IV. The Value of Daesoon Thought's Cyclic Economic View

IV. The Value of Daesoon Thought's Cyclic Economic View

1. Eumyang Hapdeok and the Recovery of Economic Motivation

Daesoon Thought's cyclic economic view—Eumyang Hapdeok (Harmonious Union of Yin and Yang), Sinin Johwa, Haewon Sangsaeng, and Dotong Jingyeong—is practically applied, respectively, to the economic problems of the recovery of economic motivation, the regeneration of economic ethics, the harmonization of economic ideology, and the overcoming of the environmental crisis. The daedae-type (polarity, 待對的) libertarian view of wealth grounded in Eumyang Hapdeok contributes to the recovery of economic motivation; the hoegwi-type (return, 回歸的) social-contractarian view of distribution grounded in Sinin Johwa, to the regeneration of economic ethics; the utilitarian view of labor grounded in Haewon Sangsaeng, to the harmonization of economic ideology; and the yuhaeng-type (flow, 流行的) communitarian view of goods grounded in Dotong Jingyeong, to the overcoming of the environmental crisis.

First, examining the daedae-type (polarity, 待對的) libertarian view of wealth grounded in Eumyang Hapdeok in relation to economic motivation: the daedae-type libertarian view of wealth restores, through the power of circulation, the loss of economic motivation that libertarianism—which developed today's Taoist capitalism—unintentionally brought about.

Taoism, which was originally established to solve the problem of economic motivation, namely the expansion of freedom, was pressed down by the power of Confucianism and inclined toward circulation theory; while in this state it was transmitted to the West, where it combined with the active philanthropic spirit of Western Religion (Seogyo) and developed into a libertarianism like Protestantism, greatly stimulating humanity's economic motivation. However, the economic motivation of humanity that libertarianism stimulated, owing to the lack of circularity in Western Religion, in fact greatly regressed and degenerated into a gambling capitalism in which material desire is bloated and spiritual motivation is feeble. Owing to the spiritual wounds brought about by a mutually contending (sanggeuk) libertarianism, humanity loses the economic motivation of the expansion of freedom; the upper classes are buried in casino capitalism and ordinary people in lottery capitalism. Modern people living in capitalism entrust their fate to chance, like gambling, barely enduring each day and realizing no positive freedom whatsoever.

In response to humanity's crisis of economic motivation, Daesoon's daedae-type libertarianism—unlike libertarianism, which defined freedom solely as the freedom to purchase goods in the market—proposes, based on the circularity of the economy, the revival of the primordial power of freedom, namely the reform of the basic structure of institutions, as an alternative to the contemporary crisis of economic motivation. Daesoon's daedae-type libertarianism, first, emphasizes the cyclic thought of recovering economic motivation in Taoist capitalism; second, diagnoses the problem of libertarianism's recovery of economic motivation as a crisis of circularity; third, presents Eumyang Hapdeok as an alternative to the crisis of economic motivation of the libertarian view of wealth; and fourth, shows what form daedae-type libertarianism—libertarianism transformed by the thought of Eumyang Hapdeok—takes.

First, examining how Daesoon's daedae-type libertarianism emphasizes the cyclic thought of recovering economic motivation in Taoist capitalism: in Daesoon Thought, since wealth is the result of circulation, as long as it does not obstruct circulation, the desire for wealth is greatly emphasized by polarity (daedae, 待對性).580)

My work is the work of living well when others are dying, and of enjoying glory and fortune when others are living well. (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 1:6)

The above passage clearly presents that the recovery of economic motivation—the expansion of freedom—is a fundamental human desire, and that this desire becomes an important virtue all the more emphasized even when compared with others. In particular, it strongly calls for pursuing, as a human being, real life and the expansion of freedom in the form of glory and fortune.581) Because of the classical Eastern notion of the "cultivator of the Way (doin)," people often misunderstand Daesoon's view of wealth as a denial of wealth; but as long as circulation is presupposed, Daesoon Thought's view of wealth is more affirmative than the libertarian view of wealth.

Next, examining how Daesoon's daedae-type libertarianism diagnoses the problem of libertarianism's recovery of economic motivation as a crisis of circularity: in Daesoon Thought, since education is the key pivot for economic circulation, it strongly criticizes a utility-centered education that abandons circulation and inclines toward worldly interests such as official posts and emolument.

「Establishing schools widely in this world to teach people is meant to bring about a great civilizing of all under heaven and, entrusting this to the works of the Three Realms, to resolve the grievances of gods and humans (神人). Yet the school education of the present makes learners sink only into the base utility of official posts and emolument; therefore, attainment of the Way (seongdo) has come to take place outside the board.」 So saying, he finished his words. (Jeongyeong, Gyoun 1:17)

The above passage shows that libertarianism, by emphasizing freedom, contributed to receiving and expanding Taoist capitalism, which had failed to develop properly under the pressure of Confucianism; but by ignoring society—the basis of freedom—and excessively emphasizing freedom, it in fact tore down society, the basis of freedom, tearing down even basic freedom and greatly impoverishing economic motivation. In particular, it points out that, by operating the school—whose function is the reform of social institutions, the essence of freedom—for the personal aim of official posts and emolument, it decisively destroyed the entire economic cycle.

Next, examining the alternative that Daesoon's daedae-type libertarianism presents for the crisis of economic motivation of the libertarian view of wealth: contrary to libertarianism, which prioritizes profit over ethics between ethics and profit, daedae-type libertarianism presents Eumyang Hapdeok, which prioritizes ethics. Eumyang Hapdeok refers to the same principle as that of the Taegeuk, in which, taking the fire above and the water below, one reverses the upper and lower order so that water comes to be above and fire below, thereby restoring the balance of forces so that circulation occurs automatically.582) If the foundational ethics is water and profit is fire, then daedae-type libertarianism—unlike libertarianism, which places fire (profit) above water (ethics)—practices the hexagram Jicheontae (地天泰), placing water (ethics) above fire (profit).

