초록 열기/닫기 버튼
The question of whether Tasan Chŏng Yagyong was a scholar of “advancing to government offices (ch’ul)” or “staying in satisfaction (ch’ŏ)” is bound to cause controversy and confusion. Despite his experience of exile, Tasan gravitated towards “advancing.” In his discussion of King Wu, Guan Zhong, and other rulers who were the subjects of Neo-Confucian deontological criticism, Tasan consistently advocated these political leaders, emphasizing their social merits. Tasan defined “scholars” as those who wanted to take government offices. In his view, learning the Way remained instrumental, and the “study for others” was more important than the “study for self.” Since the trends of prioritizing “advancing to government offices” over “staying in satisfaction” and vice-versa alternated throughout the history of Chosŏn Confucianism, this lends support to the theory that Practical Learning was inheritor to the Confucian tradition, and thus as an intellectual movement displayed continuity rather than rupture. In fact, Chosŏn Neo-Confucianism and the Practical Learning school are equally expressive of the Confucian spirit, which aims to achieve the contradictory goals of inner virtue and outer merits, regardless of their differences in emphasis.
