고촌(古村) 이운구(李雲九) 선생(先生)의 학문(學問) 세계(世界) -정통(正統)과 이단(異端)의 변증법(辨證法)- = Gochon Lee Ungoo`s Academic World-the dialectic between authenticity and heresy

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In the main text, the academic world of Gochon was examined, who acted with the subject of the dialectic between authenticity and heresy during the period of changes in the modern and contemporary history of Korea. As he confessed, he had strong criticism about distorted irrationalities of the society since his time of college days. In addition, while he studied under Hasan in his graduate school, he extensively studied critical academic methodology of eastern and western philosophy, and based on this, he paid attention to heretic theorists in Chinese philosophy. Heresy is an essential element that promotes social development in contrast to authenticity. Yet, in terms of history, heresy in the past is not necessarily heresy in the present or in the future. Moreover, it`s not guaranteed that legitimacy in the past will be maintained in the present and in the future. Gochon intended to criticize political and social irrationalities in the reality of Korea and find alternatives through the dialectical development process between the authenticity and heresy of ancient China. Even though the alternatives were not proposed in details, the contents reflected in his study and achievement listed in the main text are meaningful enough until today. In Korean documents written before Goryeo, there are no cases that explicitly criticize Hundred Schools of Thought except for Confucianism. At the end of Goryeo dynasty and in the early Joseon dynasty, as Neo-Confucianism was introduced, the perspective of the theory to exclude heresy(闢異端論) in 『Mencius』 began to stand out. However, the criticism of those days on the Schools of Thought was not serious relatively. It`s because criticism on Buddhism and Taoism was the fundamental problem in the ideological transition period at that time. The characteristic of the scholars` understanding of the Schools of Thought in Joseon on the whole was that they just used it as the tool to criticize other ideologies or irrationalities. Of course, not a few scholar acknowledged and quoted the ideas and historical values of the Schools of Thought. As above, Gochon`s passion for the study on the Schools of Thought and accumulated outcome of his study are meaningful enough in the history of Korean philosophy after the emancipation. Gochon was enthusiastic about translating classics into Korean after his retirement, and it also belonged to the academic area examining the Hundred Schools of Thought which has been relatively neglected. When Gochon`s writings and interpretation in his Korean translations are taken into consideration, his critical academic experiences may have been Confucianism→Taoism→Xun Kuang(Han Feizi)→Mohism→Wang Chong, which was different from that of Hasan. When it`s taken into account that Hasan`s academic experiences developed as western philosophy→Confucianism and Mencius→Mohism→Zhuang Zhou, Gochon didn`t stop at Taoism but relatively materialized critical ideologies from Chinese philosophy. If his study had continued, new versions of 『Laozi』, 『Zhuang Zhou』 and 『Lunheng』 would have been published. It`s such a pity, and development of Gochon`s critical academic methodology and continuous study on it are left for the scholars of his posterity.