Abstract
Chapter 1 is the editors’ comprehensive introduction to this volume and serves as a textual, philosophical, ethical, and religious background of our studies of Korean emotions (jeong 情). This concluding chapter presents “the diversity, dynamics, and distinctiveness of Korean jeong.” It integrates, articulates, and concludes the introductory chapter as well as all eleven chapters of three main parts. We discuss Confucian, comparative, Buddhist, and contemporary ideas, perspectives, and implications by addressing the holistic theme of jeong emotions also in relation to the distinctively Korean moral, social, and psychological experiences of human life and culture. We hope to develop fruitful concluding remarks and thought-provoking insights.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Buddhist
- Compassion
- Confucian
- Emotion
- Feeling
- Four Beginnings
- jeong
- Korean distinctiveness
- han
- Seven Emotions
The first, introductory chapter is the editors’ comprehensive introduction to four related topics: “emotions in general, East and West” (Sect. 1.1); “emotions in the Chinese tradition” (Sect. 1.2); “emotions in the Buddhist tradition” (Sect. 1.3); and “emotions (jeong 情) in Korean philosophy and religion” (Sect. 1.4). We hope that Chap. 1 as a whole has served well as a helpful textual, philosophical, ethical, and religious background of our studies of Korean jeong.
As the title of this book indicates, the editors and all chapter contributors have discussed the nature, role, and problem of emotions (jeong 情) in Korean philosophy and religion from diverse yet integrated perspectives—according to leading Confucian doctrines, traditions, and ideas as well as several comparative, Buddhist, and contemporary meanings, trends, and implications. We have endeavored to address this holistic theme of jeong emotions also in relation to the distinctively Korean experience and understanding of human life and culture. In addition to the introductory chapter, eleven individual chapters are dedicated to this entire, challenging topic.
This concluding chapter discusses “the diversity, dynamics, and distinctiveness of Korean jeong emotions.” We develop fruitful concluding remarks and engaging insights. First of all, jeong (C. qing 情) is a unique Chinese-Korean term consisting of three essential characters: 心 (sim/xin; heart-mind, mind, heart), 生 (saeng/sheng; life, creation, or arising), and 丹 (dan/dan; red). Etymologically and literally speaking, it is therefore a living, creative, and dynamic phenomenon that has something to do with the human mind-heart and the body. As discussed in the introductory chapter, in early (“pre-Buddhist”) China prior to the beginning of the Han dynasty, the Chinese word qing had two original meanings in Confucian and Daoist texts: “fact” (or factual), “situation,” and “reality” pertaining to the objective world of beings, phenomena, and things, on the one hand, and “emotion,” “feeling,” or “desire,” on the other hand.Footnote 1
For these and other related reasons, it is difficult to precisely translate the Chinese-Korean term jeong in any direct sense to one single English idiom. We also have to be mindful of the manifold nature, multilevel roles, and different types and problems of Korean jeong emotions. In a broadly inclusive context, jeong/qing can be translated or interpreted as emotion, passion, inclination, or desire. It can refer to basic natural feelings or sensations and also involves intuition, belief, judgment, motivation, attitude, and so on.Footnote 2
In some cases, jeong positively means or closely relates to moral sentiment, affection, compassion, sympathy, empathy, or the intimate heart, all of which are commonly admired as good (virtuous) emotions in the context of self-cultivation and ethics. Two examples are the Four Beginnings of virtue in (Korean) Confucianism and the (Korean) Buddhist virtuous emotion of compassion. However, not all jeong/qing emotions are positive or good (“wholesome” in Buddhist terminology). As presented in the introductory and other chapters of this book, there are many negative or “unwholesome” emotions; this is concurred by the philosophical and religious traditions of Confucianism, Buddhism, and others.
As far as Buddhism is concerned, Theravada, Mahāyāna, and Chinese and Korean texts criticize most jeong emotions as “unwholesome,” including desire (craving), grief, anger, greed, fear, hatred, passion, pride, jealousy, anxiety, attachment, delusion, and on.Footnote 3 Two leading Korean monks, Wonhyo and Jinul, strongly repudiate these unwholesome jeong emotions as “afflictions” (kleśa) associated with all mental and physical activities.Footnote 4 For self-discipline and enlightenment, these negative emotions have to be controlled and eliminated.
