선악기원에 대한 일원론과 이원론의 논란과 선악개념에 대한 존재론과 가치론의 구분적 해석은 성선과 악의 발현 사이의 모순적 관계를 해결하려는 논리적 시도로 볼 수 있다. 性理學과 天主學은 선악에 대해 우주론과 인성론의 입장에서 각기 다른 관점을 취하여, 우주론적인 관점에서는 일원론으로, 인성론적 관점에서는 이원론으로 해석되고 있다. 『천주실의』에 나타난 동서 선악관에 대한 핵심적 문제는 선악이 一元論인가, 二元論인가 하는 것이다. 이를 다른 관점으로 표현하면 악이란 존재하는 것인가, 존재하지 않는 것인가의 문제와 동일하다. 이를 중심으로 선악이란 무엇인가? 인간의 본성은 선한가 악한가, 마지막으로 성선과 악의 발현의 관계를 어떻게 해석할 것인가의 문제가 파생되고 있다.
『천주실의』에서는 16세기를 기점으로 동서의 선악에 대한 이러한 인식의 한 단면을 통해 주자학과 토미즘의 선악의 기원 및 개념에 대한 同異관계를 보여주고 있다. 성리학과 천주학은 인성의 기원을 선으로 전제하는 것과 악의 발현을 심의 문제로 규정한다는 점에서 일치하고 있다. 그러나 성선과 악의 발현에서의 모순적 현상에 대해서 성리학에서는 性의 문제에서 천주학에서는 心의 문제에서 해결점을 찾고 있다. 성리학에서는 復性論을 제시하고 있으며 천주학에서는 自由意志를 제시하고 있다. 리치가 주장하는 자유의지는 理에 기준한 順理와 犯理에 근거하여 심의 자율적 훈련을 통해 본성회복을 지향하고 있다. 선과 악은 자유의지의 행사가 무엇에 緣由하느냐에 달렸다고 볼 수 있다. 성리학과 천주학은 심을 人心ㆍ道心, 獸心ㆍ人心의 두 가지 작용으로 파악하고 그 근원을 육체ㆍ본성, 정신ㆍ물질로 규정하고 있다. 리치는 물질적 욕구와 정신적 욕구를 전제하여 선악의 발생을 心의 발현동기 문제로 파악하고 있다. 리치는 선과 악의 발현이 心의 양면성 사이에서 행위자의 선택적 의지에 근거한다는 것을 주장하고 있다. 주희 역시 선악의 발현을 人心과 道心사이에서 心의 조절성에 두면서 심의 발현동기에 感覺的 지각과 義理的 지각의 대상을 전제하여 심의 의지적 문제를 개입시키고 있다.
The argument of the monism and dualism for the origin of good and evil, and the elucidation by classification of ontology and axiology for the concept of good and evil could be regarded as a logical attempt to solve the contradictory relationship between the good-nature and the display of evil. Neo-confucianism and Catholicism took their different viewpoints for the good and evil in the cosmology and ethology in that good and evil are explained as monism from the viewpoint of cosmology, but as dualism from the viewpoint of ethology. The core issue for the Eastern-Western view on the good and evil shown in 『De Deo Verax Disputatio』 is that good and evil are monism or dualism. In other words from another viewpoint, it is the same with the problem ‘whether the evil exists or not’. And the following problems derive from this issue as the center: what is good and evil? Is inborn-nature of man good or evil? Finally, how could we explain the relationship between the good-nature and the display of evil?In this way, 『De Deo Verax Disputatio』 has shown the same and different relationships for the origin and the concept of good and evil of orthodox Neo-confucianism and Thomism through a piece of consciousness as this of the Eastern-Western good and evil in the era of 16th century. Neo-confucianism and Catholicism are in agreement in that they premise the origin of nature of man as good and that they determine the display of evil as the problem of mind. However, for the contradictory phenomenon between the inborn-nature and the display of evil, Neo-confucianism finds the solution in the problem of nature while Catholicism finds it in the problem of mind. Neo-confucianism has presented the theory of nature-recovery, but Catholicism has presented the free will. The free will which Ricci has asserted is inclined to the recovery of inborn-nature by the autonomous training of mind on the basis of reasonableness and unreasonableness in accordance with reason. Good and evil is to be regarded as what the display of free will is caused from. Neo-confucianism and Catholicism has caught mind as two kinds of operations of man-mindㆍtao-mind, animal-mindㆍman-mind, and has determined its origin as bodyㆍinborn-nature, spiritㆍmaterial. Ricci has premised the material desire and spiritual desire so that he has caught the occurrence of good and evil as the problem of the motive of the display of mind. Ricci has asserted that the display of good and evil is based on the selective will of the doer between both sides of mind. Chu Hsi also has put the display of good and evil under the control of mind between man-mind and tao-mind, and he has inserted the volitional problem of mind by premising the objects for sensible perception and perception for justice.
The argument of the monism and dualism for the origin of good and evil, and the elucidation by classification of ontology and axiology for the concept of good and evil could be regarded as a logical attempt to solve the contradictory relationship between the good-nature and the display of evil. Neo-confucianism and Catholicism took their different viewpoints for the good and evil in the cosmology and ethology in that good and evil are explained as monism from the viewpoint of cosmology, but as dualism from the viewpoint of ethology. The core issue for the Eastern-Western view on the good and evil shown in 『De Deo Verax Disputatio』 is that good and evil are monism or dualism. In other words from another viewpoint, it is the same with the problem ‘whether the evil exists or not’. And the following problems derive from this issue as the center: what is good and evil? Is inborn-nature of man good or evil? Finally, how could we explain the relationship between the good-nature and the display of evil?In this way, 『De Deo Verax Disputatio』 has shown the same and different relationships for the origin and the concept of good and evil of orthodox Neo-confucianism and Thomism through a piece of consciousness as this of the Eastern-Western good and evil in the era of 16th century. Neo-confucianism and Catholicism are in agreement in that they premise the origin of nature of man as good and that they determine the display of evil as the problem of mind. However, for the contradictory phenomenon between the inborn-nature and the display of evil, Neo-confucianism finds the solution in the problem of nature while Catholicism finds it in the problem of mind. Neo-confucianism has presented the theory of nature-recovery, but Catholicism has presented the free will. The free will which Ricci has asserted is inclined to the recovery of inborn-nature by the autonomous training of mind on the basis of reasonableness and unreasonableness in accordance with reason. Good and evil is to be regarded as what the display of free will is caused from. Neo-confucianism and Catholicism has caught mind as two kinds of operations of man-mindㆍtao-mind, animal-mindㆍman-mind, and has determined its origin as bodyㆍinborn-nature, spiritㆍmaterial. Ricci has premised the material desire and spiritual desire so that he has caught the occurrence of good and evil as the problem of the motive of the display of mind. Ricci has asserted that the display of good and evil is based on the selective will of the doer between both sides of mind. Chu Hsi also has put the display of good and evil under the control of mind between man-mind and tao-mind, and he has inserted the volitional problem of mind by premising the objects for sensible perception and perception for justice.
