Scientizing Traditional Medicine: Cho Honyong and Kim T'aejun's Debates in Newspapers on Traditional Korean Medicine in the 1930s

This paper explores the ‘scientific’ transformation of ideas on traditional Korean medicine focusing on Cho Hŏnyŏng and Kim T’aejun’s Debates in newspapers in the 1930s. After confronting Western medicine, traditional medicine had been developing and institutionalized in different ways and shapes in East Asia. In this process, scientizing traditional medicine was the priority task. However, if traditional medicine had to confront and adjust themselves to so-called ‘scientific’ Western medicine, was it about the layer of methodology or even reach the theoretical layer? The debates between Cho Hŏnyŏng and Kim T’aejun show the hazy lines of this discourse. Kim set aside the yin yang theory from traditional medical practice and tried to absorb it to the ‘scientific’ theory and methodology, which means a materialistic view in his context. On the other hand, Cho didn't deny Kim's theory and methodology but rather tried to compromise traditional medicine thoughts and Western knowledge. Cho believed that it could be possible to explain and yin yang theory in a scientific method. Through the conversations between the two, the complex meaning of ‘scientific’ was revealed, and was possible to see the one side of the discussion of 'what is scientific' to traditional medicine. The scientization of traditional medicine in Korea was carried out in two areas, the theoretical and practical dimensions, respectively, or simultaneously. The series of debates between Cho and Kim can shed a light on the various ways of scientization and the different junctions where traditional medicine in East Asia headed after

Monochrome Forests and Colorful Trees: The Effect of Black-and-White versus Color Imagery on Construal Level

Business: 1st Place (The Ohio State University Edward F. Hayes Graduate Research Forum)Research suggests that whereas black-and-white (bw) imagery enhances perception of essential form, color imagery enhances perception of specific detail. Drawing from construal level theory, the present research extends this work by proposing and demonstrating that the focus on form (vs. detail) prompted by bw (vs. color) imagery promotes a tendency to construe or represent the depicted objects in an abstract, high-level (vs. concrete, low-level) manner. Three experiments examine the impact of bw versus color imagery on construal level, as assessed by action identification (Experiment1), sensitivity to essential vs. superficial features (Experiment 2), and behavior segmentation (Experiment 3). Two additional experiments explore the consequences of this basic effect on product feature evaluation (Experiment 4) and product choice (Experiment 5). We discuss how this work advances construal level theory and visual perception research, and explore practical implications for marketing.A five-year embargo was granted for this item

Fujitsuka Chikashi’s Studies on Park Jega: Focusing on the ‘Fujitsuka Chikashi Collection’ in the Harvard Yenching Library

In this paper I will introduce Park Jega's books in the "Fujitsuka Chikashi Collection" housed in the Harvard Yenching Library. Fujitsuka Chikashi （1879-1948）, a professor of Chinese philosophy at Keijo Imperial University, started research on the interaction between Korean and Chinese scholars during the 18th to 19th centuries. He especially focused on the Joseon era Confucian scholar Kim Jeong-hui （1786-1856）, on whom he wrote his PhD dissertation, while at Tokyo Imperial University. He collected many books and letters of Joseon Confucian scholars, and some of these are housed in the Harvard Yenching Library. These works are not so important to the study of Fujitsuka's own works, but are invaluable for the lifht they shed on academic interaction in East Asia durin the 18th to 19th centuries. This paper will focus on Park Jega's works in particular, and will also look at Fujitsuka's notes related to those works. After this I will make a comparison with Fujitsuka's own writings

京城帝国大学における近代韓国儒教研究の展開 [全文の要約]

関西大

Evaluations of Kim Jeong-hui in Modern Japan and Korea -Focusing on Fujitsuka\u27s research about Kim Jeong-hui and publishing of The Complete Collection of Wandang

Fujitsuka\u27s research on Kim Jeong-hui had an unintentional and profound influence on many Japanese and Korean scholars at the time. Accepting Fujitsuka\u27s opinion, they re-evaluated the classicist Kim Jeong-hui or analyzed him as a scholar of Confucian classics. There was also a movement in reaction to Fujitsuka\u27s approach that evaluated Kim from completely new perspectives. Fujitsuka was a pioneer in research not only in the field of Chinese philosophy, but also in the research of Kim Jeong-hui from the multifaceted perspective of Korean philosophy, literature,and the arts. In 1934, The Comnplete Collection of Wandang was published by Kim Ik-hwan who was Kim Jeong-hui\u27s descendent. Jeong ln-bo (1893-1950) who was a very famous scholar in Korean studies wrote the foreword, and he complained that some people regarded Kim Jeong-hui was only a master of Evidential Learning (Gaozhengxue) which in fact was criticism against Fujitsuka\u27s works. These points of view on　Kim Jeong-hui influenced the narratives of history of Korean Confucianism. There isn\u27t any mention of Kim Jeong-hui in The Origin of Korean Confucianism published in 1922. In 1949, however, in the Histoly of Chosun Dynasty Confucianism explained that Kim Jeong-hui is one of the important Confucian scholar of late Joseon Dynasty. Through these debates between the scholars of Korea and Japan during the Colonial Period of Japan, Kim Jeong-hui gradually gained the reputation as both scholar and calligrapher．文部科学省グローバルCOEプログラム 関西大学文化交渉学教育研究拠点東アジアの思想と構

