http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 이경구 (검색결과 601 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
-
곤경에서 곤혹으로: 18세기 중반~19세기 초반 낙론 학자들의 딜레마
이경구 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 2020 한국문화 Vol.0 No.89
Noron’s scholars have taken the initiative in learning and politics since the mid-17th century, with the will to escape from predicament and the belief that the world would be reformed correctly. In 1755 Noron’s political justification was confirmed. On the other hand, the expectation that Qing Dynasty would not last more than 100 years have been broken down, and the trend of not being swayed by ideology has been gradually strengthened in Joseon society. Noron won the victory but the result was the advent of embarrassing situation. Horon has stuck to its previous perception, but Nakron has diverged in embarrassment. In this presentation, I analyzed the embarrassing mind through Lee In-sang, Kim Yi-an and Hong Jik-pil. They firmly held Chunchu-euiri(春秋義理). However, the values of the world have become so dizzy day by day that they felt alienated. Lee In-sang testified to the transition from predicament to embarrassment in the mid-18th century. He expressed strong depression and dissension over the changed situation, so he tried to reveal the injustice of society through retiring. Kim Yi-an and Hong Jik-pil shows that the trend of profit-focused has become the mainstream since the late 18th century, They deplored the profit-seeking trend and stepped back for preserving virtue. It was a passive strategy for the preservation of Confucianism in a pessimistic outlook.
-
‘학(學)’에서 ‘주의(主義)’로 이이와 송시열의 경서 이해
이경구 한림대학교 태동고전연구소 2018 泰東古典硏究 Vol.40 No.-
이이와 송시열의 연계는 의식, 학문, 신념 등의 여러 차원에서 따져야 의미가 있다. 이이는 성리 이론을 천착한 학자이자 사회 개혁을 역설한 정치가였다. 유학에서 보편적이었던 개념과그 개념들의 원천이었던 경전에 대해 이이는 개성이 넘치고 현실에 충실한 해석과 정책을 선보였다. 그에 비해 송시열은 학문과 현실, 역사와 자연, 과거와 미래가 일관하는 신념 체계를 구축했고, 이를 통해 내부와 외부의 타자에 대한 판단을 정당화하였다. 두 사람은 ‘학문과 정책’ 그리고 ‘주의(主義)와 이념’이란 선에서 다른 방향으로 서 있었다. 이후 두 경향은 엇갈렸다. 호론은 송시열을 따라 춘추대의를 만고불변의 가치로 고수했지만, 낙론은 이이 스타일의 학문 회복을 희망하였다. 그들은 송시열의 업적을 의리 실현에 국한하고 학문의 계승은 이이에서 김창협으로 연결하였다. 주자학에 대한 두 흐름은 현재의 문화다원적 가치론의 정립에 시사하는 바가 크다.
-
-
-
The Horak Debate from the Reign of King Sukjong to King Sunjo
이경구 한국학중앙연구원 한국학중앙연구원 2011 Korea Journal Vol.51 No.1
The Horak debate was a philosophical discussion that originated among Noron scholars who aspired to refine the logic of Neo-Confucianism. The first round of this controversy took place in the early eighteenth century, a time in which the political and philosophical dominance of the Noron faction was widely recognized throughout the Joseon dynasty. Then, Song Si-yeol’s students, divided into those who established a presence in the capital city Hanseong and those who did so in Chungcheong-do province, began to express conflicting opinions regarding the conclusions of the controversy. The differences between the two groups mainly stemmed from the issue of correctly interpreting the logic of Neo-Confucianism, and such differences later caused divisions of several academic schools and political parties within the Noron faction. The second round of the Horak debate occurred during King Yeongjo’s reign. From the onset of his reign, Yeongjo consistently argued that politics and philosophy were two distinct fields, and such an emphasis contributed to the significant divergence between the Ho-ron and Nak-ron scholars over the relationship between academia and politics. This time around, the Ho-ron group and the Nak-ron group each established its own identity as an academic school and began to criticize each other in a rather harsh manner in connection with political parties within the central government. Through the debate, philosophical differences evidently manifested themselves in the area of political ideology.
-
-
KCI연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