In the Korean (or Chinese) Confucian tradition as well, emotions such as anger, hated, and fear are strongly repudiated because of their distinctive (i.e., strong) characteristics. Craving (desire) is also viewed negatively. Other ordinary or potentially “selfish” jeong emotions such as pleasure and love (ae/ai) are also repudiated negatively. Leading Korean thinkers such as Yi Toegye, like the Chinese Neo-Confucians, strongly recommended control or suppression of these emotions through self-cultivation and moral practice. Bongrae Seok’s Chap. 2 introduced this topic in his discussion of the Four-Seven debate. Gabriel S. Choi’s Chap. 3 discussed it especially in terms of Toegye’s philosophy of gyeong (reverence).Footnote 5
Righteous anger or justified hatred (or resentment) is philosophically considered somewhat complicated from both Western and Eastern perspectives.Footnote 6 Yulgok and Dasan positively affirmed this emotion as a kind of moral indignation or a passion for justice. This interesting point is discussed in Edward Chung’s Chap. 4 and Don Baker’s Chap. 5 on these two leading Korean Confucian thinkers, respectively.
Those chapters of this book dealing with one or another topic on Korean Confucianism carefully articulate virtuous Confucian jeong such as “compassion,” “shame and aversion,” “courtesy and modesty,” and “discernment of right and wrong,” which are known as the Four Beginnings of virtue (sadan/siduan) in the Confucian tradition. They also discussed the so-called Seven Emotions as ordinary [physical-psychological] jeong: pleasure, anger, sorrow, fear, love, hatred (dislike), and desire. All of these jeong/qing emotions—whether they are presented with traditional, comparative, or contemporary perspectives—are directly or indirectly related to Chinese origin and influence. They are textually and philosophically discussed in all chapters of Part I by Seok (Chap. 2), Choi (Chap. 3), Chung (Chap. 4), and Baker (Chap. 5), as well as in three comparative- and contemporary-theme chapters of Part II and Part III by Joseph E. Harroff (Chap. 6), Hyo-Dong Lee (Chap. 7), Iljoon Park (Chap. 8), and Jea Sophia Oh (Chap. 12). Most of these chapters pointed to the significance of the Four-Seven Debate on emotions and its profound influence on the Korean understanding of jeong emotions ethically, socially, and politically. Chung’s Chap. 4 and Lee’s Chap. 6 in particular discussed moral jeong emotions in an ethical-political context of finding the compatibility of Confucian morality and modern democracy.
Other common Korean jeong emotions such as won (원 怨; resentment), han (한 恨; suffering or deep resentment/lamentation), and heung (흥 興; exhilaration or utmost joy) are often noted especially in Korean jeong talks. These significant emotions are judiciously explored in the several chapters of this book. For example, won (or wonmang 원망) resentment is infrequently talked about in the West.Footnote 7 However, it is said to be often experienced or expressed by Koreans morally, socially, or psychologically. Baker’s Chap. 5 on Dasan prudently discussed the justified emotion of resentment as a key Confucian term, even though it was rarely mentioned in the orthodox Neo-Confucian literature. Ha’s Chap. 10 meticulously presented the Korean Won Buddhist teaching of resentment (wonmang) and gratitude (gamsasim 감사심), which appears to be a distinctively Korean way of Buddhist ethics and soteriology.
Similar to won (怨), han (恨) is also translated as resentment/suffering in English and these two terms are often joined together as one word, wonhan (怨恨; resentful suffering, vengeance). Han is an interesting Korean emotion (jeong) from a historical and socio-cultural standpoint. It is carefully discussed in Chaps. 5, 8, 11 and 12 by Baker, Park, Sharon Suh, and Oh, respectively. Baker talked about Dasan’s exceptionally rare Confucian interpretation of han suffering (deep resentment) along with won resentment,Footnote 8 Park presented Korea’s “social emotions (jeong)” by covering han suffering and heung, two key psychological-social emotions in close relation to jeong. Oh also discussed the emotion of han in relation to jeong, Korean family, and women’s experience. In analyzing Korean jeong and interrelationality according to Korean Buddhist cinema, Suh’s Chap. 11 articulated the Korean han, making its connection to the Buddhist teaching of suffering (duhkha) and Mahāyāna compassion (karuṇā).