Evaluations of Kim Jeong-hui in Modern Japan and Korea

Fujitsuka's research on Kim Jeong-hui had an unintentional and profound influence on many Japanese and Korean scholars at the time. Accepting Fujitsuka's opinion, they re-evaluated the classicist Kim Jeong-hui or analyzed him as a scholar of Confucian classics. There was also a movement in reaction to Fujitsuka's approach that evaluated Kim from completely new perspectives. Fujitsuka was a pioneer in research not only in the field of Chinese philosophy, but also in the research of Kim Jeong-hui from the multifaceted perspective of Korean philosophy, literature,and the arts. In 1934, The Comnplete Collection of Wandang was published by Kim Ik-hwan who was Kim Jeong-hui's descendent. Jeong ln-bo (1893-1950) who was a very famous scholar in Korean studies wrote the foreword, and he complained that some people regarded Kim Jeong-hui was only a master of Evidential Learning (Gaozhengxue) which in fact was criticism against Fujitsuka's works. These points of view on　Kim Jeong-hui influenced the narratives of history of Korean Confucianism. There isn't any mention of Kim Jeong-hui in The Origin of Korean Confucianism published in 1922. In 1949, however, in the Histoly of Chosun Dynasty Confucianism explained that Kim Jeong-hui is one of the important Confucian scholar of late Joseon Dynasty. Through these debates between the scholars of Korea and Japan during the Colonial Period of Japan, Kim Jeong-hui gradually gained the reputation as both scholar and calligraphe

Chinese Philosophy Course at Keijō Imperial University and Fujitsuka Chikashi

This paper explores the history and character of Chinese Philosophy Course in Keijō Imperial University, focusing on Fujitsuka Chikashi （1879-1948）, a professor at Keijō Imperial University. Keijō Imperial University was Korea's first modern University, and long the only government university in Korea during the colonial period. The students of university conducted research under a variety of top-class scholars, which led to modern scholarship of Korea. Fujitsuka Chikashi was born in 1879 in Miyagi Prefecture. He studied Chinese Philosophy in Tokyo Imperial University and graduated in 1902. He stayed in Korea between 1926 and 1940 and was a professor of Chinese Philosophy and studied Kim Jeong-hee （1786-1856） who was a great scholar of bibliographical Study in Qing Dynasty. He was the only professor of Chinese Philosophy in Keijō Imperial University, but also he left lots of great works in the field of Chinese Philosophy. He is a key-person in order to understand the education of Chinese Philosophy in modern age of Korea

A Research on the Academic Activities about Korean Confucianism in Keijō Imperial University

In this paper, I will elucidate what kind of academic activities were done by the scholars who study Korean Confucianism at Keijō Imperial University. For this, I focus on the Joseon governor-general office's policy and connection with Kyeonghakwon. In 1911, the Joseon governor-general office changed Seongkyunkwan that was the highest education system in the Joseon period to Kyeonghakwon and curtailed its educational function. After the establishment of Keijō Imperial University in 1926， the educational and research function started to transfer to Keijō Imperial University while Takahashi Tōru and Fujitsuka Chikashi were producing achievements about Korean Confucianism. AfterKyeonghakwon established Myeonryungakuin the education institute，Takahshi and Fujitsuka became a professor both Keijō Imperial University and Kyeonghakwon. As well as the activities for the Joseon governor-general office，they also produced amount of research on Korean Confucianism. Generally, they published their works on the academic Journal such as Keeijō Imperial University Hobungakgakkai dai ni bu ronsan, Chosen, Chosen and Manshu, and Bunkyo no Chosen in Korea, Shibun and Kangakukai Journal in Japan. Takahashi and Fujitsuka also gave speech in both Korea and Japan, and the Japanese professors like a Hattori Unokichi and Uno Tetsuto who related with them held some lectures or speech in Korea, and published thesis in Korean Journals. Thus， the studies of Korean Confucianism in Keijo Imeprial University were closely connected with Joseon governor general office's policy and the Japanese academy field

Evaluations of Kim Jeong-hui in Modern Japan and Korea -Focusing on Fujitsuka's research about Kim Jeong-hui and publishing of The Complete Collection of Wandang

Fujitsuka's research on Kim Jeong-hui had an unintentional and profound influence on many Japanese and Korean scholars at the time. Accepting Fujitsuka's opinion, they re-evaluated the classicist Kim Jeong-hui or analyzed him as a scholar of Confucian classics. There was also a movement in reaction to Fujitsuka's approach that evaluated Kim from completely new perspectives. Fujitsuka was a pioneer in research not only in the field of Chinese philosophy, but also in the research of Kim Jeong-hui from the multifaceted perspective of Korean philosophy, literature,and the arts. In 1934, The Comnplete Collection of Wandang was published by Kim Ik-hwan who was Kim Jeong-hui's descendent. Jeong ln-bo (1893-1950) who was a very famous scholar in Korean studies wrote the foreword, and he complained that some people regarded Kim Jeong-hui was only a master of Evidential Learning (Gaozhengxue) which in fact was criticism against Fujitsuka's works. These points of view on　Kim Jeong-hui influenced the narratives of history of Korean Confucianism. There isn't any mention of Kim Jeong-hui in The Origin of Korean Confucianism published in 1922. In 1949, however, in the Histoly of Chosun Dynasty Confucianism explained that Kim Jeong-hui is one of the important Confucian scholar of late Joseon Dynasty. Through these debates between the scholars of Korea and Japan during the Colonial Period of Japan, Kim Jeong-hui gradually gained the reputation as both scholar and calligrapher