Under the premise that Korean philosophy and Korean thought are a condensation of Korean thought and culture, I would like to discuss Korean moral philosophy and its theoretical system.
This paper will answer the fundamental questions: Does Korean philosophy and Korean thought exist? If so, what exactly are they?
To this end, Chapter 1 examines the problems inherent in the discourse of indigenous thought and points out the logical pitfalls of the above question.
Why is it that we, who often pride ourselves on having a five-thousand-year history, cannot readily answer the question of whether Korean philosophy and thought exist, and if so, what exactly they are? The reader can find the answer through the discussion in Chapter 1.
In Chapter 2, we examine the discourse of familism that determines the ethical behavioral characteristics of modern Koreans.
Using sociology, social psychology, and anthropology data, I attempted to discuss with literary sensibility the fact that familial sentiment is at the root of Korean society, which values ​​regionalism and school ties.
Through this chapter, the reader will discover that familism is at the root of his actions.
Of course, familism is changing in our society, and the familism sentiment felt by the younger generation is weakening.
However, the family community is still a core subject of Korean culture.


Chapters 3 and 4 examine the Dangun myth and the founding myth of the Three Kingdoms as archetypes of Korean thought, focusing on mythology.
Although the Dangun myth was written during the Goryeo Dynasty, its contents can be considered the foundation of Korean culture.
The Dangun myth does not provide detailed information about the main character, Dangun, so we will have to wait for a sequel.
The sequel is the Jumong myth.
Through the following myth of Hyeokgeose and the story of the founding of Baekje, we can understand the ethical characteristics of Koreans.

Chapter 5 of this book deals specifically with the systematically established ethical thought of Korea.
The first one is Wonhyo, and the next is Jinul.
Buddhist thought still functions as the foundation of Korean consciousness.
In this respect, it is interesting to examine the thoughts of Wonhyo and Jinul, the great figures representing Korean Buddhism.
I have attempted to explain the complex Buddhist philosophy of Wonhyo and Jinul in an easy-to-understand way, but it is up to the reader to decide.
Chapter 7 is a work that refutes the existing historical view that the founding of Joseon was a ‘revolution by the emerging aristocracy in the Geumgi region.’
Empirical evidence shows that the Goryeo ruling class continued to dominate Joseon society as a power elite group until the mid-Joseon period.
In addition, this chapter discusses that Jeong Do-jeon's ideology, which prepared Joseon as a civilized nation of commoners and scholars, had a strong character of Sa-gak-hak (a study of merit) that emphasized practical results.
In chapters 8, 9, and 10, readers will encounter detailed explanations of the philosophies of Toegye, Yulgok, and Dasan, the prominent thinkers representing Joseon civilization, and new horizons of hermeneutics.
This paper examines the debate on the four emotions that arose between Toegye, Gobong Gi Daeseung, and Yulgok from Dasan's perspective, and discusses the true meaning of Toegye's theory of reason and movement.
In the final 11 chapters, Donghak, Jeungsanism, and Won Buddhism are examined under the category of indigenous religious ideologies of this land.