It is never surprising that the virtuous emotion of compassion is highly admired by the Korean people and other East Asians, insofar as it is deeply rooted in the Confucian, Buddhist, and other moral-spiritual traditions. Compassion is the first of the Mencian teaching of the Four Beginnings as the moral feeling (heart-mind) of universal Confucian virtue, in/ren (benevolence, human-heartedness). Thus, it closely relates to moral sentiment, affection, sympathy, empathy, and so on. Compassion or the bodhisattva’s compassion is also honored by all Buddhists, insofar as the Buddha’s teaching and key Mahāyāna scriptures highly cherish it (see Chap. 1, Sect. 1.3). Suh’s Chap. 11 mentioned the Mahāyāna compassion as the bodhisattvic virtue to relieve or cure Korean han suffering. “Great compassion” is honored and emphasized in leading Korean commentaries and essays by Wonhyo and Jinul.Footnote 9
As mentioned in Sect. 1.1 of the introductory chapter, there can also be other ethical, spiritual, psychological, or socio-cultural connotations of the term jeong. In the positive Korean context, jeong may well be a relational and interdependent embodiment of emotion with these dynamic connotations. By operating on its manifold or multilevel spectrum of mutual affection, attachment, or relationality, jeong also embraces the power or creativity of emotional intimacy but should not be conceived as being limited to this particular spectrum only because there are obviously other positive and negative aspects of jeong as we’ve seen in the foregoing paragraphs.
Now the question is, What’s distinctive about Korean jeong? Is there anything or something peculiarly “Korean”? This question therefore points to the “Korean-ness” or Korean distinctiveness of jeong in terms of philosophy, religion, and/or emotion studies.
For many centuries in Korean history, jeong has long been commonly recognized and practiced as mutual, lasting, or transformative emotions. Contemporary Koreans often talk about “family jeong,” “parent-child jeong,” “parental (grandparental) jeong,” “conjugal jeong,” “brotherly/sisterly jeong,” “fatherly/motherly jeong,” “friendship jeong,” “collegial jeong,” “school jeong,” “our (uri) jeong,” “business jeong,” “romantic jeong,” and so on. Throughout modern times, jeong culture has functioned as a distinctively Korean phenomenon within any given group of two or more persons who collectively share a close family or social relationship. In this regard, the basic Korean notion of jeong as mutual “affection” or “affective bond” echoes not only love (ae 愛), one of the Seven Emotions in the Confucian literature, but also compassion, the first of the Four Beginnings and the universal Confucian virtue of benevolence (in 仁).
Another distinctive dimension of Korean jeong emotions is the Korean Four-Seven debate and especially its profound and extensive influence on the Korean people’s understanding and practice of jeong emotions. This unique part of Korean emotion studies is comprehensively discussed by Seok, Chung, and Harroff in their chapters. Virtuous emotions such as “compassion” and “discernment of right and wrong” are articulated in relation or in contrast to ordinary emotions such as pleasure, anger, fear, hatred, and desire.
Seok’s Chap. 2 presented an overview of the Four-Seven debate from a moral psychology standpoint. Harroff discussed some Western comparative views of the “cosmopolitan” meaning of Korean jeong in the context of philosophical translation issues. Chung’s Chap. 4 focused on Yulgok’s unique interpretation of the role of emotions in self-cultivation, ethics, and political reform. It concluded that Yulgok’s distinctive Korean ethics of compassion and his passion for social justice and wellbeing are compatible with Western perspectives and especially Adam Smith’s moral theory of “mutual sympathy” and “benevolence,” Michael Slote’s virtue ethics of “empathy,” and Robert Solomon’s ethics of “passion” and “justice.”Footnote 10
Oh’s Chap. 12 reveals something unique about the social phenomenon of Korean jeong in terms of family life, women’s experience, and traditional Korean patriarchy. She argued that Korean jeong is entangled with the han emotive culture and uri (we or our) “relationality” and “dependency” that are found in pumashi (품앗이, working together) and dure (두레, collective laboring) as distinctively Korean experiences of sharing jeong. We can also talk the distinctiveness of Korean jeong also in terms of Baker’s Chap. 5 on Dasan’s Confucian discussion of wonmang (resentment, lamentation) and han (suffering or deep resentment) and Park’s Chap. 8 on the Korean social emotions of han and heung (exhilaration or utmost joy). As Park concludes, the Korean culture of jeong, han, and heung embody “a matrix to accept the Confucian understanding of being human”: for example, heung is compatible with Confucian rak (락 樂; joy) and hui/xi (희 喜; pleasure), two of the Seven Emotions, and han closely resembles ae/ai (애 哀; sorrow, grief), another example of the Seven.