In the Great Learning (Daehak) it is said, 「Things have roots and branches, affairs have ends and beginnings; to know what comes first and what comes after is to be near the Way (物有本末 事有終始 知所先後 卽近道矣)」; and again, 「That what should be treated generously is treated meagerly, while what should be treated meagerly is treated generously—this has never been the case (其所厚者薄 其所薄者厚 未之有也)」. Take this as a mirror and work accordingly. (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 2:51)

In all matters one must first make the root generous and treat the branch as secondary and meager; yet people today, like one who treats the root—ethics and morality—as meager and secondary while treating the branch (末), namely wealth, as generous and primary, are warned that they will fail. The Great Learning, which the Jeongyeong emphasizes, takes morality as the root (本) and wealth as the branch (末), warning that placing wealth above morality will bring great crisis. Yet modern people, prioritizing wealth—the very tip of the branch (末端)—over virtue, are unwittingly fostering crisis.

Next, Daesoon's daedae-type libertarianism shows what form daedae-type libertarianism—Western libertarianism transformed by the thought of Eumyang Hapdeok—takes.

Our work is the study of making others prosper. It suffices to take only what remains after others have prospered. When Jeon Myeong-suk (Jeon Bong-jun) rose up, he held in his heart the wish to make commoners into nobles and the lowborn (賤人) into the honored; therefore, after death he fared well and became the magistrate of the Joseon netherworld. (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 1:2)

The above passage shows that Daesoon's daedae-type view of wealth can produce, through individual power and without borrowing the power of society, the same effect that social security provides. Moreover, unlike the Western libertarian view of wealth, which regards an individual's wealth as that person's ability, Daesoon's daedae-type libertarianism is a needs-based principle in which ability is exercised according to others' needs, and it shows that the merit (gongdeok) of working for others also becomes wealth. It likewise shows that, by polarity (daedae), ethics is prioritized over material things.

In the Taoist and libertarian views of wealth, social justice can obstruct individual freedom. Taoism expressed the benevolence and propriety of Confucianism as what comes last—the Dao (道)—when nature loses its proper function.583) For Calvin, wealth was proof of God's predestined salvation, a matter in which no one else should interfere. Taoism, Calvinism, and libertarianism all call for minimal state intervention and hope for social welfare that does not constrain individual freedom. The dilemma of promoting social security without violating libertarianism is the core problem of capitalism. In the daedae-type view of wealth, even the individual who provides social security does not incur loss. In Daesoon Thought, for me to prosper, I need only give first. Because the universe circulates, the wealth (財富) I have given returns to me in some form. To increase daedae-type wealth, one need only change a single order: from returning after others have given, to giving first before others give. When one knows the order for accumulating daedae-type wealth, one can be said to be near the Dao (道).

The reason libertarian recovery of economic motivation failed is that the freedom which libertarian recovery of economic motivation pursues collided with the justice of social contractarianism, the communal interest of utilitarianism, and the communal excellence of communitarianism, so that doubt about freedom arose.584) In daedae-type libertarianism, the human image of making others prosper in order that I myself may prosper shows a human image that has recovered economic motivation by embracing social contractarianism, utilitarianism, and communitarianism all together.

The process by which daedae-type libertarianism resolves the economic problem of economic motivation, located on the individual–economy side, can be represented in the following table.

\<Table 4.1\> Daesoon Thought's daedae-type view of wealth

| | Details | Related Jeongyeong passage |

| ----- | :---- | ----- |

| Acknowledgment of the libertarian view of wealth | Real-world success becomes an important purpose of life. | -The study of enjoying glory and fortune when others are living well (Gyobeop 1:6) |

| Problems of the libertarian view of wealth | -Abuse of the scope of freedom (no Eumyang Hapdeok) -Prioritizing profit over ethics -Utility-centered rather than character-centered education | -School learning skewed toward official posts and emolument (Gyoun 1:17) |

| Solution to the problems of the libertarian view of wealth | -Eumyang Hapdeok -Changing the order so that, rather than receiving and then giving, one gives first and then receives. | -To know what comes first and what comes after is to be near the Way (Gyobeop 2:51) |

| Daesoon's daedae-type libertarian view of wealth | -Ability-based vs. needs-based -Social justice also becomes wealth as merit (gongdeok) -By polarity, ethics is prioritized over material things | -The study of making others prosper (Gyobeop 1:2) |

2. Sinin Johwa and the Regeneration of Economic Ethics

Examining the hoegwi-type (return, 回歸的) social-contractarian view of distribution grounded in Sinin Johwa in relation to economic ethics: the hoegwi-type (return, 回歸的) social-contractarian view of distribution regenerates, through the power of circulation, the disappearance of economic ethics that social contractarianism—which developed today's Bodhisattva capitalism—unintentionally brought about.

Buddhism, which was originally established to solve the problem of economic ethics, namely the realization of justice, was pressed down by the power of Confucianism and inclined toward circulation theory; while in this state it was transmitted to the West, where it combined with the active philanthropic spirit of Western Religion and developed into a social contractarianism like Kantianism, greatly stimulating humanity's economic ethics. However, the economic ethics of humanity that social contractarianism stimulated, owing to the lack of circularity in Western Religion, in fact greatly regressed and degenerated into an ethical nihilism in which ethical desire is bloated while its real-world reflection is paltry. Owing to the spiritual impoverishment brought about by an inflexible social contractarianism, humanity loses the economic ethic of the expansion of justice; the upper classes are buried in extreme relativism and ordinary people in anomie. Modern people living in capitalism compromise with injustice, are wounded in their ethical self-esteem, barely endure each day, and realize no positive justice whatsoever.

