2012 .08
-
한주학파 유교종교화론의 본질과 공자교운동
철학논총
2006 .10
-
한계 이승희의 공자교운동과 유교개혁론 문제
철학논총
2004 .10
-
勿川 金鎭祜의 학문성향과 性理說-寒洲說 수용과 寒洲說과의 同異-
南冥學硏究
2006 .01
-
한주학파(寒洲學派)와 간재학파(艮齋學派)의 주재설(主宰說) 논쟁과 그 평가
동양철학
2004 .01
-
寒洲 李震相과 退溪定說
한국인물사연구
2004 .09
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-051-000537879