이 논문의 목적은 유가 철학에서 오랫동안 논란이 된 ‘반성’이라는 주제의 기원을 찾고, ‘반성’ 개념의 철학사적 맥락을 조명하는 것이다. 이를 위해 필자는 ‘반(反)’과 ‘성(省)’이라는 용어가 언제 ‘반성’이라는 도덕철학적 의미를 획득했고, 그 변화의 과정은 어떠했는지를 규명하고자 한다. 『시경』과 『서경』에서 ‘반(反)’과 ‘성(省)’이라는 글자는 일상어의 의미만을 가지며, ‘반성’이라는 주제를 중국철학사에서 처음으로 제시한 인물은 공자이다. 『논어』는 ‘성(省)’이라는 용어에 ‘실패한 결과나 잘못된 행위에 직면하여 나 자신을 점검하다/돌아보다’라는 도덕철학적 의미를 함축시켰다. 그러나 『논어』는 반성의 구체적인 방법과 의미에 대한 논의는 소략하다. ‘반성’이라는 주제가 보다 체계적인 맥락에서 논의되는 것은 『묵자』이다. 묵자는 성(省) 대신에 ‘반(反)’이라는 글자에 ‘반성’이라는 의미를 부여한다. 묵자의 반(反)-반성은 현재의 자신이 과거의 자기 판단이나 행위, 사건을 대상으로 한다. 『묵자』에서 반성은 개인의 이기심과 주관성을 극복하고 공동체 전체의 관점에서 자신을 반성한다는 의미를 함축하며, 반(反)에 함축된 이러한 의미는 효(孝)와 같은 유가의 윤리적 개념이 특수성에 제한된다고 비판하는 묵가의 논지와 부합한다. 맹자는 ‘반(反)’의 일상어로서의 용법과 『묵자』의 특징적인 용법을 수용한다. 그는 『논어』의 표현과 『묵자』의 철학적 사유를 결합하여 ‘반구저기(反求諸己)’라는 특징적인 표현을 만든다. 한편 맹자는 이 두 용법과 구분되는 ‘반(反)’의 새로운 용법을 제시하는데, ‘反身而誠, 樂莫大焉’이 바로 이러한 경우이다. 이때의 반성은 자기 자신이 주체이고, 자기 내면의 본래적이고 자연적인 도덕성을 대상으로 한다. 이러한 맹자의 반(反)-반성은 자신이 주체이고, 지나간 일이나 현재의 사건과 같은 특정한 대상이 아닌, 자기 내면의 도덕감 혹은 본래적 도덕성을 대상으로 한다. 맹자의 이러한 반(反)-반성 용법은 이전과는 구분되는 새롭고 특징적인 것이다. 순자는 ‘반(反)’을 일상어 용법으로만 사용한다. 대신에 그는 『논어』에 등장하는 ‘성(省)’을 활용한다. 철학적 함축성을 가진 용어인 ‘반(反)’을 ‘성(省)’으로 대체한 것이다. 그리고 순자는 이 ‘성(省)’을 배움[學]이나 예(禮)와 연관시키는 구조를 새롭게 창안함으로써 이 용어에 자신의 철학적인 특징을 투영시킨다.

