간행물

성균관대학교 유교문화연구소> Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture

Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture update

  • : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소
  • : 인문과학분야  >  동양철학
  • : KCI등재
  • :
  • : 연속간행물
  • : 반년간
  • : 1598-267X
  • :
  • :

수록정보
수록범위 : 1권0호(2001)~29권0호(2018) |수록논문 수 : 334
Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture
29권0호(2018년 02월) 수록논문
최근 권호 논문
| | | |

KCI등재

1孟子的四種道德擴張模型

저자 : 김도일 ( Kim Doil )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 1-19 (19 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

根據文獻資料,孟子思想裏有不同類型的道德擴張,顯示較爲模糊的差別性。故本文聚焦於在孟子思想裏的道德擴張模型,予以探究幷導出有至少四個方面的特色。首先,衆所周知,孟子思想裏的擴充是指人應該擴張自己的道德態度或者反應,例如包括對別人更廣範圍的惻隱之心。誠然,惻隱之心是對於處於危難之中的人的純粹道德態度或反應。第二,?一種類型的擴張,實際上是對儒家思想史上的發展産生了較大影響:從家庭到國家的道德擴張(延伸)。此點,區別於擴充作爲擴展的態度不是一種純粹道德態度,而是一種最初應用於血緣關系的態度。第三,孟子思想中還存在著?一種類型的道德擴張:道德態度或行爲在不同人群中的擴散。這一類型不同於前兩種類型,因爲?與分享某種道德態度或行爲的人數的增加有關。第四,新儒家朱子(朱熹)對孟子的理解,不會那?注重關於第一類和第二類之間的區別,這是正與一種態度的擴展密切相關,無論是惻隱之心或一個家族的態度,因爲他對此兩者都同樣以人心擴張方面來理解。在朱熹看來,孟子思想可以理解爲孟子思想中的第四種道德擴張模型。綜上所述,本文的宗旨是張顯這四種類型的差別,以補歷來文獻中所乏較爲仔細區分之憾。


In the existing body of relevant literature, the different types of moral extension in Mencius's thought are not clearly differentiated. The purpose of this paper is to show that at least four types of moral extension can be found in Mencius's thought. First, as is well known, the idea of kuochong 擴充 in Mencius's thought is that one should extend one's moral attitude or reaction, such as ce yin zhi xin 惻隱之心, to a broader range of people. Ce yin zhi xin is arguably a moral attitude or reaction towards another person in distress. Mencius argues that such a moral attitude should be expanded to everyone, not solely the single individual in need right now. Second, another type of moral extension is in fact what has wielded more influence in the development of Confucian thought in history: the extension from family to nation. This is distinguishable from kuochong as the expanded attitude is not a purely moral one, but rather an attitude applied initially to blood relations. Third, there is yet another type of moral extension in Mencius's thought: the diffusion of moral attitudes or actions among different people. This type is different from the first two types because it has to do with the expansion of the number of people sharing a certain kind of moral attitude or action. Fourth, in his understanding of Mencius, the neo-Confucian Zhu Xi 朱熹 would not be too concerned about the difference between the first type and the second type, which are equally related to the extension of a certain kind of attitude, either ce yin zhi xin or a familial attitude, since he understands both the two types equally in terms of the expansion of ren xin 人心 (the human mind) as such. What Zhu Xi regards as Mencius's can be understood as the fourth type of moral extension in Mencius's thought. This paper aims to explore the differences among the above four types, which have not been carefully differentiated in the literature.

