earticle

영어

In the late 18th century, Seokjae Yoon Haeng-im (1762-1801), who represented Noron, and Dasan Jeong Yak-yong (1762-1836), who represented Kiho Namin, focused on their works, 『Shinho Essay_Mencius』 and 『Mencius- youi』, respectively. ‘Inmulseongi theory(Theory on difference of nature of humans and things)’ was outspread. These two people were born in the same year. Although they had different political affiliations, he received King Jeongjo's favor and quietly walked his own path as a scholar representing aspects of the history of thought in the late Joseon Dynasty. At the time, interest in ‘Inmulseon theory(Theories about the nature of humans and things)’ was constantly being raised in the academic world as the the Horak Debate. Yoon Haeng-im inherited Namdang Han Won-jin's ‘Horon's Neo-Confucian style’ and believed that there was a clear difference in the ‘Original nature’ given to ‘human’ and ‘objects’ from heaven, and that this could be confirmed through each temperament. He represented the humanism of Neo- Confucianism in Zhu Xi, recognizing that only ‘humans’ are born with all these things intact. On the other hand, through critical acceptance of Confucianism, Jeong Yak-yong interpreted ‘Nature is the principle’ and ‘natural intelligence’ as ‘The Theory of Human Nature as Moral Inclination’ and ‘The Nature of Way and Righteousness’ respectively. In particular, he emphasized the fact that ‘objects’ only have ‘Physically endowed nature’, so their difference from humans is clear. This appeared as a critical view of the Confucian thinking system, which was biased towards ideas, in line with the situation and changes of the time, and created for a practical ideological view that placed emphasis on ‘human’ and ‘parenchyma’. The two figures are the same in that they advocated the 'Inmulseongi theory(Theory on difference of nature of humans and things)' and sought to realize the origins of Confucianism and Mencius' 'human nature is good', but because their perceptions of 'Original nature' were fundamentally different, Yoon Haeng-im and Jeong Yak-yong's There was a difference in logic.

한국어

18세기 후반 노론을 대표하는 석재 윤행임(1762~1801)과 기호남인을 대표하는 다산 정약용(1762~1836)은 각각 자신의 저서인 『신호수필_맹자』와 『맹자요의』를 중심으로 ‘인물성이론’을 전개해 나갔다. 이들 두 사람은 같은 해에 출생하였다. 비록 당색은 달랐지만, 정조의 총애를 한 몸에 받으며 조선 후기 사상사의 일면을 대표하는 학자로서 자신의 길을 묵묵히 걸어 나갔다. 당시 학계는 주자학 내부에서 호락논쟁을 거치면서, ‘인물성론’에 대한 관심이 꾸준히 제기되고 있었다. 윤행임은 남당 한원진의 ‘호론적 주자학풍’을 계승하며, ‘人’·‘物’이 하늘에게서 부여받은 ‘본연지성’은 엄연한 차이가 있고 이는 각각의 기질을 통해 확인할 수 있다고 보았다. 그는 오직 ‘인간’만이 이 모두를 온전히 갖고 태어난 존재로 인식하면서 주자 성리학의 인본주의를 대변하였다. 반면, 정약용은 주자학의 비판적 수용을 통해 ‘성즉리’와 ‘본연지성’을 각각 ‘기호’와 ‘도의지성’으로 풀이하였다. 특히, ‘사물’에는 ‘기질지성’만 존재하여 인간과의 차이점이 확연하다는 사실을 강조하였다. 이것은 당시 시대적 상황과 변화에 맞물려 관념에 치우친 주자학적 사고체계에 대한 비판적 시각으로 나타나 ‘인간’과 ‘실질’을 중시하는 실천적 사상관을 생성해냈다. 두 인물은 ‘인물성이론’을 주장하고 유학의 본지와 맹자의 ‘性善’을 실현하고자 했다는 점에서는 동일하지만, 기본적으로 ‘성’에 대한 인식이 달랐기 때문에, 윤행임과 정약용의 논리에는 차이가 있었다.