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
Seol Seon was a renowned Chinese scholar and philosopher in the early Ming period. He was first introduced to the Joseon circle of academy in the 16th century, and at the time was received very well. His works were warmly embraced, and considered to be inspiring in the eyes of the Joseon scholars. But as time went on, and especially during the latter half of the 17th century, different opinions surfaced as well.
Since the beginning of the 16th century, and through the early half of the 17th century, Seol Seon was cited as the prime example of ‘willingly giving up one’s privilege to avoid serving the wrong regime,’ and was considered as a role model in that regard. His academic achievements were also praised, as he was considered as a true successor of the Sung period Neo-Confucianism because he argued that the true human nature could and should be restored through a series of training and character-building exercise.
Entering the latter half of the 17th century, however, the Joseon academic circle’s evaluation of Seol Seon began to change, and displayed a completely different attitude. In terms of loyalty the unwavering pursuit of “Moral obligation (as a vassal)” became an important issue, and the idea prioritizing ‘active character-building efforts’ was replaced by a new idea considering ‘deeper studies which would enable discoveries of the Neo-Confucianism’s complicated nature and lessons’ to be much more urgent and important. As a result, Seol Seon, who did serve the Ming government once during the reign of “treacherous” Emperor Yeong’lak, and openly honored Heo Hyeong who had served the barbaric Mongol Yuan empire in the past, came to be criticised as a person whose “loyalty was misplaced.” Meanwhile, his academic accomplishments, which were strong on action but not so much in theoretic suggestions(at least in appearance), came to be dismissed as ‘shallow.’ As a result, in spite of the previous official suggestion that he should be enshrined at the National Literary Shrine, he was not included in the renovation of the shrine which was concluded in the 18th century.
All these changes in the Joseon scholars’ and philosophers’ perception of Seol Seon, and their evaluation of Seol Seon’s accomplishments, suggest that the Joseon academic community was indeed going through a change in the 17th and 18th centuries.
Since the beginning of the 16th century, and through the early half of the 17th century, Seol Seon was cited as the prime example of ‘willingly giving up one’s privilege to avoid serving the wrong regime,’ and was considered as a role model in that regard. His academic achievements were also praised, as he was considered as a true successor of the Sung period Neo-Confucianism because he argued that the true human nature could and should be restored through a series of training and character-building exercise.
Entering the latter half of the 17th century, however, the Joseon academic circle’s evaluation of Seol Seon began to change, and displayed a completely different attitude. In terms of loyalty the unwavering pursuit of “Moral obligation (as a vassal)” became an important issue, and the idea prioritizing ‘active character-building efforts’ was replaced by a new idea considering ‘deeper studies which would enable discoveries of the Neo-Confucianism’s complicated nature and lessons’ to be much more urgent and important. As a result, Seol Seon, who did serve the Ming government once during the reign of “treacherous” Emperor Yeong’lak, and openly honored Heo Hyeong who had served the barbaric Mongol Yuan empire in the past, came to be criticised as a person whose “loyalty was misplaced.” Meanwhile, his academic accomplishments, which were strong on action but not so much in theoretic suggestions(at least in appearance), came to be dismissed as ‘shallow.’ As a result, in spite of the previous official suggestion that he should be enshrined at the National Literary Shrine, he was not included in the renovation of the shrine which was concluded in the 18th century.
All these changes in the Joseon scholars’ and philosophers’ perception of Seol Seon, and their evaluation of Seol Seon’s accomplishments, suggest that the Joseon academic community was indeed going through a change in the 17th and 18th centuries.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 설선의 생애와 학문경향
Ⅲ. 16세기∼17세기 전반 조선학계의 설선 인식
Ⅳ. 17세기 후반 이후 조선학계의 설선 인식
Ⅴ. 맺음말
참고문헌
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (63)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-910-001668337