To be honest, I feel something like jealousy or

Slavery and Beggar Morality

To be honest, I feel something like jealousy or competition from Professor Keyo Ogura. That's because he perfectly explained the essence of Korean Confucianism in "Korea is a philosophy". What I admire about Keyo Ogura is that he penetrated the intrinsic and external aspects of Confucianism into one with the concept of "morality".

Usually, when understanding an ideology or text, it is often approached from the intrinsic or external aspects. Most of the understanding remains within the text or is limited to external observations. However, a true understanding of the text is possible when it crosses the inside and outside and penetrates it as one. However, this is by no means easy.

The Ogura keynote instructs the intrinsic aspect of Confucianism with "morality" and the external aspect of Confucianism with "ism", and connects it with a concept called "morality". It is this that I admire the Ogura keynote and even feel jealous. None of the outstanding scholars in Korea have done this. If Bae Byeong-sam's "What is Confucianism for us" belongs to a typical intrinsic approach, Kim Kyung-il's "Only when a prince dies can the country live" correspond to an extrinsic approach. Kim Sang-jun's "Confucianism's Political unconsciousness" is a different story.

The reason why Ogura's keynote was able to do so may be because it was an objective approach because it was a foreign hitter. Seeing that none of the Koreans have reached the level of Ogura's keynote, I, as a post-nationalist, feel national inferiority.

In "Ideology and Utopia", knowledge sociologist Karl Mannheim said that both "ideology" and "Utopia" are the same in that they are transitional rituals of existence, but they are distinguished according to their orientation. Confucianism is also a utopian if read internally, but if read externally, it becomes an ideology. The intrinsic meaning of Confucianism is the utopian belief that humans can be complete by Neo-Confucianism learning, but in reality, the external function of Confucianism is an ideology that justifies the domination of the medieval nobility (complete human = man). If the intrinsic is "what was said", the extrinsic is "what was done". These two are different, but in reality, they work as one. Like Marx said that religion is false, but it is false, which tells the truth.

Having lost the core understanding of Confucianism to the Ogura keynote (?) I now turn to what's left, namely shamanism. Believing that the two things that dominate the Korean spiritual world are Confucianism and shamanism, I also make it a subtle task to reach the core understanding of Confucianism's "morality". This is considered a key task for understanding Korean society and ideology after the Ogura keynote and, above all, after the Moon Jae In regime, so I have studied it even if it is a dull head.

Here is the interim report on the results of my thoughts so far. The core semantic structure of shamanism I have grasped is "conflict avoidance" and "quickness determination". So, shamanism avoids the conflict structure between the world and life. So, it is consistent in such a way that good things are good, and there is no answer even if you think about it, so you only need to pass this moment. The profound meaning of the world never comes to those who avoid conflict.

The psychology of "conflict avoidance" is known as "quickness". Anyway, we head to the consciousness that life is unknown, that good is good, and that problems should be covered up. So we do a gut. You can pray to the God of Heaven and Earth, do a pushover, and then move on. You just have to pretend that you have passed from one world to the next. Next time a problem arises again, you can pretend to go and solve it again then and move on. My task is to group these shamanic "conflict avoidanceism" and "quickness unity" into a single concept like "moralityism" in the Ogura keynote. What would be good? There is still more research to be done.

In Nietzsche's sense, Confucianism's "morality" is slave morality. There is no freedom there. Then, what should I say about shamanism's "conflict avoidanceism" and "quickness determination"? I see it as beggar morality. Shamanism positions itself as a man of destiny by letting go of his or her decision-making power over life. "Beggars don't eat when they want to, but eat when they can". In a word, the spirit of shamanism is the spirit of eating and dying when there is. Of course, there is no freedom here either.

I witness the solid operation of Confucianism's "moralityism", shamanism's "conflict avoidanceism", and "quickness concludingism" while watching Koreans deal with events such as Ferry Sewol, Moon Jae In, and Itaewon in the governments of Park Geun Hye and Moon Jae In. Still, Korea is a society dominated by ancient and medieval rituals. Modern rationality is not given by itself. Modernity will not come unless the ancient shamanic and medieval Confucian rituals are objectively and critically understood and overcome. Living in an apartment by car does not mean that it is modern.