This paper aims to illuminate the origin and the moral philosophical context of the concept of ‘reflection’. I'm going to focus on the word ‘fan(反)’ and ‘sheng(省)’. ‘Sheng(省)’ has firstly obtained the moral meaning of ‘reflection’ in the Confucius Analects. So Confucius is the first thinker who invents the meaning of ‘reflection’. But his descendent thinkers, like Mozi and Menzi, use the term of ‘fan(反)’ instead of Confucius's ‘sheng(省)’. ‘Fan(反)’ meant ‘to be contrary to each other’, ‘to return’, ‘rather’ in the canons like Shijing(詩經), Shujing(書經), and Lunyu(論語). The usage of ‘fan’ in these canons is not philosophical language but ordinary and simple language. Mozi was the first thinker who use ‘fan’ as the meaning of reflection. It means when a person is faced with a unexpected failure or a wrongdoing, he has to seek the cause of those results from himself instead of others or think over about those result for preventing any recurrence. Mozi also use ‘fan’ as ordinary and simple language. Menzi's usage of ‘fan’ has three types. The first type is ordinary and simple language like ‘to be contrary to each other’, ‘to return’, ‘rather’. The second type is exactly the same as Mozi's usage to reflect upon oneself. Menzi's acception of Mozi's usage of ‘fan’ shows the Mozi's philosophical influence for Menzi. The third type shows Menzi's characteristic theory that human nature is originally good. Menzi' insists that if one can reflect and concentrate upon oneself, then he may ascertain the existence of the innate moral inclination which is called ‘the Four Beginnings’. This type of reflection must proceed before doing any action. The aim of this type of reflection is not preventing any recurrence of failure or wrongdoing, but having a confidence for the natural morality. Xunzi uses ‘fan’ as everyday language and replaces ‘fan’ with ‘sheng(省)’. ‘Fan’ loses the philosophical meaning and ‘sheng’ gained the role of ‘fan’ in Xunzi. Xunzi's distinctive usage of ‘sheng’ is a direct involvement with the learning and Li(禮) and this feature is related to his theory that human nature is originally evil. There’s one other point which claims our attention. The combination of ‘fan’ and ‘sheng’ and appearance of the word ‘fansheng(反省)’ in later ages is by virture of Xunzi's usage of ‘sheng’.

This paper aims to illuminate the origin and the moral philosophical context of the concept of ‘reflection’. I'm going to focus on the word ‘fan(反)’ and ‘sheng(省)’. ‘Sheng(省)’ has firstly obtained the moral meaning of ‘reflection’ in the Confucius Analects. So Confucius is the first thinker who invents the meaning of ‘reflection’. But his descendent thinkers, like Mozi and Menzi, use the term of ‘fan(反)’ instead of Confucius's ‘sheng(省)’. ‘Fan(反)’ meant ‘to be contrary to each other’, ‘to return’, ‘rather’ in the canons like Shijing(詩經), Shujing(書經), and Lunyu(論語). The usage of ‘fan’ in these canons is not philosophical language but ordinary and simple language. Mozi was the first thinker who use ‘fan’ as the meaning of reflection. It means when a person is faced with a unexpected failure or a wrongdoing, he has to seek the cause of those results from himself instead of others or think over about those result for preventing any recurrence. Mozi also use ‘fan’ as ordinary and simple language. Menzi's usage of ‘fan’ has three types. The first type is ordinary and simple language like ‘to be contrary to each other’, ‘to return’, ‘rather’. The second type is exactly the same as Mozi's usage to reflect upon oneself. Menzi's acception of Mozi's usage of ‘fan’ shows the Mozi's philosophical influence for Menzi. The third type shows Menzi's characteristic theory that human nature is originally good. Menzi' insists that if one can reflect and concentrate upon oneself, then he may ascertain the existence of the innate moral inclination which is called ‘the Four Beginnings’. This type of reflection must proceed before doing any action. The aim of this type of reflection is not preventing any recurrence of failure or wrongdoing, but having a confidence for the natural morality. Xunzi uses ‘fan’ as everyday language and replaces ‘fan’ with ‘sheng(省)’. ‘Fan’ loses the philosophical meaning and ‘sheng’ gained the role of ‘fan’ in Xunzi. Xunzi's distinctive usage of ‘sheng’ is a direct involvement with the learning and Li(禮) and this feature is related to his theory that human nature is originally evil. There’s one other point which claims our attention. The combination of ‘fan’ and ‘sheng’ and appearance of the word ‘fansheng(反省)’ in later ages is by virture of Xunzi's usage of ‘sheng’.

Fan(反), Sheng(省), Reflection(反省), Kongzi, Menzi, Xunzi