2018 Fiscal Year Final Research Report
Intellectual Interaction Amongst Scholars Centering on Kaitokudo School
| Project/Area Number |
16K02219
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
History of thought
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Meiji University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
SHIMIZU Norio 明治大学, 理工学部, 専任准教授 (30580849)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
本村 昌文 岡山大学, ヘルスシステム統合科学研究科, 教授 (80322973)
グラムリヒ・オカ ベティーナ 上智大学, 国際教養学部, 教授 (60573417)
高橋 恭寛 東日本国際大学, 東洋思想研究所, 准教授 (70708031)
浅井 雅 神戸大学, 国際文化学研究科, 協力研究員 (80782010)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2016-04-01 – 2019-03-31
|
| Keywords | 懐徳堂 / 朱子学 / 陽明学 / 『春水日記』 / 龍野藩 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
Our project's aim was the examination of the shifting ideas amongst Kaitokudo scholars as seen in their criticism of other schools of thought. Whereas in its beginning the Kaitokudo had no established intellectual position but was rather eclectic in its approach, Goi Ranshu, even though as an adherent of Neo-Confucian thought, criticized the school of Ogyu Sorai in his regard of the notion of meibun (moral obligations according to one's name and function in society), which implied to him the practice of both, loyalty to one's country and the submission to the domestic political order. Nakai Chikuzan, on the other hand, considered terminology (bun) to be of great importance and thus brings him in terms of thought closer to with Sorai on this account.
We also investigated the scholars' networks centered around the Kaitokudo. Next to intellectual interaction, we identified networks that went beyond the immediate community and kinship relations and disregarded the ideological differences.
|
| Free Research Field |
思想史
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
研究成果の学術的意義は、次の三点にある。第一に、従来研究が手薄だった、十八世紀中盤の儒教を対象とした点。十八世紀思想史では徂徠学や国学、寛政異学の禁に関心が集中し、その他の動向は軽視されてきたが、本研究はその点に着目した。第二に、懐徳堂を朱子学の拠点として、同時代思想史に位置づけようとした点。懐徳堂の評価は、一部の特殊な思想家を近代的観点から評価する傾向が強かったが、本研究は敢えて朱子学と同時代性に焦点を当てた。第三に、懐徳堂の通時的変遷を明らかにした点。五井蘭洲以後、懐徳堂が朱子学を基調としたことは周知の事実だが、朱子学思想の変遷を明らかにした研究は、これまで存在していない。
|
