Cheonin Gam-eung Theory and Silhak: Two Wisdoms of Joseon Facing Disaster

Two Worldviews of Joseon Facing Disaster: The Sky’s Warning and the Earth’s Whisper

• Understand the differences between the two key Joseon-era disaster interpretations, Cheonin Gam-eung Theory and Silhak.
• Learn from historical cases how leadership and systems operated in crisis situations.
• Gain deep insights into modern crisis management and leadership.

The Sky’s Warning: Cheonin Gam-eung Theory and the Monarch’s Responsibility

In 1664, twin comets appeared in the Joseon night sky, plunging society into great fear. This was not just an astronomical event but the operation of the grand worldview called Cheonin Gam-eung Theory (天人感應說). This theory holds that heaven and humans respond to each other, and natural disasters are stern warnings from heaven about the monarch’s immorality and political failures.

At the time, King Hyeonjong lamented, “The fault lies with me, so why do the disasters befall the people?” Finding disaster responsibility in the monarch’s personal morality was central to Joseon governance philosophy.

The King’s Self-Confession: The Gu-eon Edict

The monarch’s first response to heaven’s warning was to issue the Gu-eon Edict (求言敎書). This special decree publicly acknowledged his faults and solicited opinions from officials and the people, a sophisticated act of governance.

King Taejong asked in the Gu-eon Edict, “Is it because my virtue is lacking, or because of flaws in governance?” He questioned his faults across all areas of rule. This self-criticism acted as a political safety valve, absorbing public discontent into the official system and opening blocked communication channels.

The Scholar’s Life-Risking Remonstrance: Jibu Sangso

Once the king opened the door to criticism with the Gu-eon Edict, officials responded with life-risking frank advice. The most dramatic form was the Jibu Sangso (持斧上疏), where an official submitted a memorial along with an axe, expressing readiness to be executed on the spot if proven wrong.

During the Goryeo period, U Tak wielded an axe to admonish King Chungseon for immoral relations, and this spirit continued into Joseon, shining in Jo Heon’s memorial just before the Imjin War. Gu-eon Edict and Jibu Sangso together demonstrated the core of Confucian politics: a self-correcting drama balancing the monarch’s absolute power and the scholar-officials’ moral duty.

The Earth’s Whisper: Silhak Questions the Cause of Disaster Anew

The great national crises of the Imjin and Byeongja Wars painfully revealed that Cheonin Gam-eung Theory alone could not protect the nation. Against this backdrop, a new thought emerged seeking disaster causes not in heaven but on earth: Silhak (實學).

Silhak scholars separated the principles of human society (‘dori’ 道理) from the laws of the natural world (‘mulli’ 物理) and began viewing disasters differently. This was an intellectual revolution fundamentally changing the disaster response paradigm.

Seongho Yi Ik: Liberating Nature from Politics

Silhak pioneer Seongho Yi Ik (李瀷) argued in his work 『Seongho Saseol』 that “earthquakes originate from empty spaces underground unrelated to heaven.” This revolutionary idea overturned the belief that earthquakes were heavenly punishments for the monarch’s misrule.

Yi Ik separated natural phenomena from political interpretation and treated them as subjects of rational inquiry. Thanks to his intellectual emancipation, disaster responsibility shifted from moral judgment of “virtue” to practical evaluation of “competence.”

Dasan Jeong Yak-yong: Designing a Disaster Management System

While Seongho Yi Ik opened the philosophical breakthrough, Dasan Jeong Yak-yong (丁若鏞) drew a practical blueprint. His masterpiece 『Mokminsimseo』 detailed the local officials’ roles in disaster response, akin to a modern disaster management manual.

Dasan focused not on why disasters happen but on what must be done. He proposed the ‘Six Measures for Famine Relief (진황육조, 賑荒六條),’ including grain stockpiling and fair distribution, emphasizing that disaster management’s essence lies in “preparedness and inspection during normal times.” This was an attempt to build an incorruptible administrative system rather than rely on a single monarch’s morality — the birth of modern public administration and crisis management theory. In my view, this insight remarkably shifted responsibility from the “king” to the “system.”

Comparison / Alternatives

Cheonin Gam-eung Theory vs Silhak: Two Perspectives on Disaster

Conclusion

The two responses Joseon showed to disaster, Cheonin Gam-eung Theory and Silhak, still pose important questions for us today. What should we prioritize in the face of modern disasters?

• Leader’s Moral Responsibility: Cheonin Gam-eung Theory reminds us of the importance of leaders’ accountability and empathy in crises. This is a timeless expectation communities have of their leaders.
• Building Scientific Systems: Silhak emphasizes the need for rational, science-based, and robust disaster response systems beyond emotional appeals.
• Integrated Approach Needed: Ultimately, the wisest path is to listen to both voices. When leadership deeply empathizes with people’s suffering and a competent system protects them effectively, a truly resilient society can be built.

Facing today’s climate crisis and social disasters, what responsibilities do we demand from leaders, and how should our social systems operate? Joseon’s wisdom offers crucial clues to finding these answers.