In response to humanity's crisis of economic ethics, Daesoon's hoegwi-type social contractarianism—unlike Western social contractarianism, which defined justice solely as the justice of not being worse off than others in the market—proposes, based on the circularity of the economy, the revival of the primordial power of justice, namely the reform of the basic structure of institutions, as an alternative to the contemporary crisis of economic ethics. Examining Daesoon's hoegwi-type social contractarianism as discussed thus far: it, first, emphasizes the cyclic thought of recovering economic motivation in Bodhisattva capitalism; second, diagnoses the problem of social contractarianism's regeneration of economic ethics as a crisis of circularity; third, presents Sinin Johwa as an alternative to the crisis of economic ethics of the social-contractarian view of distribution; and fourth, shows what form hoegwi-type social contractarianism—social contractarianism transformed by the thought of Sinin Johwa—takes.

First, examining how Daesoon's hoegwi-type social contractarianism revives Bodhisattva capitalism's circulation-valuing view of distribution to stimulate economic ethics: in Daesoon Thought, since distribution is the result of circulation, as long as it does not obstruct circulation, the desire for distribution is greatly emphasized by return (hoegwi, 回歸性).

Sangje invariably used honorific speech even toward lowly persons. Whenever Kim Hyeong-ryeol saw Sangje using honorific speech toward his own hired hand Ji Nam-sik, he was greatly embarrassed and requested, 「This man is my hired hand; please lower your speech to him.」 Thereupon Sangje said, 「That man is your hired hand; what relation is he to me? In this countryside, since it has been a habit from childhood, it will be hard to change your speech; but when you go to other districts, treat whomever you meet with respect. Henceforth there is no distinction of legitimate and illegitimate birth, nor of noble and base.」 (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 1:10)

The above passage acknowledges the social-contractarian view of distribution concerning basic justice. Basic justice also leads to fair equality of opportunity.585) As in the dependent-arising theory of Buddhism, such as karmic retribution (cause and effect), in Daesoon Thought too—a circulation theory—opportunity comes around fairly, taking as its cause that which had been cast aside and had no name. Fair equality of opportunity becomes the ground of the social basis of self-respect. Korea's past status system rivaled India's, yet Korea has almost no remaining status system compared with India, where the caste system persists, and is counted among the most democratized nations even compared with advanced countries such as Britain, the United States, and Japan. At the time the Jeongyeong was recorded, abolishing the distinction of legitimate and illegitimate birth and of noble and base was hard to believe, yet history flowed in a direction consistent with the Jeongyeong. Because of the classical Eastern notion of "respect for elders," people often misunderstand Daesoon's view of distribution as a hierarchical one; but as long as circulation is presupposed, Daesoon Thought's view of distribution is more active than the social-contractarian view of distribution.

Next, examining how Daesoon's hoegwi-type social contractarianism diagnoses the problem of social contractarianism's regeneration of economic ethics as a crisis of circularity: in Daesoon Thought, since fairness (公正) is the key pivot for economic circulation, it strongly criticizes social-contractarian human affairs (insa) that deny communal participation, settling merely for outward appearances.

After all matters had thus been resolved, Sangje said to Gyeong-o, 「Knowing that you had seventy nyang, I requested it; why do you deceive me so?」 He, with a serious face, replied, 「I truly had none.」 The very next day, robbers (hwajeok) broke into Gyeong-o's house and he lost all that money. Hearing of it, Sangje said, 「Knowing that a grudge-spirit (cheoksin) had attached to that money, I requested it in order to save the multitude of beings; yet he would not listen.」 (Jeongyeong, Haengrok 3:16)

The above passage shows that social contractarianism, by emphasizing justice, contributed to receiving and expanding Bodhisattva capitalism, which had failed to develop properly under the pressure of Confucianism; but by ignoring community—the basis of justice—and excessively emphasizing individual duty, it in fact tore down society, the basis of justice, tearing down even basic justice and greatly impoverishing economic ethics. In particular, it points out that, by operating goods—whose function is the reform of social institutions, the essence of justice—solely for the personal aim of profit, it decisively destroyed even individual economic circulation.

Next, examining the alternative that Daesoon's hoegwi-type social contractarianism presents for the crisis of economic ethics of the social-contractarian view of distribution: contrary to social contractarianism, which prioritizes the individual's fulfillment of duty between the individual's fulfillment of duty and sanctions against violators, hoegwi-type social contractarianism presents Sinin Johwa, which prioritizes the ethic of sanctions against violators.586) Sinin Johwa refers to the same principle as feedback (a return loop) in dominoes, where the first cause never disappears but grows larger or smaller and at the end necessarily returns to itself. If the ethic of sanctions against violators is the divine (神) and the individual's fulfillment of duty is the human (人), then hoegwi-type libertarianism—unlike social contractarianism, which places the divine (神, the ethic of sanctions against violators) above the human (人, the individual's fulfillment of duty)—practices Sinin Johwa, placing the divine (神, the ethic of sanctions against violators) on equal footing with the human (人, the individual's fulfillment of duty).

Sangje taught, 「If a human being cannot fill his desire, he bursts with indignation and falls into grave illness. Now I first set up the false law (nanbeop) and afterward send down the true law (jinbeop); releasing all matters, I leave them to each one's free will, so in all affairs make your mind upright. Crookedness is the root of all sin; truthfulness is the source of all fortune. Now I shall make the divine beings (sinmyeong) descend upon people and aim the carpenter's inkline at their minds, and set the judgment of right and wrong to the lightning. Whoever fails to set his mind aright and acts crookedly, when the ultimate energy (jigi) descends, his heart will burst and his joints will be wrenched apart. Though his fortune be good, it will be hard to get it past his throat.」 (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 3:24)

In all matters one must first make generous the invisible realm of the divine (神) and treat the visible realm of the human (人) as secondary and meager; yet modern civilization, which makes the root—the realm of the divine (神)—meager while treating the branch (末), the realm of the human (人), as generous and primary, is warned that it will fail. Yet modern people, prioritizing human desire—the very tip of the branch (末端)—over the divine, are unwittingly fostering crisis.

