順序配列補充法의 實驗的 檢討

안재호(Ahn, Jae Ho) 영남고고학회 2021 嶺南考古學 Vol.- No.89

순서배열법은 문화사고고학을 연구하기 위해 창안된 것이지만, 순서배열보충법은 사회고고학의 도구로써 유적 내모든 유구의 동시성과 시간성을 밝히기 위한 발생순서배열법의 한 방법이다. 이 방법은 결실자료를 보충하여 그 결실자료가 최소가 되는 배열을 조작하여 양식편년을 목적으로 한다. 이 방법론의 타당성을 검증하기 위해서 5개의 예시로써 실험한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 순서배열된 각 유구의 배열은 실제의 시간 순서가 아니라는 점이다. 그래서 순서배열되었다고 그것을 바로 편년으로 인식하면 안 된다. 사용할 수 있는 유용한 방법은 형식의 출현 양상을 통하여 획기를 설정하여, 다수의 유구를하나의 획기로 묶었을 때 그 획기의 순서만이 역사적인 시간의 순서와 거의 일치한다. 둘째, 올바른 시간성을 가진 획기의 수를 늘리려면 3기 이상의 유구에서 출토되는 형식의 수를 늘려야 한다. 그러기위해서는 유물에서 유효한 시간적 속성을 찾아 분류하여야 한다. 그리고 형식은 그 존속기간이 짧을수록 좋은 결과를보이고, 존속기간이 긴 형식은 순서배열에 아무런 영향을 미치지 못한다. Contrary to seriation often used as a method for cultural-historical archaeology, complementary seriation is a branch of occurrence seriation and used to examine the simultaneity and temporality of the artifacts found in the same archaeological site. The benefit of this method in chronologizing styles is based on its usefulness in providing a possible series of artifacts with minimum missing data by properly complementing the missed. The followings are the results of the experiments, which were done with five samples to verify the validity of this method, First, it is noteworthy that a set of serialized artifacts is not necessarily reflective of the real temporal order, which means that the result of seriation cannot be taken directly for a chronology. One useful method to cope with this problem is to define several periods to which each artifact can be assigned and then examine the temporal order among these periods. The experiments corroborate that the order drawn from these periods reflects the real historical order. Second, in order to increase the number of periods well-defined and reflective of the correct temporal order, it is necessary to have more styles each of which was discovered from more than three different remains. For this, valid temporal features of the artifacts should be extracted to properly classify them. The styles that were produced during only shorter terms could result in better results whereas those with longer terms are less useful since they cannot have meaningful influences in seriation.

三韓時代 嶺南地方과 北九州地方의 交涉史 硏究

安在晧(Ahn Jae-ho),洪潽植(Hong Bo-sik) 부산대학교 한국민족문화연구소 1998 한국민족문화 Vol.12 No.-

맹순 인성론의 체계와 의미

안재호(Jae Ho Ahn) 한국동서철학회 2002 동서철학연구 Vol.24 No.-

N/A

吳澄의 ‘心學’ 체계 芻議

안재호 ( Ahn Jae Ho ) (사)율곡연구원 2021 율곡학연구 Vol.45 No.-

Wu-cheng is regarded as a Confucian who tried to synthesize the studies of Zhu-zi and Xiang-shan. However, Wu's Confucianism used the name of Xinxue[心學], is a traditional study since YaoSun[堯舜], that clearly revealed the essence of the entire Song dynasty Confucianism, directly, like Yangchon and Toegye in the Joseon Dynasty, is a study of ZhuJing[主敬] that emphasizes Xin[心] the subject. Wu-cheng became aware of the theoretical problem of Zhuzixue[朱子學] and laid the foundation for solving it. Its contents are not only the synthesis of cultivating theory, but also reflection and awareness of the LiQi[理氣] and XinXing[心性]. According to Wu, Li is not an independent substance that is the basis of everything and the qi that forms them, is just their self-discipline. Xin is the subject of leadership and presidency that leads us to the right perception and action, its fundamental ability is cognitive awareness, through this, can finally realize the Xingli[性理] that is contained. This is the Wu’s Xinxue, therefore, is only “the study of the Xingli”.