KCI등재

2把文本變成自己的――恰當閱讀中國哲學之反思

저자 : 안악철 ( Roger T. Ames )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 21-39 (19 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

如果要讀出中國文獻文本自己本身述說的意義,?是有個自己的語義闡釋環境的。這個語義闡釋環境,這就是《易經大傳》已鮮明淸晳闡述的“過程宇宙論”。這樣存在的一個語義闡釋環境,也恰如《論語》總在繼續重建一樣,經歷日日新地解讀,始終一以貫之。?是這樣傳承,被不同時代文化環境的儒者(我們自己今天也在其中)持續保持其一慣性、權威性。 筆者指出,本文也對《論語》采取“過程哲學”解讀的立場,這樣可使其域境性特點、互系性、時宜性以及動態特點,作爲奠定儒家宇宙觀的一以貫之諸特徽,得以突顯,占據中心位置。懷德海與杜威的“過程哲學”,在他們各自稱爲的“錯置具體性謬誤”和“頂級哲學謬誤”文化遺産中,是受到威脅的。筆者所做的,正是圍繞不同時代對《論語》日日新具體性、一貫性的解讀過程,嘗試性地闡釋和提出孔子是一位過程哲學家這一觀點。


If we are going to allow the Chinese texts to speak on their own terms, we have to begin by establishing the interpretive context for reading them―the process cosmology that is made explicit in the Dazhuan 大傳 (Great Tradition) commentary of the Yijing 易經 (Book of Changes). The argument is that, true to the premises of the text itself, the Lunyu 論語 (Analects of Confucius) is not only continually reconstructed and made corporate in successive readings, but is in fact reauthored and reauthorized by each reader in every generation and cultural site, including our own. I will argue that this processual understanding of the Lunyu highlights the centrality of situated particularity, collateral relationality, temporality, and productive indeterminacy as persistent defining features of a grounding Confucian cosmology, precisely those cultural assets that process philosophers A. N. Whitehead and John Dewey deem threatened in the commitment of the fallacies they have called “misplaced concreteness” and “the philosophical fallacy” respectively. I want to use the concrete and continuing “process” of reading the Lunyu as a heuristic to support my claim that Confucius is indeed a process philosopher.

KCI등재

3從伊本西納的角度考察李珥 對人存在問題的理解

저자 : 유원기 ( Yoo Weon-ki )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 41-62 (22 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

本文將從伊本西納(Avicenna,980-1037)的角度考察評價李珥(栗谷,1536-1584)對人存在問題的理論。這是一種新的嘗試,是爲了發現幷提供韓國哲學與伊斯蘭哲學之間的相互理解的可能性。李珥是韓國著名的新儒學哲學家,而伊本西納則是烏?別克斯坦著名的伊斯蘭哲學家。乍看起來,兩位學家之間沒有直接的聯繫,而確實沒有任何證據顯示他們認識甚至聽說過對方。但是,我們依然可以對他們的哲學進行比較,因爲他們都至少對人存在的問題有濃厚的興趣。 作爲一個旣典型又傑出的新儒學學家,李珥對人存在問題表示興趣是爲了爲通過自我修養順理成章的成爲聖賢的目標而建立具有存在論基礎的道德本性。但是,他與大多數同時代的儒學家不同,卽他的觀點接近於理氣一元論而不是二元論。就是說,他反對理與氣分離。但是,伊本西納應該反對他這種觀點,因爲伊本西納主張靈魂在某種程度上區別于肉體。作者將校驗伊本西納的這種主張的根據,幷與李珥的根據及理論作以比較。通過這種比較,我們可以印證兩種不同傳統的哲學至少有可比性,不僅可以發現他們邏輯上是否存在不一致與謬誤,還可以提供某種解決方案來補足他們的理論。


This paper attempts to view and evaluate Yi I's (Yulgok, 1536-1584) theory of human beings from Ibn Sina's (Avicenna, 980-1037) perspective. This is a new attempt to discover the possibility of a mutual understanding between Korean philosophy and Islamic philosophy, which has never been attempted before, either in Korea or elsewhere. As noted, Yi I was an eminent Neo-Confucian philosopher from Korea, whereas Ibn Sina was an eminent Islamic philosopher from Uzbekistan. At first glance, they hardly seem to have any direct connection; indeed, there is no evidence that they learned about each other. Nonetheless, it is still possible to compare their philosophies since both of them were, at least, deeply interested in the matter of understanding human beings. As a typical though distinct Neo-Confucian scholar, in the investigation of human beings, Yi I primarily tried to set up an ontological basis for moral nature which is understood as naturally aiming to become a sage through self-cultivation. However, unlike many other Neo-Confucian scholars of his day, he presented a monistic view rather than a dualistic one in that he strongly emphasized the inseparability of ri (principle) from gi (material force). As noted, ri and gi are the components of human beings and so all properties or characteristics must stem from either or both of them. However, the Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina would object to Yi I's understanding of human beings, since he maintained that human souls were capable of being separated from their bodies at the time of death. In this paper, I shall examine his reason for this claim and compare it with Yi I's view. In doing this, I shall focus on discovering what sorts of logical inconsistencies or faults they had, if any, and whether we can provide any solutions to make up for them.