Next, Daesoon's hoegwi-type social contractarianism shows what form hoegwi-type social contractarianism—Western social contractarianism transformed by the thought of Sinin Johwa—takes.

(...) If you go to the marketplace or to a gathering and merely think, 'If they believed my words a path to life would open for them,' though they themselves do not know it, their divine beings (sinmyeong) will know it, and virtue will return to you.」 (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 1:2)

The above passage shows that Daesoon's hoegwi-type view of distribution is composed of a stricter distribution network—the divine beings (sinmyeong)—than social contractarianism. The hoegwi-type social-contractarian view of distribution is a more thorough view of distribution than social contractarianism; it is not a simple system in which output equals input, but a complex system in which what is put in comes out amplified or diminished. It therefore shows that "no-grudge (mucheok)"—ensuring that there is no resentment whatsoever at the outset—is very important.

In the Buddhist and social-contractarian views of distribution, individual freedom can obstruct the justice of society. Buddhism emphasized that the benevolence and propriety of Confucianism are futile discrimination, and expressed that what transcends discrimination is emptiness (空). For Kant, justice was proof of the individual's existence, a matter in which no one else should interfere. Buddhism, Kantianism, and social contractarianism all call for minimal state intervention and hope for social welfare that does not constrain individual freedom.587)

In the hoegwi-type view of distribution, both an individual's kindness and grudges (cheok) all return. Even the individual who provides social security does not incur loss. In Daesoon Thought, for me to prosper, I need only bestow first. Because the universe circulates, the wealth (財富) I have bestowed returns to me in some form. To increase hoegwi-type distribution, one need only change a single order: if one wishes to receive either kindness or grudges from others, one gives first. When one knows the order for accumulating hoegwi-type distribution, one can be said to commune with the divine beings (sinmyeong).

The reason social-contractarian regeneration of economic ethics failed is that the justice which social-contractarian regeneration of economic ethics pursues collided with the freedom of libertarianism, the communal interest of utilitarianism, and the communal excellence of communitarianism, so that doubt about justice arose. In hoegwi-type social contractarianism, the human image of believing that, though the other person may not know, the other's divine beings (sinmyeong) will know, and of making others prosper, shows a human image that has recovered economic ethics by embracing libertarianism, utilitarianism, and communitarianism all together.

The resolution of the problem of economic ethics through the hoegwi-type social-contractarian view of distribution can be summarized as follows.

\<Table 4.2\> Daesoon Thought's hoegwi-type view of distribution

| | Details | Related Jeongyeong passage |

| :---- | :---- | ----- |

| Acknowledgment of the social-contractarian view of distribution | -Basic liberties -Fair equality of opportunity -The social basis of self-respect | Treat whomever you meet with respect. (Gyobeop 1:10) |

| Problems of the social-contractarian view of distribution | -Absence of communication between individuals -No responsibility even if kindness goes unrepaid -Simple system | Explaining that Gyeong-o would have the grudge-spirit-attached money taken by robbers (Haengrok 3:16) |

| Solution to the problems of the social-contractarian view of distribution | -Sinin Johwa -Eternal return -Complex system | Making the divine beings descend upon people and aim the inkline at their minds (Gyobeop 3:24) |

| Comparison of social contractarianism and Daesoon's view of distribution | -Daesoon is connected by a stricter distribution network than social contractarianism -A structurally thorough view of distribution -No-grudge (mucheok) is the initial condition of the complex system | Though they do not know it, their divine beings will know it (Yesi 1:43) |

3. Haewon Sangsaeng and the Harmonization of Economic Ideology

Examining the junghwa-type (neutralization, 中和的) utilitarian view of labor grounded in Haewon Sangsaeng in relation to economic ideology: the junghwa-type (neutralization, 中和的) utilitarian view of labor harmonizes, through the power of circulation, the discord of economic ideology that utilitarianism—which developed today's Confucian capitalism—unintentionally brought about.

Confucianism, which was originally established to solve the problem of economic ideology, namely the realization of the public good, was pressed down by Confucianism's own classical canon and inclined toward circulation theory; while in this state it was transmitted to the West, where it combined with the active philanthropic spirit of Western Religion and developed into a utilitarianism like capitalism and communism, greatly stimulating humanity's economic ideology. However, the economic ideology of humanity that social contractarianism stimulated, owing to the lack of circularity in Western Religion, in fact greatly regressed and degenerated into an ideology in which ideological propaganda is splendid while real-world development is paltry. Owing to the Cold War brought about by a utilitarianism without regard for the weak, humanity loses the economic ideology of the expansion of the public good; under capitalism it is buried in the maximization of the gap between rich and poor, and under communism in growth stagnation. Modern people living in capitalism fold up their ideals, are wounded in their human pride, endure each day with frustrated dreams, and realize no positive public good whatsoever.

In response to humanity's crisis of economic ideology, Daesoon's junghwa-type utilitarianism—unlike Western utilitarianism, which defined the public good solely as the public good of winning more votes than others in politics—proposes, based on the circularity of the economy, the revival of the primordial power of the public good, namely the enhancement of market efficiency, as an alternative to the contemporary crisis of economic ideology. Examining Daesoon's junghwa-type utilitarianism as discussed thus far: it, first, emphasizes the cyclic thought of harmonizing economic ideology in Confucian capitalism; second, diagnoses the problem of utilitarianism's harmonization of economic ideology as a crisis of circularity; third, presents Haewon Sangsaeng as an alternative to the crisis of economic ideology of the utilitarian view of distribution; and fourth, shows what form junghwa-type utilitarianism—utilitarianism transformed by the thought of Haewon Sangsaeng—takes.