철학부(哲學部) : 정이(程이)의 성정(性情)과 심(心)의 체용설(體用說) 관견(管見)

안재호 ( Jae Ho Ahn ) 한국중국학회 2015 중국학보 Vol.74 No.-

This article aims to show how ChengYi (程이)``s notions of Xing (性), Qing (情) and Xin (心) are unified and clearly distinguished. Furthermore, I will examine why Xingqing (性情) should be interpreted as Tiyong (體用) of Xin. ChengYi tried to find solutions for the problem of good and evil in the actual world. Thus he claimed Xingjili (性卽理) which means human nature that has objectivity and universality. However, there is Qing which is presented as evil in the actual world, despite it is intrinsically the same with Xing. Therefore, he emphasized that Qing should follow Xing. His argument involves that people should face a matter which ``Xingli``s certainty (性理之當然)`` does not bring to light, realize dignity and difficulty of moral practice, finally strive to moral practice. Xin as a whole and supervisor manages Xing and Qing which are distinguished ``immovable Li (理)`` and ``combination of movable Li and Qi (氣).``It is because, according to ChengYi, Xin is not only connected with awareness, but also subject which could unite Tiandi (天地) through realization of all creation (天地萬物) in one``s mind. To sum up, Xin has to be considered as a whole and there is Xing which is also foundation of existence as the first principle. Qing is a function which appeared from Xin. I think what we need to take notice is not the division of Xingqing itself because it is just problem posing. The key of ChengYi``s argument is that we should actualize ``Xingli``s certainty.`` Thereby based on its Xing (體), Xin releases its Qing (用) as the subject of actualizing. Consequently, ChengYi``s theory of Xingqing and Xin could be organized distinctly only if the notion of Xin is explained definitely.

철학부 : 왕부지 (王夫之) 심론 연구 - 이성이 갖는 두 가지 의미와 그 관계를 중심으로 -

안재호(Jae Ho Ahn) 한국중국학회 2001 중국학보 Vol.43 No.-

N/A

寬倉里遺蹟의 編年과 變遷

안재호(Ahn, Jae Ho) 부산고고학회 2021 고고광장 Vol.- No.28

호서해안지역의 대표적인 송국리문화 유적인 보령 관창리유적의 형성과정을 통하여 사회상을 재검토하고자한다. 유적에서 출토된 유물을 분류하고, 순서배열보충법으로 작성된 양식편년에 따라 주거지를 3시기로 나누었다. 관창리취락은 수전을 기반으로 한 농경사회이지만 수렵채집문화도 공존한다. 무덤은 취락 내부에 발견되지만, 별도의 구릉에도 묘역을 조성하였다. 그리고 중국의 제도술을 도입하면서, 토기가마를 한 곳에 모아두고 그주변에 고상창고와 공방을 갖춘 반전업적 생산체제를 갖춘 점이다. B지구가 중심지역이면서 3개의 구역(A~C) 으로 나누어진다. Ⅰ기취락은 B지구 A구가 중심이며 1동의 대형가옥이 존재하지만 소규모에 불과하다. Ⅱ기에는 B구에 토기가마가 조영되면서 확장되지만, A구는 축소한다. 2동의 대형가옥이 A·B구에 등장한다. Ⅲ기가 되면 A구는 쇠퇴하고 2개 구역으로 재분할된 B구에 대형가옥은 구릉의 최상부에 1동, 특수건물이 입지하는 낮은 곳에 각 1동씩분포한다. 이 시기는 수장이 등장하기 직전으로서 취락 구성원 사이의 계서와 귀속지위가 인정된 사회였다 Gwanchang-ri settlement was an agrarian society based on paddy-field production but huntinggathering was also performed simultaneously. Graves have been discovered both inside the settlement and separated hill areas. The discovery of earthenware kilns gathered together in the same spot surrounded by raised warehouses and workshops suggests that the introduction of ceramic technique from China led to the formation of a semi-professional production system. The settlement is accordingly divided into three districts of A, B (a central ara), and C. The settlement formed in Period I stretched out mostly around District B and A and only one large-sized house was built there whereas all others had small sizes. In Period II, District B began to expand as earthenware kilns were installed there while the size of District A was being reduced. Two large-sized houses were built in Districts A and B in this period. As District A declined in Period Ⅲ, District B began to be divided into two sub-districts, one around the hilltop and another located in the lower area with some special purpose buildings, and two large houses were built in each of these sub-districts. Period Ⅲ was right before the appearance of chiefdom in this region and the community formed there in this time had a society where the ranks and ascribed statuses among the people living together in the large houses were stabilized.

