도가 반지성주의 정치사상에 대한 재고찰 - 유가･도가 논쟁점을 중심으로 - = Reconsideration of Anti-Intellectual’s Political Thought of Taoism - Focusing on the Debate between Confucianism and Taoism -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Anti-intellectualism does not deny intelligence itself, refers to an idea or attitude of believing that only one’s own claims are correct, treating intellectual discussions that contradict them as anti-social, and trying to suppress them with power. If Confucianism aimed to cultivate virtues and create the common good of artificial effort (有爲) through intellectual inquiry, then Taoism was another form of intellectualism that sought to directly attain the Tao(道) of spiritual brightness (神明) by cutting off artificial intermediaries and practicing artificial effortless (無爲). The abandoning artificial knowledge(棄智) in the Laozi (老子) is not a rejection of intellect itself, but a rejection of clever knowledge, and a process of finding the inner brightness (明). Zhuangzi (莊子)’s criticism of Confucius was a call to return to the true knowledge (眞知) that inherently exists within human nature, without going through artificial processing. The Huanglao(黃老) school rejected the external intermediaries of Confucian benevolence, rightness, courtesy, and rules (仁義禮法), instead taking the internal spiritual brightness as the spiritual subject to directly reach the Tao (=Heaven=Nature). Seen this way, neither the Laozhuang (老莊) nor Huanglao were anti-intellectualism. The core of the debate between Confucianism and Taoism was not about knowledge itself, but about what constitutes true knowledge.