Jee’s Chap. 9 also discussed the distinctive nature of jeong in relation to the Korean Buddhist teaching of hanmaeum (one heart-mind) and concluded that jeong, “a moral, social, and cultural emotion of the Korean people,” is strongly influenced by their Confucian language and ethics of uri “we-ness” (“our-ism”) as group belonging and interdependency. This is philosophically compatible with Daehaeng’s Buddhist idea of hanmaeum and Wonhyo’s teaching of ilsim. From a different Buddhist angle, Ha’s Chap. 10 confirmed that Sotaesan’s Won Buddhist ethics of gratitude (gamsasim 감사심) to heal the suffering of resentment (wonmang) is also inspired by the Confucian teaching of benevolence, moral action, and social wellbeing; in other words, this Buddhist practice tends to be a distinctively Korean way of soteriology.
Suh’s Chap. 11 on jeong and interrelationality in Korean Buddhist cinema makes an interesting conclusion that Korean jeong is not Buddhist in origin, but its Confucian foundation gradually accommodated with the Mahāyāna teaching of compassion, for which reason the two traditions “intertwine in the lived experiences of Buddhist monastics.” Suh’s “socially-engaged Mahāyāna” approach to jeong emotion as “affection,” “empathy,” “adhesive bond,” or “relational dependence” remarkably resonates with the Korean Confucian-based talk of humanism and human relationships in terms of sympathy (compassion) and moral jeong, affective heart-mind, emotional intimacy, and social interdependency.
The Chinese-Korean word jeong 情 is fundamentally Confucian in origin. Overall, the holistic nature, meaning, and role of Korean jeong emotions are influenced by and associated with the Confucian tradition of moral language, social interaction and harmony, and psychological-and-cultural interdependence. It is also reasonable to state that despite the mutual ethical integration between Confucian jeong affection (compassion) and Mahāyāna Buddhist compassion among Korean Buddhists, there is a little originally Buddhist about the humanistic and social context of Korean jeong expression and experience. This is one of the essential conclusions we collectively discover from reading all chapters of this book and especially Chaps. 9, 10 and 11 on the Buddhist perspectives.
If we look at the history of Buddhism or Christianity in Korea, each of these religions had to go through one level or another of cultural integration by adjusting itself to Korean Confucian language, mentality, and society: in other words, Korean people’s “cultural DNA” is embodied by the Confucian-oriented tradition of basic human bonds and their reciprocal emotions (injeong 人情). The holistic nature of Korean jeong eventually became a multidimensional and interreligious phenomenon: it ethically, religiously, and socio-culturally integrated with (1) Mahāyāna Buddhist compassion and care, (2) Korea’s shamanistic folk talk of han resentment and heung joy, and (3) Daoist influence in terms of pungnyu naturalistic freedom and heung joy. Of course, we cannot ignore the Christian influence of love and forgiveness as another dimension that has likely been incorporated into modern Korean jeong especially among the Korean Christians.
From a different angle, it was subtly suggested that the modern usage of two Korean terms jeong and injeong (human emotions)—both of which we have discussed extensively in this book—is probably “influenced by the Japanese tradition [of Confucian language and modernity] since the Japanese colonial period (1910–1945).” This suggestion was given partly due to the debatable argument that the Tokugawa Confucian thinker Itō Jinsai (1627–1705)Footnote 11 spoke of two Japanese Confucian terms jo 情 (jeong/qing; emotions) and ninjo 人情 (injeong/renqing; human emotions) and the Japanese historian Masao Maruyama (1914–1996)Footnote 12 pointed out that Jinsai’s talk of ninjo likely influenced Japan’s modernization in the eighteenth century.Footnote 13 Given Japan’s colonial rule over Korea (1910–1945), one can see why this suggestion was made: Japanese Confucianism might have contributed to Japan’s colonial influence on, for example, Korea’s political and economic modernization during this period. However, in the context of what we have concluded above, the editors as well as our chapter contributors (including those authors of several chapters on contemporary perspectives) have agreed that two Korean words jeong and injeong are not directly influenced or “colored” by Japanese Confucian language and moral psychology in relation to either Jinsai’s Kogaku talk of ninjo emotions or Maruyama’s point about its political impact on Japan’s modernity.