철학부 : 왕부지 이욕관 연구

안재호 ( Jae Ho Ahn ) 한국중국학회 2002 중국학보 Vol.45 No.-

歷代任何儒家思想家都夫主張要强制人類的所有欲望(尤其是生理欲望). 然而一般來講,一想到儒家, 就提起‘禁慾’這個槪念, 此則爲何? 其原因之一是, 因爲但見那種主張而幾乎未涉及對欲望的積極正面的肯定. 雖然如此, 儒家思想强調禁慾, 這種看法只是一種誤解而已. 我們通過船山對理欲槪念的理解和其關係規定, 來討論那種看法是否只是誤解. 簡約地說, 如同其他儒者, 船山也認爲, 人具有道德理性而由此追求人文理想. 但是, 除了道德理性之外, 人又與生具有自然的生理欲求. 對此, 船山認爲, “飮食男女之欲, 人之大共也”, “天下之公欲, 卽理也; 人人之獨得, 卽公也”. 再加上, 就像“有氣斯有理”一樣, 生理欲求和道德理性之間也有存在論意味的或邏輯的先後關係: “有欲斯有理”. 因此, 從人生價値和人文理想的追求上講, ‘理’貴且重於‘欲’, 但‘欲’乃是‘理’可以存在的基本前提, 所以船山强調宅們之間的‘竝健’. 只要如此, 才能正確認識人的眞正面貌, 進而可以邁進於人文理想之故.

철학부(哲學部) : 『노자』 철학체계 분석

안재호 ( Jae Ho Ahn ) 한국중국학회 2008 중국학보 Vol.57 No.-

在≪老子≫有一些不合於其全體體系的部分, 而那些部分就引起對≪老子≫哲學的種種問題. 例如, 把타同法家竝列, 被認爲``老獪的政治術數``等等. 因此, 我們要檢察在≪老子≫裏眞有那些部分, 進而以理論體系爲中心來檢討那些部分實地引起那마嚴重的問題. 我們通過這種檢討來發見幾種問題: 對於人類和世間的單純以及天眞的想法, 氣的存在問題及同道或德的關係問題, 無爲和柔弱之間的羅輯謬誤. 這些問題즘樣才可以解決或辯護니? 諸子百家優先把君主看做是一個以自己思想來說服的對象. 由這觀種點來看, ≪老子≫所謂聖人當然意味着理想人格, 而同時又是一個現實君主要志向的目標. 爲了說服現實君主, ≪老子≫給他們看自己的思想즘樣有利於他們. 於是出現我們以爲問題的``天眞的想法``和``功利主義式的態度``. 此外, 和通行本對照, 帛書和竹簡, 特別是竹簡≪老子≫有?多的差異. 這就表明: ≪老子≫竝不是一個時代一個人的作品, 而是經過幾個時代幾個人的手來形成當今之形態. 竹簡≪老子≫竝沒有玄奧的形而上學體系, 只有可在現實生活中應用的格言. 符應時代和社會的要求, 增加了一些形上學內容以及圖謀富國强兵的法家式的思惟, 從而出現不符合本來理論體系的部分. 我們雖然如上辯護, 可問題還是沒有完全解決而照樣留着那裏. 於是, 終於出現像莊子等人, 來繼承≪老子≫的精神的同時, 又努力建立比較完整的體系.

장재(張載)의 형이상학 비판 -기(氣)와 신(神) 개념을 중심으로-

안재호 ( Jae Ho Ahn ) 퇴계학연구원 2011 退溪學報 Vol.129 No.-

張載的形上學一般被稱爲``氣一元論``, 甚至理解爲是一種``唯氣論``. 其實, 張載所說的氣乃是全包容形下質料的氣(陰陽五行)及形上實現原理之神的太和絪縕氣體. 然而, 他有時旣說神是歸屬於氣的, 而有時則說是獨立於氣的. 因此, 有時就像唯物論者的主張那樣顯得是種唯物論性氣一元論, 而別時則又强調神之完全獨立. 吾人的批判就在這兒, 卽集中在對互相相反的兩個方面的分析. 這樣, 才能明確理解張載形上學. 張載的氣槪念不只是像一般以爲的陰陽五行等質料性形而下者. 那同時也是, 更根本的是又本體也總體的``太和元氣``. 能將張載氣槪念分成這樣兩種的根據就在他的神槪念. 對張載來說, 神就像『易傳』所說的那樣, 是一種妙用於天地萬物而又把·們化育成長的. 形上的實現原理絶不能成爲質料性形而下者的屬性. 是故, 想要建立一個包容形下氣和形上神的一元論體系, 那需要一個總體·整體. 張載所謂太和元氣乃是那種總體·整體. 張載早已持有排斥道佛(存在問題)和再貞立儒學傳統(道德實踐問題)這兩種目標. 要完成這目標的形上學體系就是``太和絪縕的氣本體論``. 此中, 如果執着於形下氣的方面, 那就會流失道德實踐根據(神); 相反, 專强調神一面的話, 會抛棄一元論的形上學體系. 由此, 唯物論者和牟宗三等對張載形上學的理解是又對又錯的.