지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In this paper, I examine James B. Palais’ conception of history through his book 『Confucian Statecraft and Korean Institutions: Yu Hy?ngw?n and the Late Chos?n Dynasty』. Palais was critical of academic attitudes that saw history of Korea according to the theory of internal development. His criticism was also a rejection of the products of Korean historical research in the 20th Century. Palais labored to constructively confirm his criticism and rejection through his analysis of Yu Hy?ngw?n and 『Pan’gye surok』.
According to Palais, elements that make up the foundation of modernity had not been formed in Late Chos?n Dynasty, thus, any discussion on modernity of the era would be incorrect in such view. In this context, Realist School of Confucianism known as Silhak that began in Korea could not qualify as a modern ideology: it was also not appropriate to analyze Yu Hy?ngw?n and『Pan’gye surok』 in terms of Silhak. James Palais understood that 『Pan’gye surok』’s main thesis was to resolve problems that arose in a society in which oligarchy and aristocracy had fused into a single social structure. He also realized that Yu Hy?ngw?n lacked any sense of ethnic-nationalism in light of the fact that Yu designed social reform based on Confucian culture.
James Palais’ study of Yu Hy?ngw?n and 『Pan’gye surok』 became an occasion for self-examination for Korean scholars: did Korean ‘Silhak’ scholarship reflect the realities of Late Chos?n Dynasty? And had the history of the period been overrated due to our fascination with ‘modernity’? However, Palais’ scholarship shows its limits in that he excessively underrated the level of Chos?n’s social developments from his ‘higher’ perspective, and also in that he proceeded his analysis without clearly capturing the essential issues that Yu Hy?ngw?n and other Silhak scholars agonized on. Today, when Korean Studies is being discussed on a global level, James Palais’ research is a critical subject that must be examined for gaining a more progressive perspective and methodology.
According to Palais, elements that make up the foundation of modernity had not been formed in Late Chos?n Dynasty, thus, any discussion on modernity of the era would be incorrect in such view. In this context, Realist School of Confucianism known as Silhak that began in Korea could not qualify as a modern ideology: it was also not appropriate to analyze Yu Hy?ngw?n and『Pan’gye surok』 in terms of Silhak. James Palais understood that 『Pan’gye surok』’s main thesis was to resolve problems that arose in a society in which oligarchy and aristocracy had fused into a single social structure. He also realized that Yu Hy?ngw?n lacked any sense of ethnic-nationalism in light of the fact that Yu designed social reform based on Confucian culture.
James Palais’ study of Yu Hy?ngw?n and 『Pan’gye surok』 became an occasion for self-examination for Korean scholars: did Korean ‘Silhak’ scholarship reflect the realities of Late Chos?n Dynasty? And had the history of the period been overrated due to our fascination with ‘modernity’? However, Palais’ scholarship shows its limits in that he excessively underrated the level of Chos?n’s social developments from his ‘higher’ perspective, and also in that he proceeded his analysis without clearly capturing the essential issues that Yu Hy?ngw?n and other Silhak scholars agonized on. Today, when Korean Studies is being discussed on a global level, James Palais’ research is a critical subject that must be examined for gaining a more progressive perspective and methodology.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 『반계수록』연구의 논리와 문제 의식
Ⅲ. 연구의 특징 : 역사 해석의 새로움 혹은展望의 不在
Ⅳ. 맺음말
참고문헌
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
유형원, 제임스 팔레, 그리고 실학의 정의
한국실학연구
2022 .06
-
Yu Hyeongwon, James Palais, and the Definition of Silhak
한국실학연구
2022 .06
-
조선후기 신국가 구상의 전통과 경세유표(經世遺表)
다산과 현대
2017 .12
-
반계 유형원의 국가재정 개혁구상과 녹봉제 실시론
한국실학연구
2018 .01
-
조선후기 실학 연구의 고민과 반성 - 그 방법적 모색을 중심으로
율곡학연구
2021 .12
-
조선 시대 실학 용법에 대한 거시적 일고찰
개념과 소통
2020 .01
-
실학(實學)과 실학파(實學派) 문학의 쟁점과 방향
동방한문학
2024 .09
-
제7차 교육과정기~2018 개정 교육과정기 한국사 교과서의 실학 서술 -고등학교 한국사를 중심으로-
역사와교육
2022 .11
-
19세기 말∼20세기 초 한·중·일 삼국의 실학 개념
개념과 소통
2015 .01
-
조선후기 실학의 변증법적 전환
동방문화와 사상
2022 .06
-
유형원의 학문 연원과 『반계수록』의 정치론－서경덕계 학맥과 연관하여－
한국사상사학
2022 .12
-
교육과정 개정을 앞두고 살펴보는 실학 교육의 현황과 전망
역사와교육
2022 .11
-
17세기 문명적 위기의식과 실학 -磻溪柳馨遠의 문집 발간에 즈음해서
한국실학연구
2017 .01
-
조선후기 실학 연구의 추이와 성과 : 해방 후 한국에서의 실학 연구, 방법과 문제의식
한국사연구
2019 .03
-
반계 유형원의 실학정신과 그 교훈
韓國史學史學報
2018 .01
-
근대 초기 실학의 존재론 : 실학 인식의 방향 전환을 위하여
역사비평
2018 .02
-
조선후기 새로운 국가구상의 전통과『경세유표(經世遺表)』 − 『반계수록(磻溪隨錄)』 이래 남인(南人)의 전제론(田制論)과 결부하여 −
동방학지
2017 .01
-
조선후기 성리학 이념과 실학의 제 문제
韓國史學史學報
2019 .01
-
한국 실학과 미래 세대 교육
역사와교육
2022 .11
-
伊藤東涯의 『三韓紀畧』편찬과 조선 연구
사학연구
2018 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-911-001420585