2016-08-012024-05-18https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/704402摘要：以韓國儒學和日本儒學為例，日本儒學每多批評宋儒的言論，其所謂宋儒多指朱子。日本近世儒學確實有一股反朱子學的傾向。韓國儒學則獨尊朱子，不僅陽明學發展空間有限，受宋儒大力批判的荀子更缺乏生存空間，因此韓國即使在儒學全盛時期也從未出現《荀子》注本，不像日本儒學擁有許多《荀子》注本，大家如荻生徂徠、皆川淇園都曾注荀。荀子學在日韓的不同處境，也反映了日韓儒學對理學（或狹義而言的朱子學）的不同態度。縱然韓國對荀子學興味闌珊，但儒者在著作中卻經常提及荀子，通過仔細爬梳，仍然可以清理出韓國荀子學的紋理脈絡。 大致而言，荀子之勸學、解蔽、修身、禮法、經學方面的主張頗受重視，最為韓儒詬病的思想是性惡，這自然是受宋儒的影響。在反荀子的主流當中，幾位肯定荀子的學者顯得格外引人注目，其中尤以丁若鏞闡發荀子思想最力，這與丁若鏞思想中本帶有反理學、反朱子學的傾向有關。本計劃擬從東亞視野探討韓國荀子學的思想特色。<br> Abstract: This project attempts to explore Choson Korean Interpretations of Xunzi in East Asian perspective. The Choson Dynasty (1392-1910) of Korean history features its creative development of Zhu Xi school. Under the overwhelming influence of Zhu Xi(1130-1200), Xunzi is degraded as unorthodoxy. The main reason for the evaluation of Xunzi is his notion of “human nature is evil.” It is understandable that Zhu Xi and other Song Confucian scholars who support Mencius’ notion of “human nature is good” are hostile to Xunzi. Although the main stream is against Xunzi, there are some scholars who emphasize Xunzi’s contribution to the theory of human nature. I will focus on two points: (1) the connections between the interpretations of Xunzi and the longstanding history of Zhu Xi school and (2) the intellectual features of those scholars who support Xunzi’s notion of “human nature is evil.”荀子東亞儒學韓國儒學性惡說XunziEast Asian ConfucianismKorean Confucianismhuman nature