KCI등재

4《栗谷別集付籤》主要爭點中所含 韓元震初年哲學之特徵

저자 : 이해임 ( Lee Hae-im )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 63-90 (28 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

《栗谷別集付籤》的核心論點爲:1、太極與性之同異問題,2、天地之氣與父母之氣之同異問題,3、心之純善問題,4、智與知之體用問題,5、克己與復禮之同異問題等,這些爭點源於如何解釋湖學與洛學所共有的“性合理氣”與“心是氣”問題。韓元震將理規定爲道德規範之根據,而將氣規定爲價値中立之物。理乃善之根據,氣作爲心的知覺作用,旣可顯現爲善亦可顯現爲惡,且除聖人之外的普通人(凡人)難以産生正確的知覺作用,所以如欲使心的知覺作用産生道德反應,必須依賴於他者。韓元震以理而非性來確保道德反應,這是因爲性之作用作爲氣之顯現而無法保障必爲純善。在此,作爲性的理幷非善的四端之發源處,而成爲了規範的根據。職是之故,在韓元震初年哲學中,心的知覺作用(知)自身幷不能産生道德反應,唯有依據規範(窮理),約束自身反應(存養),努力實踐(力行)才能通過道德知覺(智)來完成。


The major issues in Yulgok byeoljip bucheom 栗谷別集付籤 are as follows: firstly, the sameness of the Great Ultimate (taiji 太極) and human nature (xing 性); secondly, the sameness of the material force of heaven and earth (tiandi zhi qi 天地之氣) and the material force of father and mother (fumu zhi qi 父母之氣); thirdly, the pureness (chunshan 純善) of the mind; fourthly, the relation between moral perception (zhi 智) and sensory perception (zhijue 知覺) as essence (benti 本體) and its application (zuoyong 作用); and lastly, the sameness of subduing selfish desires (keji 克己) and returning to propriety (fuli 復禮). These issues stem from the matter of how to interpret two propositions: human nature is the combination of the principle and material force (xing he liqi 性合理氣) and the mind is material force (xin shi qi 心是氣). Han Won-jin regards the principle as the basis for moral standards and material force as value-neutral; the principle is the basis of good, and material force can appear as either good or evil in the perception process. In addition, ordinary people find it difficult to perceive properly. Thus, when the mind is trying to perceive morally, it has to rely on something. Han Won-jin tries to establish the basis of morality in the principle rather than in nature, since the effect of nature cannot be completely good. The principle as nature is not the source of moral feeling but the basis of norms. Thus, the perception of the mind cannot produce a moral response in itself, but turns into moral perception only when one's response is monitored and practiced based on certain norms.

KCI등재

5如何詮釋孟子的“性”槪念――西方漢學界的兩場論戰及其當下意義

저자 : 한진화 ( Han Zhenhua )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 91-112 (22 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

19世紀末的傳敎士漢學時代和20世紀末的專業漢學時代,漢學家們圍繞《孟子》的人性論展開了兩場針鋒相對的論爭。在第一場論爭中,理雅各借道巴特勒主敎的良心論來說明孟子性善論的價値,幷將孟子的“性善”解釋成“性向善”,但謝衛樓却?擊孟子和理雅各雙雙否棄了上帝恩典。第二場論爭的焦點在於安樂哲的文化主義與華靄仁的共同人性論之間的分岐,而産生這種分岐的深層原因則是辯論雙方對於民主和人權的不同態度。兩場論爭盡管表現形態各異,但論爭的核心觀念却高度相關,在理論脈絡上可以追溯至四百多年前天主敎各修會理解《孟子》人性論的不同態度。


Two ardent debates over the Mencian theory of human nature were launched by sinologists in the late nineteenth century, a period of missionary sinology, and in the late twentieth century, a period of professional sinology. In the first debate, James Legge articulates the value of the Mencian theory of human nature from Bishop Butler's view of conscience. He interprets Mencius' “goodness of human nature” as “human nature towards good.” However, Davelle Sheffield criticizes that Mencius and Legge both deny the grace of God. The second debate focuses on the divergence between Roger T. Ames' culturalism and Irene Bloom's theory of common human nature. Such divergence is deeply rooted in both sides' differing attitudes towards democracy and human rights. Despite different strategies and tactics, the two debates are closely related to each other in terms of their core concepts, which can be traced back to the Catholic churches' different understandings of Mencius' conception of human nature over 400 years ago.

KCI등재

6聖人聞而知之何以可能?

저자 : 성하 ( Sheng Xia )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 113-132 (20 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

聞而知之是以聖人爲物件的認知,其對應的知識種類幷不僅僅是一種外在客觀知識,而是具有成就聖人人格和變革社會的雙重作用。孔子認爲這種知識需要由“聞”來獲得,但是聞而知之的聞與日常生活中見聞之聞是不一樣的,見聞之聞容易被外物和私欲所遮蔽,而聞而知之的聞却與天道相關,通過“聞―道”具有化部分爲整體、去僞成眞和化育天下的作用。孔子以問禮和聞樂爲例爲我們展示了聞而知之的認知形式,首先通過問使自己和物件達到“空空如也”的狀態,然後聽聞遠處天道在此處的回響,這是避免主客分離的局限而使我們能直接獲知聖人知識的根本;其次以玉振之音來領會“聽―命”,卽通過天命來反復條理終始,使萬物聚集成爲一個有序的整體,也就是萬物“如在”左右的狀態而實現成己、成物的目的。“聞―道”和“聽―命”以無爲而成、不言而信的方式完成了對自身和社會的改造,所以,聞而知之不僅具有交互主體性,而且還蘊含巨大的社會實踐能力。


To know by listening is the sage's way of perceiving external things. This knowledge not only includes objective knowledge of external things, but also contributes to developing the sagely personality and renewing the society. Confucius thinks that this knowledge needs to be acquired by listening; however, this listening is differentiated from listening in daily life, which is easily affected by objects and desires. Listening for knowledge is associated with the Way of Heaven. Through understanding the Way by listening, each part achieves the whole, the false is eliminated and the true is retained, and the world is transformed to be better. The perceiving model of listening for knowledge is revealed by Confucius's asking rite and listening to music. First, put oneself and other objects in the empty state by asking and listen to the Way of Heaven echoing here from far distance. Through this process, we can directly acquire the knowledge of the sage without any distinction between subject and object. Second, with reliance on the sound of Jade, understand the Mandate of Heaven, which arranges myriad things in an orderly manner. That is to say, as if everything exists in our right and left sides, we should fulfill the nature of ourselves and preserve that of myriad things. Listening to the Way and listening to the Mandate can transform us and societies. Listening for knowledge not only has inter-subjectivity but also retains social practical ability.

KCI등재

7中韓朱子學發展模式的比較

저자 : 등경평 ( Deng Qingping )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 133-149 (17 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

中韓朱子學之間的比較硏究存在兩種模式:一是韓國朱子學與作爲本源朱子學的朱熹及其弟子所創立學問之間的縱向比較,二是韓國朱子學與同時期的中國朱子學之間的橫向比較。在第二種比較的意義上,一方面考察中國宋元明淸朱子學發展的不同階段以及相應的義理展開過程;?一方面考察韓國朱子學從引進到二十世紀初朝鮮王朝滅亡之間的發展歷程以及相應的義理論爭。可以看出,中國朱子學的發展模式可以稱爲多元思想資源幷存格局中的三起三落式,韓國朱子學則是單一思想資源下的一起一落式。這一發展模式上的差異,需要綜合政治環境、思想文化背景、以身體道的推動力量、學術思想成果以及學派立場等多方面因素,才可以得到恰當理解。


In regard to Zhuzixue 朱子學 (Study of Master Zhu) in China and South Korea, there are two main comparative approaches: one is the comparison between Zhuzixue developed in Korea and Zhuzixue formulated by Zhu Xi and his disciples. The other is the comparison between Zhuzixue in Korea and China during the same time period. These two kinds of comparison are conducive to examining how Zhuzixue showed different development patterns during the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties of China. In addition, these comparisons can elucidate how Zhuzixue evolved in Korea from its introduction to the fall of the Joseon Dynasty in the early twentieth century. The development patterns of Zhuzixue in China and Korea follow different paths: China has experienced three ups and downs in multilateral academic streams while Korea has experienced one up and down in a unilateral academic stream. These differences can be clearly explained only when we consider the two nations' differences in various aspects, such as political environments, ideological and cultural backgrounds, and academic achievements.

KCI등재

8嚴復的科學思想與會通觀

저자 : 한성구 ( Han Sung Gu )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 151-170 (20 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

嚴復是近代中國著名的啓蒙思想家,是向西方尋?眞理的先進人物之一。 他曾提出重視科學、發展科學的思想,同時,他對科學與哲學的關係有著獨特的見解。 他的思想淵源主要來自西方,但同時他對中國傳統思想有一定的了解。 嚴復認爲面對民族存亡之危機,人的自覺是最重要的,但中國傳統思想中的一些觀念始終困擾著人們的整個思想和意識,如果不改變這種觀念,就不能營救中華民族和國家的未來。 所以他首先要把中國的思想與文化從傳統形而上學與玄學的束縛中盡快解放出來,幷且運用科學方法和經驗知識,一方面進行中國傳統思想近代化,?一方面服膺於社會現實的要求。 嚴復向傳統"天道"觀念進行新的解釋。他通過傳統天道觀念的重釋,建造以西方科學爲基礎的本體論思想,而且以理性原則會通科學和其?領域之知識。 他的"天"是"自然而然"的天,但他所謂"自然而然"的含義是模糊的、多重的。 所以他設定兩種天道、人道關係。 他一方面根據"天演之道",主張"任天爲治",這樣天道和人道是貫通的。 但?一方面,他主張"以人持天",這樣,天道和人道是對立的。 任天爲治,是要肯定進化法則的普遍性,以此提醒中國人直視民族危機;而以人持天則要强調人治之功,是要肯定人類道德的重要性,以此給中國以救亡和民族復興的希望。 嚴復是最早將科學作爲一種價値體系來接受的中國人。 他飜譯赫胥黎《天演論》和宣揚社會達爾文主義,從內容上爲科學主義的産生奠定了重要基礎。 嚴復展示了自己整個思想的一個中心宗旨,卽以理性原則會通科學和其?領域之知識,亦卽將"思議"與"不可思議"會通爲一。 他的思想雖然包含著經驗主義的不可知論的傾向,但他在晩淸對中國科學主義産生的推動力則是不容忽視的,而且還久遠地發生著影響。


Yan studied Western science to find the truth. He emphasized science and advocated the development of scientific thought. At the same time, he had a unique view on the relationship between science and philosophy. His thought came mainly from the West, but he also possessed a deep understanding of Chinese traditional ideas. In the crisis of the destruction of the nation, Yan Fu emphasized the self-consciousness. However, some of the traditional Chinese ideas were closely associated with the collective consciousness of the Chinese people. He held that if these ideas are not changed the future of the Chinese people would be bleak. Therefore, he suggested that Chinese ideology and culture should be liberated from the bondage of traditional metaphysics. He also urged that Chinese people should modernize their traditional thought and respond to social demands by using scientific method and experiential knowledge. Yan Fu is the first Chinese to accept science as a value system. He translated Thomas Henry Huxley's Evolution and Ethics (Tianyan lun 天演論) and promoted the theory of social evolution (shehui jinhua lun 社會進化論). Through this work, he provided the theoretical basis for the emergence of "scientism." He promoted mutual understanding of scientific knowledge and the knowledge of other disciplines, and pursued compatibility of the "comprehensible" (siyi 思議) and the "incomprehensible" (buke siyi 不可思議). Although his thought contained an element of agnosticism (bukezhi lun 不可知論), he exerted a great influence on the birth of Chinese Scientism in the late Qing dynasty.

KCI등재

9從“回到康有爲”到“回到牟宗三” ―― “大陸新儒家”政治儒學之反思

저자 : 문벽방 ( Wen Bifang ) , 이상 ( Li Xiang )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 171-184 (14 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

二十一世紀以來,當代中國哲學界出現了一股解構啓蒙、否定現代價値的思潮,以蔣慶、陳明爲主角的“大陸新儒家”卽是這方面的代表。蔣慶認爲,民主、自由等現代性價値是劣質的普世價値,中國的王道政治則爲優質的普世價値,故提出了一套他所認定的儒家王道政治的構想。“大陸新儒家”最近幾年的口號是“回到康有爲”,陳明認爲,必須超越革命敍事和啓蒙規劃,回到康有爲國家建構與國族建構的問題、思路和立場上來,現代國家建構與國族建構優先於任何現代性價値,必須放在價値排序的首位。較之於當代“大陸新儒家”,“當代新儒家”則更能接受科學、民主等現代價値,牟宗三所提出的“良知坎陷說”,是基於其對中西文化的深刻理解所作的順暢中國文化生命的工作,絶非“大陸新儒家”所批評的一味接受西方的價値、無視中國的傳統文化。因此,與其“回到康有爲”,罔顧現代性價値,則莫若“回到牟宗三”來理解和消化他的成果。


Since the beginning of the new millennium, in Chinese philosophy circles, there has been a trend towards deconstructing the enlightenment legacy and denying the legitimacy of modern universal values. This trend is associated in particular with Jiang Qing and Chen Ming, two prominent representatives of so-called Mainland New Confucianism. Jiang Qing criticizes such values of modernity as democracy and freedom for being negative universal values. He maintains that the superior universal value is political rule according to the ancient notion of the Kingly Way, based on which he proposes a set of formulations. In more recent years, Chen Ming's slogan has been the call to return to Kang Youwei. Chen insists that it is necessary to transcend the narrative of revolution and the vision of the enlightenment, to return to Kang Youwei's concept of national and state construction. In Chen's opinion, the construction of the modern state and nation takes precedence over any values and should be ranked first; modern universal values such as fairness, justice, freedom, democracy, and constitutionalism are of secondary importance, or even trivial. On the other hand, contemporary Neo-Confucianism scholars such as Mou Zongsan, Tang Junyi, and Xu Fuguan are much more willing to accept modern values like science and democracy. They try to harmonize Chinese culture and modern values to get them to advance each other by drawing on the resources of Chinese traditional culture. In this respect, Mou Zongsan proposes what he calls the “self-negation of innate moral consciousness,” in order to sustain Chinese culture. This does not mean that he upholds Western values blindly and ignores traditional Chinese culture, as Mainland New Confucian critics accuse him. Therefore, it is better to re-understand, digest, and absorb the achievements obtained by Contemporary Neo-Confucians such as Mou Zongsan, rather than to return to Kang Youwei blindly and ignore modern universal values.

KCI등재

10存在心理學與儒家

저자 : 전병술 ( Jun Byungsul )

발행기관 : 성균관대학교 유교문화연구소 간행물 : Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 29권 0호 발행 연도 : 2018 페이지 : pp. 185-201 (17 pages)

다운로드

(기관인증 필요)

초록보기

亞伯拉罕·馬斯洛是人本主義心理學(Humanistic Psychology)的主要創建者之一。現代人持有?多精神上的問題,他認爲價値觀的喪失是這個時代的最終痼疾,而且目前的情況比歷史上任何時代都要危險,所以主張我們人類只有通過自己的努力,卽達到自我實現來改變這種情況。他又說美國人已經認識到,政治的民主和經濟的繁榮在他們身上幷沒有解決任何基本的價値問題。除非轉向內部,轉向自己,否則就沒有價値觀念的棲息地。馬斯洛在《存在心理學探索》主要反對傳統行爲主義的機械論和環境決定論,强調人是主動的,能創造的,實現完美人格。他認爲人作爲一個有機整體。他把連結社會至宇宙,實現自我幷且擴充自我爲終極目標的學問稱謂“存在心理學”,這正是符合儒家一向追求的終極目標。馬斯洛關注的是什?是有道德的生活?什?樣的人是道德的人??樣才能把人敎育成期望和喜歡過有道德的生活的人??樣才能把兒童培養成道德高尙的成人?等等問題他認爲提出這樣的問題。他認爲對心理學來說,這是革命性的轉折。他經由存在認知,至於事實和價値的融合,要建立科學的倫理學。可是他所謂的科學觀察經驗得到的,只是觀察幾個充分成熟的人來達成結論。總體上來看,缺乏具體的方法,僅止於一種宣言而已。若他看到儒家“存天理,去人欲”,“涵養省察”,“致良知”等的種種工夫方法,他的“存在心理學”更會完整的、紮實的。反過來說,儒家對心理學的發展將會做出莫大的貢獻。


Abraham H. Maslow is one of the main founders of Humanistic psychology. According to him, modern people live with many different psychological problems, and among them, loss of values is the ultimate chronic disease. He argues that since current situations modern people are facing are more dangerous than ever in history, people should work their way out toward reaching the goal of self-realization, thereby improving such situations. He also states that Americans have already realized that political democratization and economic prosperity do not offer solutions to basic value issues, stressing the need of converting to oneself in order to establish one's values. Maslow, in his writing Toward a Psychology of Being, criticizes traditional behavioristic psychology and environmental determinism. He highlights the potential of humans, as an active being, for creating something and realizing complete personality. He states that the final goal of Being-psychology is for humans to expand themselves from society to the universe and fulfil themselves as one part of the organized whole. This goal corresponds with the ultimate aim of Confucianism. Maslow is concerned about questions such as “what is a moral life?”, “what makes a person moral?”, “how can we raise children to be morally elegant adults?” He regards this kind of critical mind or awareness as a revolutionary transition in psychology. He tries to set up scientific ethics where truth and values fuse together through recognizing the being. What he means by “science” is scientific ethics acquired through observation and experience, especially by emulating fully mature people. However, this is just an empty statement lacking concrete steps. Confucianism has their way of practice such as “cun tianli qu renyu” 存天理去人 欲, “hanyang xingcha” 涵養省察, and “zhi liangzhi” 致良知. If Maslow had known such ways of practice in Confucianism, his Being-psychology would have been more perfect and sound.

1
권호별 보기
가장 많이 인용된 논문

(자료제공: 네이버학술정보)

가장 많이 인용된 논문
| | | |
1연안해역에서 석유오염물질의 세균학적 분해에 관한 연구

(2006)홍길동 외 1명심리학41회 피인용

다운로드

2미국의 비트코인 규제

(2006)홍길동심리학41회 피인용

다운로드

가장 많이 참고한 논문

(자료제공: 네이버학술정보)

가장 많이 참고한 논문

다운로드

2미국의 비트코인 규제

(2006)홍길동41회 피인용

다운로드

해당 간행물 관심 구독기관

강원대학교 성균관대학교 University of Oxford 동방문화대학원대학교 전남대학교
 26
 24
 10
 6
 6
  • 1 강원대학교 (26건)
  • 2 성균관대학교 (24건)
  • 3 University of Oxford (10건)
  • 4 동방문화대학원대학교 (6건)
  • 5 전남대학교 (6건)
  • 6 서울대학교 (5건)
  • 7 연세대학교 (5건)
  • 8 서울과학기술대학교(구 서울산업대학교) (4건)
  • 9 계명대학교 (3건)
  • 10 법원도서관 (2건)

내가 찾은 최근 검색어

최근 열람 자료

맞춤 논문

보관함

내 보관함
공유한 보관함

1:1문의

닫기