바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

The Review of Korean Studies

ISSN : 1229-0076

Article Contents

Next
e-Submission

Vol.13 No.3
Citation Share

From Sinocentrism to Civilization Discourse

The Review of Korean Studies / The Review of Korean Studies, (P)1229-0076; (E)2773-9351
2010, v.13 no.3, pp.13-30
https://doi.org/10.25024/review.2010.13.3.001

(2010). From Sinocentrism to Civilization Discourse. The Review of Korean Studies, 13(3), 13-30, https://doi.org/10.25024/review.2010.13.3.001
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The Sinocentric dichotomy between civilized people and barbarian people has long been the worldview of East Asians. Although this view was challenged before, the decisive challenge was posed by the changes in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. What was the reason for the irreversible overthrow of traditional Sinocentrism and the adoption of what they had previously considered to be barbarianism?Qing China’s Kang Youwei (1857-1927), Japan’s Fukuzawa Yukichi (1835-1901), and Joseon Korea’s Yu Giljun (1856-1914) all thought Western civilization to be a more advanced civilization. However, the eventual aims the three men sought were not the same. From revitalization of Confucianism (Kang Youwei), permanent separation from the tradition of Confucianism through “de-Asianization” (Fukuzawa Yukichi), to the pursuit of a modern independent state without abandonment of traditional Confucianism (Yu Giljun), these three representative intellectuals of East Asia display how the traditional mentality formed during the premodern period continued to influence the modern transformation.The variations and methods of acceptance of the Sinocentric dichotomy of civilized and barbarian played a very important role in the formation of mentalities among the three nations of East Asia. Psychological responses to the injury created by the impact of the Western civilization were not unrelated to the extant mental attitude displayed by Sinocentrism. While China failed to abandon its narcissism and maintained its faith in its origins, Japan radically abandoned Sinocentrism and assimilated itself to Western culture–creating its own narcissism vis-à-vis others. Korea appears to have switched the object of assimilation beginning at the point of the Sino-Japanese War. While traditionalism may have persisted at the underlying level, the thrust of modern Korean society could be found in this transformation.

keywords
Sinocentrism, civilization, Kang Youwei, Fukuzawa Yukichi, Yu Giljun

Reference

1.

Choe, Ikhyeon. 1898. Myeonam seonsaeng munjib. Vol. 4. http://db.itkc.or.kr/index.jsp?bizName=MK&url=/itkcdb/text/bookListIframe.jsp?bizName=MK&seojiId=kc_mk_e002&gunchaId=&NodeId=&setid=1460014 (accessed 26 June 2010).

2.

Dongyi. Suishu. Vol. 81. http://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E9%9A%8B%E6%9B%B8/%E5%8D%B781 (accessed June 26, 2010).

3.

Fukuzawa, Yukichi. 1866. Seiyō Jijō. Tokyo: Jijishinbousha.

4.

Gang, Hang. 1599. Ganyangrok. http://db.itkc.or.kr/index.jsp?bizName= MK&url=/itkcdb/text/bookListIframe.jsp?bizName=MK&seojiId=kc_mk_a024&gunchaId=&NodeId=&setid=57249 (accessed June 26, 2010).

5.

Fukuzawa, Yukichi. 1885. Datsu-A ron. Jiji shinbo. March 16. (Meiji 18). Goryeosa. Vol.120. http://www.krpia.co.kr/pContent/?svcid=KR&proid=1 (accessed June 26, 2010).

6.

Kang, Youwei. 1898. Kongzi gai zhi kao. htttp://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E5%AD%94%E5%AD%90%E6%94%B9%E5%88%B6%E8%80%83 (accessed June 26, 2010).

7.

Kim, Gisu. 1876. Ildong giyu. Vol. 2. http://db.itkc.or.kr/indexjsp?biz Name=MK&url=/itkcdb/text/bookListIframe.jsp?bizName= MK&seojiId=kc_mk_h033&gunchaId=&NodeId=&setid=305566 (accessed June 26, 2010).

8.

Kim, Yunsik. 1891 Sokeum Cheongsa. Repr., Seoul: Kuksapyun chanwiwonhoe, 1960 (http://image.history.go.kr:8080/dhrs/dhrsXIFViewer.jsp?system=dlidb&id=000000016519(accessed June 26, 2010).

9.

Liji. http://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E7%A6%AE%E8%A8%98 (accessed June 26, 2010).

10.

Maengjajipju. http://gate.dbmedia.co.kr/aks/korea.asp?url_name=사서 (accessed June 26, 2010).

11.

Mutsu, Munemitsu. 1994. Kenkenroku. Seoul: Beomusa.

12.

Songja daejeon. Vol. 131. http://db.itkc.or.kr/index.jsp?bizName=MK&url=/itkcdb/text/bookListIframe.jsp?bizName=MK&seojiId=kc_mk_g009&gunchaId=&NodeId=&setid=302555 (accessed June 26, 2010).

13.

Toegye jeonseo. 1843. Vol.8. (http://db.itkc.or.kr/index.jsp?bizName=MK).

14.

TongnipSinmun. 1896. Nonseol. April 21. http://gonews.kinds.or.kr/OLD_NEWS_IMG3/DLD/DLD18960421u00_01.pdf (accessed June 26, 2010).

15.

TongnipSinmun. 1896. Japbo. June 4. http://gonews.kinds.or.kr/OLD_NEWS_IMG3/DLD/DLD18960604u00_02.pdf (accessed June 26, 2010).

16.

Yu, Giljun. 1895. Seoyu gyeonmun. Tokyo: Goshunsha.

17.

Zhouyi. http://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E5%91%A8% E6%98%93 (accessed June 26, 2010).

18.

Asukai,Masamichi. 2002. Nihon kindai seishinshi no kenkyū (A Study of Modern Japanese Spiritual History). Kyōto: Kyōto Daigaku Gakujutsu Shuppankai.

19.

Bak, Honggyu. 2001. 17segi deokcheon ilbon e iteoseoeui hwai munje (The Problem of Sinocentrism in Seventeenth Century Tokukawa Japan). Hanguk jeongchihak hoebo 35(4): 277-296.

20.

Chen, Qitai and Tingyong Li. 2004. Zhongguo xue shu tong shi (A History of Chinese Humanities). Vol. 6. Beijing: Ren min chu ban she.

21.

Gu, Gyeonseo. 2001. Ilbon jishikin eui sasang (Thoughts of Japanese Intellectuals). Seoul: Hyeondae mihaksa.

22.

Han, Sangil. 2002. Asia yeondae wa ilbon jeguk juui (Asian Solidarity and Japanese Imperialism). Seoul: Oreum.

23.

Jo, Gwanja. 2001. Karagokoro reul baejaehan gongdongseong eui an gwa bak. Ilbon sasang 3:139-159.

24.

Kim, Bongryeol. 1998. Yu Giljun gaehwa sasang eui yeongu (A Study of Yu Giljun’s Enlightenment Thoughts). Seoul: Gyeongnamdae Chulpanbu.

25.

Maruyama, Masao. 1998. Ilbon jeongchi sasangsa yeongu (A Study of Japanese Political Thoughts). Trans. Seokgeun Kim. Seoul: Tongnamu.

The Review of Korean Studies

e-Submission OA Policy