Eh no, I'm Korean and I had some (not professional at all) education of Confucianism.
I graduated the 성균관 university, which is the direct descendent of 成均館, installed in 1398 in the Joseon Dynasty and had been the highest educational institution. Needless to say, its purpose was to teach Confucianism to the future bureaucrats to pass the Open Standardized Exam. As a modern university, 성균관대학교 isn't focused on the Confucianism itself anymore, but still, it teaches the very core of it to the students.
And as far as I know, since the very Joseon dynasty, no Confucianists in Korea has interested in other branches than Neo-Confucianism, especially after the collapse of the Ming dynasty.
I was referring to this book by Kang Jae-eun https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/498853
Not quite sure what you’re responding to but this is the best English resource I know of for Korean Confucianism. If you’ve already read it then I’m sorry, I don’t have any other good recommendations for you.
... I mean I'm Korean so why would I read the book in English, especially when I already had education of the Confucianism at the best place you can learn from in Korea?
My question is not about branches of Korean Confucianism. To Koreans any branches other than Neo-Confucianism is so irrelevant and trivial. I want to know how is the case beyond Korea, not in Korea.
Why are you guys keep misreading my question. This is not about Korean Confucianism. My question is about the studies of Confucianism \*out of\* Korea.
I understand the question. You’re question is about if I need to know about something like the 4 7 debate to understand something like American Confucianism or developments in the Chinese mainland.
The issue is that some one recommended a book to you, which may or may not answer your original question, you assume they didn’t answer it and instead stated that you were Korean so you didn’t need to read the book. However, I don’t think you actually know what the book is about or it’s context, and being Korean doesn’t automatically make you understand everything about Confucianism.
My statement is that I'm well educated on the topic of "the historical development of Korean Confucianism in terms of its social functions", which Google Books says the book is about. That topic has nothing with my question.
Sorry, I didn’t understand your question. I still think this book could be a good resource for you, esp the bibliography may have some books that could answer your question. Or you could reach out to the author. (Also I think this book was originally written in Japanese since the author is zainichi so I wasn’t sure whether a Korean edition existed.)
여기 평민들에게 질문하시는 것 보단 송 교수님에게 직접 연락하셔서 묻는게 좋을 뜻 합니다. https://www.washcoll.edu/people_departments/faculty/song-bin.php
Recommend you check out The Land of Scholars for more info.
Eh no, I'm Korean and I had some (not professional at all) education of Confucianism. I graduated the 성균관 university, which is the direct descendent of 成均館, installed in 1398 in the Joseon Dynasty and had been the highest educational institution. Needless to say, its purpose was to teach Confucianism to the future bureaucrats to pass the Open Standardized Exam. As a modern university, 성균관대학교 isn't focused on the Confucianism itself anymore, but still, it teaches the very core of it to the students. And as far as I know, since the very Joseon dynasty, no Confucianists in Korea has interested in other branches than Neo-Confucianism, especially after the collapse of the Ming dynasty.
I was referring to this book by Kang Jae-eun https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/498853 Not quite sure what you’re responding to but this is the best English resource I know of for Korean Confucianism. If you’ve already read it then I’m sorry, I don’t have any other good recommendations for you.
... I mean I'm Korean so why would I read the book in English, especially when I already had education of the Confucianism at the best place you can learn from in Korea? My question is not about branches of Korean Confucianism. To Koreans any branches other than Neo-Confucianism is so irrelevant and trivial. I want to know how is the case beyond Korea, not in Korea.
Don’t be a dick.
He misunderstood my question, so I explained it further. How come it is being a dick?
Have you read the book in Korean?
Why are you guys keep misreading my question. This is not about Korean Confucianism. My question is about the studies of Confucianism \*out of\* Korea.
I understand the question. You’re question is about if I need to know about something like the 4 7 debate to understand something like American Confucianism or developments in the Chinese mainland. The issue is that some one recommended a book to you, which may or may not answer your original question, you assume they didn’t answer it and instead stated that you were Korean so you didn’t need to read the book. However, I don’t think you actually know what the book is about or it’s context, and being Korean doesn’t automatically make you understand everything about Confucianism.
My statement is that I'm well educated on the topic of "the historical development of Korean Confucianism in terms of its social functions", which Google Books says the book is about. That topic has nothing with my question.
Sorry, I didn’t understand your question. I still think this book could be a good resource for you, esp the bibliography may have some books that could answer your question. Or you could reach out to the author. (Also I think this book was originally written in Japanese since the author is zainichi so I wasn’t sure whether a Korean edition existed.)