First, examining how Daesoon's junghwa-type utilitarianism revives Confucian capitalism's circulation-valuing view of labor to stimulate economic ideology: in Daesoon Thought, since labor–production is the result of circulation, as long as it does not obstruct circulation, the desire for production is greatly emphasized by neutralization (junghwa, 中和性).588)

Entering the gi-yu (己酉) year, Sangje performed the Buried-Fire (maehwa, 埋火) reordering work and, while making the southeast wind blow for forty-nine days, on the forty-eighth day a certain person came and pleaded for his illness to be cured. Because Sangje was absorbed in the reordering work, he did not respond, and that person returned and harbored resentment. Thereupon the southeast wind ceased, and Sangje, realizing this, at once sent someone to console the sick person. At this time Sangje said, 「If even one person harbors a grievance (won), the energy of heaven and earth is blocked.」 (Jeongyeong, Gongsa 3:29)

The above passage shows that even the sacrifice of a few endured for the Reordering Works of Heaven and Earth (Cheonji-gongsa) can block the energy of heaven and earth—so that utilitarianism, which sacrifices the small (小) for the great (大), causes many problems. Since utilitarianism pursues the greatest happiness of the greatest number, it often sacrifices the small (小) for the great (大). Yet the above passage shows that, even though a few sacrifice for the interest of the many, the power of the few is by no means weaker than the power of the many. Because of the classical Eastern notion of "scholar-farmer-artisan-merchant (sa-nong-gong-sang),"589) people often misunderstand Daesoon's view of labor as an evasive one; but as long as circulation is presupposed, Daesoon Thought's view of distribution is more affirmative than the utilitarian view of labor.

Next, examining how Daesoon's junghwa-type utilitarianism diagnoses the problem of utilitarianism's harmonization of economic ideology as a crisis of circularity: in Daesoon Thought, since efficiency is the key pivot for economic circulation, it strongly criticizes utilitarian politics that denies efficiency internal to the market system and politically puts forward other alternatives.

Wonil, hosting Sangje at his house, heard him speak of the Way of the sage and the arts of the hegemon-warrior (ungpae). It was as follows.

「To save lives and heal the world (濟生醫世) is the Way of the sage; to bring disaster upon the people and overturn the world (災民革世) is the art of the hegemon-warrior. Already all under heaven has long suffered the afflictions left by the hegemon-warriors. Therefore I shall now, by the Way of mutual life-giving (相生), transform the people and rectify the world. From now on, set your mind aright. One who studies to be a great person must always accumulate the virtue of cherishing life (hosaeng). How could it be fitting to wish to live by killing the myriad multitudes of beings?」 (Jeongyeong, Gyoun 1:16)

The above passage shows that utilitarianism, by emphasizing the public good, fell into the Confucian classical canon, ignored the individual—the basis of the public good—and, by excessively emphasizing only communal interest, in fact ignored the individual, the basis of the public good, tearing down even the basic public good and greatly impoverishing economic ideology. In particular, it points out that, by operating the arts of the hegemon-warrior—whose function is the reform of social institutions, the essence of the public good—solely for personal aims, it decisively destroyed even social economic circulation.

Next, examining the alternative that Daesoon's junghwa-type utilitarianism presents for the crisis of economic ethics of the utilitarian view of distribution: contrary to utilitarianism, which prioritizes the choice of the majority between regard for the minority and the interest of the majority, junghwa-type utilitarianism presents Haewon Sangsaeng, which prioritizes the ethic of regard for the minority. Haewon Sangsaeng includes a structure in which two or more different forces take cyclic benefit from one another. If the harm done to the minority by the majority is called grievance (won, 冤), then the majority's regard for the minority can be called the resolution of grievance (haewon, 解寃), and the mutual life-giving (sangsaeng) that follows the resolution of grievance can be called Haewon Sangsaeng. Junghwa-type utilitarianism places the resolution of grievance (haewon, 解寃, the majority's regard for the minority) before grievance (won, 寃, the harm done to the minority by the majority).

When Jeon Bong-jun (全琫準), indignant at tyrannical rule (虐政), gathered the Donghak followers and raised a righteous army, the state of the times grew ever more turbulent, their anger soared to the heavens, and their momentum worsened by the day. At this time Sangje, knowing that the prospects of those Donghak troops were unfavorable, one summer day recited to many people the verse 「月黑雁飛高 單于夜遁逃 欲將輕騎逐 大雪滿弓刀」 (The moon is dark and the wild geese fly high; the Chanyu flees by night. About to pursue with light cavalry, heavy snow fills bow and blade), making clear that the Donghak troops would fail when the season of snow arrived, and urged many people not to join Donghak. Indeed, that winter the Donghak troops were crushed by the government army, and those who followed Sangje's words escaped calamity. (Jeongyeong, Haengrok 1:23)

In all matters one must first make generous the invisible fundamental realm and treat the visible realm as secondary and meager; yet a system like Donghak, which makes the root—examination of efficiency within the market—meager while treating only the branch (末), namely external cause-and-name beyond institutions, as generous and primary, is warned that it will fail. The Byeongse-mun (Text on the Illness of the Age) of the Jeongyeong warns that one who is ignorant of the momentum of all under heaven will fall into the energy of death.590) Yet modern people, prioritizing the very tip of the branch (末端)—namely cause-and-name—over real benefit, are unwittingly fostering crisis.

Next, Daesoon's junghwa-type utilitarianism shows what form junghwa-type utilitarianism—Western utilitarianism transformed by the thought of Haewon Sangsaeng—takes.