In other words, traditional Korea developed its own Confucian and related understanding and culture of jeong and injeong for many centuries textually, philosophically, ethically, religiously, and socially, insofar as our book has discussed comprehensively in the introductory and eleven chapters. That is to say, Koreans had already developed their jeong tradition, along with original Chinese influence, a long time ago prior to Itō Jinsai’s seventeenth century and the Japanese colonial period. It is more likely that the humanistic and philological (or philosophical) Confucian influence of jo (jeong) and ninjo (injeong) emotion talk would rather be the other way: Korea influenced Japan. For example, under Korean influence through reading the Korean Neo-Confucian letters and essays and especially those by Yi Toegye, Japanese Shushigaku (Zhu Xi school) Neo-Confucians in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries talked about emotions such as the Four Beginnings and the Seven Emotions in their own discussions of emotions, self-cultivation, and ethics. In other words, it is possible that Itō Jinsai and his Kogaku Confucian thinkers were also motivated (influenced) by this textual and intellectual trend of Korean impact on Japanese ethical and practical discussion of jo (jeong) and ninjo (injeong) human emotions.Footnote 14
In the final analysis, there is still more work to be done regarding the study of emotions in East Asian philosophy and religion; however, thinking through jeong in a variety of Korean philosophical and religious contexts, as we have done in this book, is certainly a good place to start exploring the transformative potential of this fascinating topic both within and beyond Asian thought and comparative philosophy and religious studies.
Overall, we hope the reader will find this book a ground-breaking discussion of Korean philosophy and religion vis-à-vis its dynamic topic of jeong through our diverse, balanced, and integrated interpretations. The book has focused on the meaning, role, and problem of jeong emotions—which we can consider the heart of Korean thought—and thereby informing and directing one’s life and emotional experience as a scholar, an ethicist, a spiritual practitioner, or an average person.
What we discover through this study is a healthy philosophy of human nature and emotions, East and West. This holistic system of teaching and practice is deeply grounded in the traditional and contemporary trends of Korean philosophy and religion, most of which represent the intellectual, moral, and spiritual vitality of East Asian thought as well.
To conclude, by shedding new light on the breadth and depth of Korean Confucianism, Buddhism, and comparative and contemporary thought, we hope to have provided not only a pioneering, introductory anthology on the enthralling theme of jeong based on our collaborative and extensive efforts, but also an important scholarly source for Korean Confucian and Buddhist studies, comparative philosophy and religion, and beyond.
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
For details on this point, see the editors’ discussion in all parts of Sect. 1.3 (emotions in the Buddhist tradition) of this introductory chapter.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
As we have pointed out in the introductory chapter, Sect. 1.1.4.
- 7.
We also note that in the West, its associated terms such as “trauma,” “injustice,” and “grief” (grievance) are popular terms in psychology, sociology, journalism, theology, religious studies, feminist studies, and medical science (trauma and healing).
- 8.
For this and other good reasons, Dasan is widely recognized as not only a leading Korean critic of Cheng-Zhu Neo-Confucianism school and its Korean Seongnihak school but also an original and creative Confucian thinker who compiled so many volumes of commentaries and essays. For details on Dasan’s thought focusing on self-cultivation and sagehood, consult Baker’s major forthcoming book: How to be Human: Dasan Jeong Yagyong’s Commentaries on the Zhongyong (2022); for more information, see Baker’s Chap. 5, references.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
Itō Jinsai was a Confucian scholar and thinker in eighteenth-century Japan who belonged to the so-called Kogaku (Ancient learning) that influenced Japan’s philological and ethical study of Chinese Confucian classics such as the Analects and Mencius. For Itō Jinsai’s life and thought, see Spae (1967) and J. Tucker (1998).
- 12.
Masao Maruyama was a modern Japanese historian who published a famous book on the intellectual history of Tokugawa Japan (1600–1868), which includes his critical analysis of the development of Tokugawa Confucianism in terms of philosophy, politics, and modernization in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Masao Maruyama 1975). For good books on the Japanese Neo-Confucian tradition, consult Mary E. Tucker (1989) and Nosco (1989).
- 13.
This is our clarified version of the suggestion originally made by one of the anonymous external reviewers of our book project proposal for this manuscript. The editors thank the reviewer for making this interesting suggestion.
- 14.
