A Criticism of Yang-Ming Studies Mok-jae Hong Yeo-ha
In the 17th century Jo-seon academia, you can see Zhu-zi Studies who have faith in the subject of the subject ostracizing the subject of studies other than the subject.
On the other hand, after two wars, those who were skeptical of the subject came across a different study from that of the subject. At this time of the influx of various academic thought, the atmosphere for Anti-Yang-ming Studies rose relatively as there were one or two scholars who were positive about it. However, the criticism around this time has yet to be seen by scholars who fully understand Yang-Ming Studies and have developed arguments based on it. Nor can there be any major deviation from the previously criticized discussion left by Lee Hwang.
Hong Yeo-ha left three articles criticizing Yang-Ming studies from the standpoint of Zhu-zi.
In 「題陽明集後」, academic admiration for the Zhu-zi Studies was revealed. This is part of his academic orientation. He claimed following the fact that through this article identified. First, the method of study through books was revealed implicitly, emphasizing the method of study of subject matter. Second, Wang Su-in's theory of Qiyangji［致良知］was denied by emphasizing the method of Zhu-zi' studies by giving legitimacy to the theory that the theory of Zhu-zi's study was a desirable method of study.
In 「題陽明集朱子晩年定論後」, the following points were found. First, Hong Yeo-ha sees Wang Su-in as a Buddhist, not a Confucian scholar. Second, the Zhu-zi criticized that he was repentant and enlightened in his later years to write as if he had been united with him. He also confirmed his criticism of Wang Su-in by writing in defense of what he saw as the old age's political theory, as he had kept his usual words together. Third, he emphasizes the study method that emphasizes the importance of "Following the path of study and inquiry［道問學］" in the subject's study, saying that after "Following the path of study and inquiry［道問學］" you have to think accurately and practice hard to achieve "true Honoring the moral nature［尊德性］." He also criticized Yang-Ming academic methods, saying, "There is a certain turn in the study stage," as Zhu-zi’s says, "It is not possible to reach adult status all of a sudden." In 「尊性齋記」, it was wrong to define the academic method of Zhu-zi studies and the academic method of Yook Gu-yeon's as 'Honoring the moral nature［尊德性］' and to understand it as it was during the Yuan and Ming Dynasties that. Therefore, it should not be understood that the method of study of the Zhu-zi is divided in such a dichotomous way that it is only one side of 'Following the path of study and inquiry［道問學］' and that it should be understood that it is learned first and then moved forward to Honoring the moral nature［尊德性］. Hong Yeo-ha also also stressed, Yook Gu-yeon must be well-educated and well-groomed even if the qualities she received from heaven are great growth.' Even the Zhu-zi who Hong Yeo-ha praised for correcting his studies in order to fill his own deficiencies, and Yook Gu-yeon criticized him, citing his lack of virtue Through the above three articles, we confirmed the criticism of Yang Ming-hak by Hong Yeo-ha, a Confucian scholar of the 17th century.