On the twenty-third day of the twelfth month of the jeong-mi year, Sangje sought out Sin Gyeong-su at his house. Speaking of Yao's "observing the images of the sun, moon, and stars and respectfully granting the seasons to the people" (曆像日月星辰敬授人時), Sangje said, 「Heaven and earth, without the sun and moon, are an empty shell; the sun and moon, without one who knows (知人), are a vain shadow (虛影). Since Tang Yao (唐堯) discerned the law of the sun and moon and taught it to the people, the grace of heaven and the principle of earth were first granted to humankind.」 At this time Sangje taught "The sun and moon, without selfishness, govern the myriad things; the rivers and mountains, possessing the Way, receive the hundred deeds" (日月無私治萬物 江山有道受百行), and composed the Five Incantations (五呪), naming them the essence-fluid (津液) of heaven and earth. Those Five Incantations are as follows.

新天地家家長歲 日月日月萬事知

侍天主造化定永世不忘萬事知

福祿誠敬信 壽命誠敬信 至氣今至願爲大降

明德觀音八陰八陽 至氣今至願爲大降

三界解魔大帝神位願趁天尊關聖帝君 (Jeongyeong, Gyoun 1:30)

The above passage shows that, in Daesoon's cyclic economic view, the human being becomes a being who neutralizes (中和) from the central position and examines human affairs from the center, and thus becomes a being who can change the given framework. It shows that, when the resolution of grievance (haewon) of junghwa-type utilitarianism takes precedence over utilitarian innovation, so that all innovation becomes the resolution of grievance, then the sincerity-reverence-faith (seong-gyeong-sin) needed to reach innovation all become longevity and fortune—that is, the source of value.

Daesoon's junghwa-type view of labor shows that, without borrowing individual power and through communal power, it can produce the same effect that social security provides. In the Confucian and utilitarian views of labor, communal interest can infringe upon individual interest. Confucianism criticized the emptiness (空) of Buddhism and the qi (氣) of Taoism as vain quietistic extinction (heomu jeokmyeol)591) and expressed that what transcends the individual is the Great Unity (大同).592) The public good was proof of the existence of the community, a matter in which every individual should be involved. Confucianism, capitalism, and communism all call for maximal state intervention and hope for social welfare that does not infringe upon the interest of the few. The dilemma of promoting the welfare of the few while maintaining utilitarianism is the core problem of capitalism.

In the junghwa-type view of labor, both the interest of the many and the interest of the few are regarded as one. Even the social majority that provides social security does not incur loss. In Daesoon Thought, for me to prosper, I need only give first. Because the universe circulates, the wealth (財富) the community has shown regard for returns to the community in some form, through the Mean that escapes extremes.593) To increase junghwa-type production, one need only change a single order: showing regard for the rights and interests of the minority first as well. When one knows the order for accumulating junghwa-type distribution, it can be said to become Haewon Sangsaeng.

The reason utilitarian harmonization of economic ideology failed is that the public good which utilitarian harmonization of economic ideology pursues collided with the freedom of libertarianism, the social justice of social contractarianism, and the communal excellence of communitarianism, so that doubt about the public good arose. In junghwa-type utilitarianism, the human image of believing that, though people may not know one's own sincerity, reverence, and faith, Heaven will know, and of making others prosper, shows a human image that has harmonized economic ideology by embracing libertarianism, social contractarianism, and communitarianism all together.

A summary of Daesoon's junghwa-type utilitarianism for resolving the problem of economic ideology thus far is as follows.

\<Table 4.3\> Daesoon Thought's junghwa-type view of labor

| | Details | Related Jeongyeong passage |

| :---- | :---- | ----- |

| Acknowledgment of the utilitarian view of labor | -Community prior to the individual -Communal interest prioritized as much as communal justice -Respect for innovation and efficiency | If even one person harbors a grievance, the energy of heaven and earth is blocked (Gongsa 3:29) |

| Problems of the utilitarian view of labor | -Ignoring qualitative distinctions, uniformity -Prioritizing profit over ethics -Ignoring the minority | Long having suffered the afflictions left by the hegemon-warriors (Gyoun 1:16) |

| Solution to the problems of the utilitarian view of labor | -Junghwa-type circulation -Prioritizing Haewon Sangsaeng over innovation -Evaluating loyalty-filial piety-fidelity (chung-hyo-yeol) by sincerity-reverence-faith (seong-gyeong-sin) | Urging people not to join Donghak (Haengrok 1:23) |

| Comparison of utilitarianism and Daesoon's view of labor | -The human being is a being who innovates the framework itself -Labor by need, not by ability -Loyalty-filial piety-fidelity (chung-hyo-yeol) for the resolution of grievance | 福祿誠敬信 壽命誠敬信 (Gyoun 1:30) |

4. Dotong Jingyeong and the Overcoming of the Environmental Crisis

Examining the yuhaeng-type (flow, 流行的) utilitarian view of labor grounded in Dotong Jingyeong in relation to the environmental crisis: the yuhaeng-type (flow, 流行的) communitarian view of goods overcomes, through the power of circulation, the environmental crisis that communitarianism—which developed today's Western capitalism—unintentionally brought about.

Western Religion (Seogyo), which was originally established to solve the problem of the economic environment, namely the realization of community, was pressed down by Western Religion's own dogmatism and inclined toward circulation theory; while in this state it combined with the active enlightening spirit of Yu-Bul-Seon transmitted to the West and developed into a communitarianism like socialism and social-welfarism, greatly stimulating humanity's economic environment. However, the improvement of humanity's economic environment that communitarianism stimulated, owing to the lack of circularity in Western Religion, in fact greatly regressed and degenerated into an environmental crisis in which material development is splendid while the natural environment is paltry. Owing to the environmental crisis brought about by a communitarianism without human regard for nature, humanity loses the ideal economic environment of the expansion of community and is buried in the crisis of the extinction of the human community. Modern people living in capitalism abandon countermeasures against the environmental crisis, endure each day with frustrated dreams and without hope for humanity's future, and realize no positive communal response whatsoever.