Here are two other possible reasons. For many centuries—from the fifth to the mid-nineteenth (beginning of “modern” Meiji Japan)—Korean Confucianism had intellectually informed and influenced Japan in terms of Chinese writing (kanji), literary Japanese, classics, humanistic philosophy, moral education, social ethics, political administration, and practical learning (jitsugaku 實學). It is widely recognized that the philosophy and scholarship of the eminent Korean thinker Yi Toegye profoundly inspired Tokugawa Neo-Confucians such as Fujiwara Seika (1561–1619) and Hayashi Razan (1583–1657) and eventually helped them to establish their Shushigaku, a mainstream Neo-Confucianism there (Abe Yoshio 1970: 22). Furthermore, Yamazaki Ansai (1618–1682), his follower Ōtsuka Taiya (1677–1750), and other great Neo-Confucians such as Satō Naokata (1650–1719) were in turn influenced by Toegye’s teaching, character, and philosophy (see Abe Yoshio 1965, 1970: 57–59, 1977: 9). For more discussion of this topic, see Chung 2016 (Introduction) or 2021 (Chap. 1).
References
Abe Yoshio 阿部吉雄. 1965. Nihon Shushigaku to Chōsen 日本朱子學と朝鮮 (Japanese Zhu Xi school in relation to Korea). Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.
Abe Yoshio. 1970. “Development of Neo-Confucianism in Japan, Korea, and China: A Comparative Study.” Acta Asiataca 19: 16–39.
Abe Yoshio, ed. 1977. Chōsen no Shushigaku Nihon no Shushigaku 朝鮮の朱子學, 日本の朱子學 (Korean Zhu Xi school and Japanese Zhu Xi school). Vol. 12 of Shushigaku taikei 朱子學大系 (Great compendium on the Zhu Xi school), 14 vols. Tokyo: Meitoku shuppansha.
Chung, Edward Y. J. 2016. A Korean Confucian Way of Life and Thought: The Chasŏngnok (Record of Self-Reflection) by Yi Hwang (T’oegye). Translated, annotated, and with an introduction. Korean Classics Library: Philosophy and Religion Series. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Chung, Edward Y. J. 2021. The Moral and Religious Thought of Yi Hwang (Toegye): A Study of Korean Neo-Confucian Ethics and Spirituality. Palgrave Studies in Comparative East-West Philosophy series, no. 4. New York and London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Masao Maruyama. 1975. Studies in the Intellectual History of Tokugawa Japan. Translated by Mikiso Hane. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Nosco, Peter, ed. 1989. Confucianism and Tokagawa Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Slote, Michael. 2007. The Ethics of Care and Empathy. Abingdon: Routledge.
Slote, Michael. 2010. Moral Sentimentalism. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Slote, Michael. 2020. Between Psychology and Philosophy: East-West Themes and Beyond. Palgrave Studies in Comparative East-West Philosophy. New York and London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Smith, Adam. 2009. (1875). The Theory of Moral Sentiments: To Which Is Added, a Dissertation on the Origin of Languages. With a biographical and critical memoir of the author by Dugald Stewart. London: George Bell and Sons. (original from the University of Michigan, digitized 2009).
Solomon, Robert C. 1993. The Passions: Emotions and the Meaning of Life. Second edition. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Solomon, Robert C. 1995a. A Passion for Justice: Emotions and the Origins of the Social Contract. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing.
Solomon, Robert C. 1995b. “The Cross-Cultural Comparison of Emotion.” In Marks and Ames, eds. Emotions in Asian Thought: A Dialogue in Comparative Philosophy. Albany: SUNY Press.
Spae, Joseph J. 1967. Itō Jinsai: A Philosopher, Educator and Sinologist of the Tokugawa Period. New York: Paragon Book Reprint Corp.
Tucker, John A. 1998. Itō Jinsai’s Gomō jigi and the Philosophical Definition of Early Modern Japan. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Tucker, Mary E. 1989. Moral and Spiritual Cultivation in Japanese Neo Confucianism: The Life and Thought of Kaibara Ekken (1630–1714). Albany: SUNY Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chung, E.Y.J., Oh, J.S. (2022). Conclusion: The Diversity, Dynamics, and Distinctiveness of Korean Jeong. In: Chung, E.Y.J., Oh, J.S. (eds) Emotions in Korean Philosophy and Religion. Palgrave Studies in Comparative East-West Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94747-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94747-7_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-94746-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-94747-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)