이간과 한원진의 인물성동이논쟁을 바탕으로 한한국식 다문화주의 모색 연구

초록

This study examines the core ideas and social context of the philosophical debate on the nature of human character―Inmulseongdongi―between Yi Gan and Han Won-jin, and explores how we, as members of a multicultural society, might meaningfully engage with their thought. The rapid transition of Korean society into a multicultural one has led various areas―such as the government, local communities, and academia―to develop multicultural discourses. However, this process has often leaned heavily on Western academic frameworks. In response to this concern, the present study begins with the belief that Korea’s indigenous philosophical debates can also contribute to shaping multicultural discourse. Yi Gan and Han Won-jin each discussed the nature of human character from their own perspectives: one advancing the theory of Inmulseongdong(shared human nature across people and things), the other supporting Inmulseongi(distinct human nature). Their debate is best understood in light of the domestic and international conditions of late Joseon dynasty. Internally, the rise of Silhak(Practical Learning) threatened the dominance of Neo-Confucianism, and the growth of the monetary economy began to destabilize the rigid class system of scholar-officials, farmers, artisans, and merchants. Externally, the Qing dynasty had achieved political stability and was asserting its influence as a dominant power in East Asia. Within this context, the arguments of Yi Gan and Han Won-jin served not only as theoretical frameworks for understanding human nature but also as ideological responses to social challenges and the dynamics of identity and otherness. Yi Gan’s theory of Inmulseongdong acknowledged the potential of non-human entities, yet it carries the risk of assimilationism, as it implicitly demands that non-human or non-mainstream beings become ‘like humans’, thus reinforcing anthropocentrism. In contrast, Han Won-jin’s Inmulseongi theory risks leading to discrimination by emphasizing difference, but it also opens a path to recognizing and respecting otherness―by not requiring the ‘other’ to conform to the dominant norm. This provides an intellectual foundation for multiculturalism in that it aligns with the recognition of immigrants’ unique cultures without imposing the dominant culture’s standards. As members of a multicultural society, we can draw upon the positive aspects of both thinkers’ arguments and reinterpret them to suit contemporary realities. This blended approach may help us cultivate a Korean-style multiculturalism rooted in our own philosophical traditions.

키워드