In response to humanity's environmental crisis, Daesoon's yuhaeng-type communitarianism—unlike Western communitarianism, which defined community solely as belonging to a community economically more advantageous than other communities—proposes, based on the circularity of the economy, the revival of the primordial power of community, namely a joint response to humanity's crisis, as an alternative to the contemporary environmental crisis. Examining Daesoon's yuhaeng-type communitarianism as discussed thus far: it, first, emphasizes the cyclic thought of overcoming the environmental crisis in Western capitalism; second, diagnoses the problem of communitarianism's overcoming of the environmental crisis as a crisis of circularity; third, presents Dotong Jingyeong as an alternative for overcoming the environmental crisis of the communitarian view of goods; and fourth, shows what form yuhaeng-type communitarianism—communitarianism transformed by the thought of Dotong Jingyeong—takes.

First, examining how Daesoon's yuhaeng-type communitarianism revives Western capitalism's circulation-valuing view of goods to stimulate the economic community's overcoming of the environmental crisis: in Daesoon Thought, since goods are the result of circulation, as long as it does not obstruct circulation, the desire to bestow community594) and goods is greatly emphasized by flow (yuhaeng, 流行性).

In the seventh month of that year, the Donghak party members gathered at Wonpyeong. Kim Hyeong-ryeol, passing through this place to see Sangje, saw the Donghak party gathered, went to Sangje, and reported it. Sangje sent him to Wonpyeong to find out the purpose and conduct of that gathering. At Wonpyeong he ascertained that it was a gathering of the Iljinhoe, that they put forward the aim of "serving the nation and bringing peace to the people" (boguk anmin), and that the assembly site was Ganggyeong (江景) in South Chungcheong (忠南); he returned to Sangje and reported the facts. Hearing this, Sangje said, 「Let me make it so that henceforth they do away with plundering and harm to the people such as in the gabo (甲午, 1894) year, and that each of them uses his own property. I must first set the example.」 So saying, he sold the household belongings of his home and a little of his farmland and, with that money, went into Jeonju town and distributed it to passing beggars. From then on, the Iljinhoe members, instead of plundering, acted with their own property. By this affair the townspeople of Jeonju were moved by Sangje's deeds and heightened their reverence for him. (Jeongyeong, Gyoun 1:15)

The above passage shows that Daesoon Thought acknowledges a philanthropic view of goods that uses individual property for common purposes, prioritizing communal justice as much as communal interest. Foreseeing that the Iljinhoe and Donghak, though they arose for common purposes, would sustain themselves by plundering the residents, Sangje showed a communitarian example in advance, thereby making the Iljinhoe too engage in communal affairs with their own money. Daesoon's yuhaeng-type view of goods, like the communitarian view of goods, shows that goods, even if individually owned, are beings that cannot be handled at an individual's whim. If Donghak took the sacrifice of a few for granted under the pretext of the great cause of community, Daesoon's image of sacrificing oneself for the great cause is sufficient to contrast with the Iljinhoe, so that even the Iljinhoe came to act with their own money. Because of the classical Eastern notion of "virtue as root, wealth as branch (德本財末)," people often misunderstand Daesoon's view of goods as one of non-possession; but as long as circulation is presupposed, Daesoon Thought's view of goods is more flow-oriented than the communitarian view of goods.

Next, examining how Daesoon's yuhaeng-type communitarianism diagnoses the problem of communitarianism's overcoming of the environmental crisis as a crisis of circularity: in Daesoon Thought, since excellence is the key pivot for economic circulation, it strongly criticizes communitarian politics that denies excellence internal to the market system and uses other alternatives as a political pretext.

One day, the disciples saw Sangje and asked, 「With Sangje's power, how could you have suffered the disturbance of Jang Hyo-sun?」 Sangje said, 「If a dispute arises within the religious order (敎中) or within a household (家中), the divine government (神政) becomes disordered; if left as it is, great calamity comes upon the world. Therefore I received that energy and dissolved the calamity.」 (Jeongyeong, Haengrok 3:8)

The above passage shows that primary communities such as the family and the school take precedence over all organizations, and that the members of a community must hold firm conviction about the preciousness of the community.595) Communitarianism, by emphasizing communal excellence—while it had failed to develop properly, having fallen into the dogmatism of Western Religion—contributed to receiving the Eastern Yu-Bul-Seon and expanding the communal environment; but by ignoring the individual—the basis of the public good—and excessively emphasizing only communal excellence, it in fact tore down the individual, the basis of the public good, tearing down even the basic public good and greatly impoverishing the economic environment. In particular, it points out that, by operating goods—whose function is the reform of social institutions, the essence of excellence—solely for the personal aim of fame and profit, it is adversely affecting even cosmic circulation.

Next, examining the alternative that Daesoon's yuhaeng-type communitarianism presents for the environmental crisis of the communitarian view of goods: contrary to utilitarianism, which prioritizes the choice of the strong few between the tyranny of the few who are strong in profit and the response of the weak many, yuhaeng-type communitarianism presents Dotong Jingyeong, which prioritizes the ethic of regard for the weak many. Dotong Jingyeong can be said to be a circulation in which two or more systems act upon one another in a flowing (yuhaeng) manner.

If the common will of the weak many is called the Dao (道), then a world in which the harmony of the strong and the weak is achieved can be called Dotong Jingyeong. Unlike communitarianism, which is skewed toward the will of the weak many, yuhaeng-type (return-type) communitarianism simultaneously satisfies the demands of both sides.

