18세기 동아시아와 ‘근대성’이라는 프리즘에 관하여

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 서강대학교 철학연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 철학논집 / 36호
· 저자명 : 정빈나

목차

I. 머리말: 동아시아의 ‘근대’에 대한 성찰
II. 18세기 동아시아에 대한 ‘근대성’의 프리즘: 탈형이상학과 실제성
III. ?소증?에서의 대진의 ‘리’ 해석: ‘개별자’와 ‘구체성’의 부각
IV. ‘근대성’의 프리즘에 들어오지 않는 부분들: 한계와 가능성
V. 맺음말: 논의의 정리

초록

본 글은 대진의 ⌈맹자자의소증⌉에 담긴 ‘리’에 대한 견해에서 ‘근대성’의 특징인 ‘개별자’ 개념을 도출하려 한다. 대진은 ‘리’를 인간의 개별적이고 구체적인 조리로 본다. 인간은 기를 품부 받아 개별적인 ‘혈기’, ‘심지’를 본성으로 가지며 욕구와 지성을 구비한다. 지성을 통해 개별자의 욕구를[=자연] 올바른 방향[=필연]으로 충족시킬 수 있으며 타자의 욕구도 헤아릴 수 있다. 대진은 ‘소동연’의 개념을 들어, 개별자들의 필연에는 합의점이 있고 이에 이르려면 개별자들의 의견이 대등한 가치를 갖고 취합되어야 한다고 본다.
대진의 ‘리’ 해석에서 ‘개별자’의 예로 든 요소들은 전적인 근대성을 띤다고 볼 수는 없다. 그러나 ‘개별자’를 중시하는 대진의 사유에서 근대로의 가능성을 모색할 수는 있다. 전근대와 탈근대가 혼재된 한국사회는 오히려 새로운 철학적 가능성을 품고 있다. 근대적 의미의 ‘개별자’의 확립과 동아시아 전통 속의 ‘개별자’에 관한 사유는 철학적 가능성의 실마리로서 유효하다.

영어초록

In the 18th century, the East Asian scholars tended to focus on specific and
realistic discourse rather than abstract metaphysics. Because of this reason,
nowadays, East Asian scholars research a potential of ‘Modernity’ in the history
of East Asia in the 18th century. However, to find potential of this, we should
investigates the Eastern thoughts of the 18th century how similar as the features
of ‘Modernity’. A purpose of this paper is analyzing Dai Zhen(戴震)’s opinion
of ‘Li(理)’ in『孟子字義疏證(Mengzi ziyi shuzeng, Commentary on the
Meanings of Terms in the Book of Mencius)』, and finding the concept of
‘Individuals’ which is the core of ‘Modernity’.
Dai defined ‘Li’ as an individual and specific patterns[條理] for each human
being and things. And also he protested Neo-Confucian view which prescribe
‘Li’ as an universal and metaphysical principles. Human and things are
existences those have nature of ‘xu?q?(血氣)‘ and ‘x?nzh?(心志)’ which are
based on ‘qi(氣)’. Human being know ‘Li’ for the patterns of nature because
they have emotions, desires, and intelligence in the nature of ‘xu?q?‘ and
‘x?nzh?’. Human being fulfil desires and emotions[=natural(ziran, 自然)] in the
right direction[=necessary(biran, 必然)] through using intelligence, and
understand the desires and feelings of others.
However, how can we secure unity beyond the individuality of each human
being and things? For this question, Dai presented the concept of
‘unanimity(suotongran, 所同然)’. He believed that ‘necessary(biran, 必然)’ of
each individual beings can reach a consensus. He argued that gathering a
number of comments is necessary to reach agreement, not only specific personal
opinion. A basis of agreement is giving value to the individuality of presences.
In clearly, finding a potential of the concept about ‘individuals’ from Dai’s
interpretation of ‘Li(理)’ has confines. As a clue to the elements of ‘Modernity’
have a relative inventiveness, but it is can not be entirely modern. Nevertheless,
we can seek possibility towards to ‘Modernity’ through Dai’s thoughts emphasis
‘individuals’. The idea of Dai is timeliness to find ‘Modern’ what wasn’t
achieved in East Asia. All of the above discussion is connected to the reality
of Korea. Because Korean have to create their own new ‘Modernity’ rooted in
their thinking and living. Korean society is chaos mixed pre-modern, modern,
and post-modern. Paradoxically, however, this chaos may be a clue to make a
plan of new philosophy and a view of world. To think about establishment of
‘individuals’ of modern, and ‘individuals’ in the East Asian tradition is
available as a glimpse of the planning.

참고자료

· 없음