이간의 이기동실‧심성일치론과 임성주의 비판

초록

The purpose of this paper is to clarify Lee Gan(李柬)’s thesis of ‘the unity of principle and vital force(理氣同實)’ and ‘the coincidence of mind and nature(心性一致)’, and examine Im Seong-ju’s criticism on it. Discussing the non-issuance state of the mind, Lee Gan emphasized the thesis of ‘the unity of principle and vital force’ and ‘the coincidence of mind and nature’, which implies that the human nature(or principle) will be good actually only if human mind(or vital force) becomes good. At the same time he separated principle from vital force and pointed it in domain of comparing human nature and things’ nature. It means that the thesis of the unity of principle and vital force has not been applied consistently in the two realm. Im Seong-ju(任聖周), penetrating the dislocation found in Lee’s theory, criticised him for being out of touch with the ultimate source and insisted that thesis of ‘the unity of principle and vital force’ and ‘the coincidence of mind and nature’ is a real law working consistently anywhere in this world.

키워드