Deep at night, Sangje took the disciples up a mountain in Taein town and performed a reordering work; afterward he said to them, 「The great divine beings of heaven and earth have gathered for this work; when they disperse there will surely be a terrible chastisement.」 As he finished speaking, unexpectedly a roar of the crowd arose from Taein town. The disciples, attending Sangje, came down from the mountain and looked: the crowd had rushed into the tavern of Sin Gyeong-hyeon (辛敬玄) and smashed all the household goods and liquor jars. Originally Sin Gyeong-hyeon, after starting his liquor business, had gained the favor of the town's young men and amassed money; but because he treated those young men coldly when they were in want, they, indignant at his heartlessness, attacked him. The next day Sangje went to Gyeong-hyeon's tavern, where the couple were weeping and about to move elsewhere. Sangje said nothing but asked Gyeong-hyeon's wife for liquor; the woman said, 「All the liquor jars have been smashed; what liquor could there be?」 He said, 「Bring the soju hidden in that chest.」 The woman, flustered, said, 「Before you, sir, nothing can be hidden at all,」 and poured out soju from a small bottle and offered it. Sangje admonished the couple, 「In all matters, right and wrong lie entirely with me, not with one's position. Henceforth think well in all matters and act. If you do so, your path ahead will open again and your business will flourish.」 As admonished, the couple stopped their move, mended their faults, and continued their business; before long their business flourished again. (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 3:18)

In the above passage, the people who, though without power, were many and indignant at Sin Gyeong-hyeon's heartlessness—a community that had merely endured—exploded according to a change in a particular energy and attacked Sin Gyeong-hyeon's house. In all matters one must first make generous the invisible realm and treat the visible realm as secondary and meager; yet a person like Sin Gyeong-hyeon, who makes the root—examination of virtue (德) within the market—meager while treating only the branch (末), namely external cause-and-name beyond institutions, as generous and primary, is warned that he will fail. Yet Sin Gyeong-hyeon too, if he turns his mind well, was given the chance to come back to life.

Next, Daesoon's yuhaeng-type communitarianism shows what form yuhaeng-type communitarianism—Western communitarianism transformed by the thought of Dotong Jingyeong—takes.

Kim Gap-chil always acted with childish willfulness and stubbornness, but Sangje would coax him well and merely smile, never once scolding him, so that he grew worse and would not mend. Hyeong-ryeol, unable to bear it, scolded, 「Where is there such a wicked fellow?」 Sangje said to Hyeong-ryeol, 「Your words and deeds are not yet unraveled and still carry venom. 'When you set out to remove the bad, all is weeds; when you take a liking and look, all is flowers' (惡將除去無非草 好取看來總是花). Words are the cry of the mind, and deeds are the traces of the mind. If you speak well of others, it becomes virtue and you prosper, and the surplus virtue is pushed along and gradually becomes great fortune, reaching your own body; but words that slander others become harm to them, and the surplus harm is pushed along and gradually becomes great calamity, reaching your own body.」 (Jeongyeong, Gyobeop 1:11)

In a community, if one speaks well, the community's members all prosper together and it keeps growing; if one speaks ill in a community, the community keeps shrinking. Goods, too: what is bestowed to make others prosper has its surplus virtue pushed along to become greater and to flow (yuhaeng), while goods made to flow so as to make others fare ill have their calamity all the more amplified, flowing back to me.

Comparing the views of goods of Western Religion and Daesoon: the communitarian view of goods of Western Religion has lofty ideals, but with its anthropocentric thinking it fails to bring to life the hidden functions of objects. As Baudrillard revealed in The System of Objects (Le Système des objets),596) just as objects are said to exist prior to the human being, in Daesoon's yuhaeng-type view of goods the divine beings (sinmyeong) are present and circulate together.

Daesoon's yuhaeng-type view of goods shows that, without borrowing individual power and through communal power, it can produce the same effect that social security provides. In the views of goods of Western Religion and communitarianism, communal excellence can infringe upon individual interest. Western Religion and ecologism both call for maximal state intervention and hope for social welfare that does not infringe upon the interest of the few.

In the yuhaeng-type view of goods, both the interest of the weak and the interest of the strong are regarded as one. Even the social strong who provide social security do not incur loss. In Daesoon Thought, for me to prosper, I need only give first. Because the universe circulates, the goods (財貨) the community has shown regard for return to the community in some form. To increase yuhaeng-type goods, one need only change a single order: showing regard first for the rights and interests of those who are many but weak. When one knows the order for accumulating yuhaeng-type goods, it can be called Dotong Jingyeong.

\<Table 4.4\> Daesoon Thought's yuhaeng-type view of goods

| | Details | Related Jeongyeong passage |

| :---- | :---- | ----- |

| Acknowledgment of the communitarian view of goods | -Acknowledging goods by need -Communal justice prioritized as much as communal interest -Bestowal valued as much as efficiency | I must first set the example (Gyoun 1:15) |

| Problems of the communitarian view of goods | -Free-riding -Betrayal by members -The unmeasurability of symbolic value | If a dispute arises within the religious order (敎中) or a household (家中), the divine government (神政) becomes disordered (Haengrok 3:8) |

| Solution to the problems of the communitarian view of goods | -Utilizing the flow (yuhaeng) of objects rather than individual bestowal -Maintaining checks on the strong few -Emphasizing the importance of dialogue | A man who treated the young men coldly when they were in want was set right by the community (Gyobeop 3:18) |

| Comparison of communitarianism and Daesoon's view of goods | -The flowing (yuhaeng) circularity of objects themselves -The circulation of bestowal | If you speak well of others it becomes virtue and they prosper, and the virtue grows greater so that I prosper all the more (Gyobeop 1:11) |

The reason communitarian overcoming of the environmental crisis failed is that the excellence which communitarian overcoming of the environmental crisis pursues collided with the freedom of libertarianism, the social justice of social contractarianism, and the public good of utilitarianism, so that doubt about excellence arose. In yuhaeng-type communitarianism, the human image of believing that, though people may not know one's own merit (gongdeok), Heaven will know, and of making others prosper, shows a human image that can resolve environmental problems by embracing libertarianism, social contractarianism, and utilitarianism all together. A summary of Daesoon's yuhaeng-type communitarianism for resolving the environmental-crisis problem thus far is as in \<Table 4.4\>.