왕양명과 칼 바르트의 패러다임 전환

국문 초록 (Abstract)

동서양의 주요 전통으로서 유교와 그리스도교는 근본적으로 전혀 다른 성향의 패러다임들이다. 일반적으로 유교는 “인간-중심적”인 반면, 그리스도교는 “신-중심적”이라고 구분한다. 이러한 유형론적 상이성에도 불구하고, 보다 심층적으로 살펴보면 두 전통들 사이에 놀랄만한 유사성을 발견하게 된다. 이 글에서는 그 중 각 전통의 맥락 안에서 유사한 자체적 개혁, 즉 패러다임 전환, 특히 지행합일에 관련하여 조명하고자 한다. 그들의 담론은 궁극적 결단(立志, 신앙)이라는 유사한 출발점에서 시작하여 유사한 패러다임 전환(心卽理, 복음과 율법)을 시도 한다. 이것은 이론과 실천의 일체성(知行合一)이라는 교의적의 유사성을 가져온다. 양명과 바르트는 앎과 행함, 존재와 행위, 혹은 존재론적 지식과 윤리적 실천은 분리가 불가능하다고 강하게 천명하는데 서로 공명한다. 이러한 이론과 실천 사이의 불가분성 주장은 양명 유학과 바르트 신학이 그들의 전통과 사회에 막강한 윤리-정치적 영향력을 주는 것을 가능하게 했다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Generally speaking, Confucianism is “human-centered,” whereas Christianity is “God-centered.” In the deeper level, however, this simple distinction would not be so tenable, though this distinction is helpful at this beginning of dialogue. The Confucian and Christian paradigm shifts made by Wang Yang-ming and Karl Barth present a strikingly similar mode of thinking, and both of them established one’s ultimate commitment as the point of departure for the explication of the meaning of their traditions. These involve additional point of convergence, the unity of theory and praxis. Wang and Barth converge at the radical assertion in the inseparability of knowing and acting, being and acting, ontological knowledge (theology or confuciology) and ethical practice. This assertion in the unity of theory and practice enabled Wang’s confuciology and Barth’s theology to make very powerful ethico-political influences on their traditions and societies.
Whereas Wang thematized his doctrine of the unity of knowing and acting from the primordial non-dualism in the structure of mind-and-heart (li-chih), Barth developed his doctrine of the unity of theology and ethics from the doctrine of election as the sum of the Gospel (faith). Both of them held a positive vision of an ultimately transcendent reality (immanent-transcendence in Confucianism, Grace in the Christian term). Generally, while theology thematizes explicitly, placing this vision to the forefront (focusing on justification), confuciology brackets it off, placing it in the background (focusing on self-cultivation). However, both Wang and Barth lessened these differences. Wang constructed a dynamic confuciology of self-cultivation, further developing the Chung-yung-ian vision of Heavenly embodiment into human nature (liang-chih). Barth brought the doctrine of sanctification to the forefront, thematizing the Christian vision of God’s gracious election of the human race.
Both Wang and Barth affirmed the ontological unity of the human. Both emphasized the unity of the inner and the outer of the whole person, the self-determined being. Both agreed that true humanity embraces the unity of knowing and acting (in the Confucian sense) or hearing and doing (in the Christian sense), between ontological knowledge and ethical practice (ontology and ethics, theology and ethics), or simply between theory and praxis. The unity so conceived constitutes both Wang’s confuciology and Barth’s theology to produce most dynamic, radical social hermeneutics in their traditions, called “dynamic idealism” (Wang) and “theo-ethical realism” (Barth). The dynamism and radical realism were possible by overcoming the epistemological fallacies (dualism) of the established paradigms (Chu Hsi’s interpretation of ko-wu and Luther’s doctrine of law and Gospel), and securing a solid ontological (hermeneutical) foundation, an important converging point. Furthermore, radical humanization, in both, does not mean merely individual piety. Rather, it employed a collective process as team work of community (communal acts), and serious socio-political involvements.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 국문 요약문
• 근거(source) : 마음(心)과 말씀(Word)
• 패러다임 전환(paradigm shift) : 심즉리(心卽理)와 ‘복음과 율법(Gospel and Law)’
• 출발점 : 입지(立志)와 신앙(faith/metanoia)
• 이론과 실천(theory and praxis) : 지행합일(知行合一)과 신학과 윤리의 합일(unity of theology and ethics)
• 〈ABSTRACT〉