:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:湛軒洪大容的「人物均」論探究--朝鮮後期人物性同異論爭的演變與其意義
書刊名:哲學與文化
作者:李演都
作者(外文):Lee, Yun-do
出版日期:2014
卷期:41:8=483
頁次:頁99-113
主題關鍵詞:湛軒洪大容人物性同異論人物均論氣一元論以天視之物學Dam-Hun Hong Dae-YongInmulsŏngdongironThe theory of whether human nature and things nature are same or differentInmulgyŏnEquality of human being and the other living thingsSilhakPractical studyGiyilwonronThe doctrine of material force as the principalInBenevolenceYicheonsijiSaw both of them from the universal point of viewMulhakScience
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:7
湛軒洪大容是一位朝鮮性理學在人物性同異論爭演變過程中的代表思想家之一。他對於人性與物性的說法,可概括為「人物均」即「人與物之均一」。其人物均論,雖然繼承了洛學所說人物性同的看法,但是與傳統的說法在特質上有所不同。關於人與自然的關係,湛軒以氣一元論的世界觀與自然科學的思惟方式為基礎,提出自然與人都是氣活動的產物。據他所言,作為一個生命原理的仁,是人與物共具的理。傳統性理學用道德本體之理來闡釋自然界的運行,以便確定道德規律的絕對性與普遍性。然而,洪大容卻用作為自然界的普遍性原理的仁概念來解釋理,以便脫離於以人為中心的思惟模式。洪大容不同意人與物的一切差別,他認為在地球上的一切生命體都具備操縱自己身體的神妙能力,即「心」之功能。洪大容認為,雖然其在現實世界上的具體實現有多層次,但內在於一切生命體的心體是同一的。洛學雖然主張人物性同,但是認定在心的方面上有明顯的差別。然而,洪大容卻認為人性與物性在心的本體上沒有如此的差別。由此觀之,他所說的人物心本同可說是洛學心論之擴張。一切萬物是在理與心的層次上同一,而人與人之間的差異或人與物的差別,只取決於氣之清濁而已。由此,洪大容反對在道德價值上人類對動物的優越性,而從客觀普遍性自然學的觀點來看待人與物。他的這種觀點可以說為朝鮮後期學術界提供了物學的基礎。至於他在人性與物性論辯的格局上,已擺脫心性論的框架而轉換為人與物之價值上的差異問題。在這個意義上,湛軒的人物均論可以說是人物性同論之轉換。
Hong Dae-Yong, pen name Dam-Hun, demonstrates the process and features of theoretical change of "Inmulsŏngdongiron (the theory of whether human nature and things nature are same or different)", and his idea can be summarized as Theory of "Inmulgyŏn (Equality of human being and the other living things)". While Dam-Hun inherits the position of Nak sector school (a sector that supports the theory that human being and an animal have same nature), he also shows the different characters from the previous arguments. In the relations between human beings and nature, based on the scientific understanding and the doctrine of material force as the principal, Dam-Hun sees both nature and a human being as a being which consist of the activity of Material Force, "ki". He suggested the concept "In" (benevolence) as the common pneuma inherent in a human being and an animal, and asserted that this "In" is the universal principle, "Li". The traditional Zhu-Xi school tried to secure the moral absolutes by explaining the nature system using "SungLi" (nature as universal principle). In contrast, Dam-Hun could overcome the human-centered system of thought by explaining the principle, "Li" using "In", the universal principle of the nature system. He thought that there is no difference between the human being and all the living things have the same brilliant Virtue. He said that although the appearance that the Mind reveals in reality is different, the brilliant Virtue inherent in every living thing is the same. Nak sector school saw that the nature of human being is the same as the one of an animal, but didn't admit that the mind is identical. However, Dam-Hun saw that a human being and an animal have no differences from each other in the entity of the Mind. In this respect, his theory can be seen as the extension of Nak sector school's Theory of the Mind. All things are the same, if seen in the level of "Li" and Mind, and the differences, among human beings, and between an human being and an animal, result from whether the natural born "ki", material force is pure or not. Dam-Hun freed himself from the viewpoint that the human being is superior to other beings in its moral value, and saw both of them from the universal point of view. This viewpoint of his provided the academic community in the late Choson Dynasty with a basis of science. He made it possible for "Inmulsŏngdongiron" to go beyond the frame of Theory of Mind and Nature, and to change into the matter of differences in values. In this sense, Dam-Hun's philosophy, Theory of Equality of human and the other living things can be regarded as the changeover of "Inmulsŏngdongiron (the theory that human being and a things have same nature)".
期刊論文
1.尹絲淳(2007)。洪大容對於人與他物之脫程朱學的哲學。韓國思想與文化,39,191-224。  延伸查詢new window
2.白敏禎(2008)。湛軒洪大容的理氣論與人性論再檢討。退溪學報,124,79-126。  延伸查詢new window
3.辛正根(2001)。洪大容與經驗中心認識論的理氣觀之再生。哲學思想,13,81-112。  延伸查詢new window
4.安載晧(20131200)。巍巖李柬之「實事」論管窺--朝鮮儒人物性同異論爭中「同論」之代表思想。哲學與文化,40(12)=475,135-152。new window  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.劉奉學(1992)。18-19世紀燕巖一派北學思想的研究(博士論文)。首爾大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.李柬(1997)。巍巖遺稿。首爾:民族文化推進會。  延伸查詢new window
2.洪大容(1997)。湛軒書。首爾:民族文化推進會。  延伸查詢new window
3.文錫胤(2012)。湛軒洪大容研究。首爾:Sa-lam-Mu-Nei (人文)。  延伸查詢new window
4.朴熙秉(1999)。韓國的生態思想。首爾:Dol-be-gae。  延伸查詢new window
5.文錫胤(2006)。湖洛論爭形成與展開。首爾:東與西。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.金炯璨(1995)。人類和萬物的差別性檢討。從論爭看韓國哲學。遼寧:藝文書苑。  延伸查詢new window
2.金文鎔(1994)。北學派的人物性同論。人性物性論。首爾:韓國思想史研究會。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE