查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 17世紀韓國的儒學思想--朱子學的深化以及對其的批判=The Korean Confucianism in 17C--Deepening Zhuzixue and Criticism about It |
---|---|
作 者 | 安在淳; | 書刊名 | 儒教文化研究 |
卷 期 | 7 2007.02[民96.02] |
頁 次 | 頁1-36 |
專 輯 | 17世紀東亞儒學思想 |
分類號 | 132.5 |
關鍵詞 | 折衷派; 反朱子學; 人物性論; 實學; 陽明學; Eclectic school; Anti-Zhuzixue; Theory of man's and thing's nature; Practical learning; Yangming school; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 17世紀韓國的朱子學是退溪、栗谷兩學派扎根發展的時代。他們用理氣論解釋人的心性問題,在這述程中也出現了折衷兩學派思想的折衷學派。而且他們的深討對象也從人的心性問題擴展到人性和物性的關係問題,這就產生了所謂的“人物性同異論辨”。17世紀雖是朱餐學教條化的時代,但白湖和西溪還是展開了反朱子學的理論體系,挑戰朱子學的權威。他們的學說在韓國思想史上具有如下意義:(1)為朝鮮後期實學思想的產生奠定了時代背景。白湖和西溪的反朱子學思想同時也帶來了18世紀實學思想的一個重要特徵──“思想的解放”;(2)使得18世紀韓國理學史上湖洛論辨的出現成為必然。西溪的人物性論雖然是對當時朱子學界的人物性論的批判,但與其意圖無關,打開了人物性同異論爭的序幕;(3)全面刺激了韓國陽明學派的發展。 |
英文摘要 | The Korean Neo-Confucianism in 17C was deepened by both Toegye’s an;d Yoolgog’s schools, and anther schools, and anther school, which compromised the theories between two schools, appeared. They tried to explain the mind and nature of Man with li-qi theory. In this process they were concerned about the relation between Man’s and Thing’s nature, that is “Is it the same or different mutually?” On the other side, Zhuxi’s commendation of the Confucian scriptures was absolutely reverenced, so the different commendation about Zhuxi’s could never be approved. In such an atmosphere, Baegho and Seogye unfolded anti-Zhuxi’s commentation. This current of Korean Confucianism in 17C has a meaning as below. First, it became a background of the Practical Learning in the latter Chosun dynasty. Especially it concerned with an Eclectic School of Korean Neo-Confucianism in 17C. Second, the survey of Man’s and Thing’s nature in this period made a way for Ho-Rag Debate, which was the most important theme in 18C’s Korean Neo-Confucianism. Third, anti-Zhuxi’s commendation of the Confucian scriptures took Yangming school out of a shady spot. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。