Intellectual Trends of the Lê Dynasty (1428~1789) in Vietnam - The Changes in Thực Học and the Academic Viewpoint of Lê Qúy Đôn (1726~1784) -

This study traces the intellectual flow and trends of the Lê Dynasty in Vietnam before the 19th century. It also aims to examine the social internal dynamics and possibilities that led to the reformist ideas and reform movements of the 19th and 20th centuries through the emergence and subsequent changes in Thực Học (實學) which sought reform in the 15th century, and to estimate the academic viewpoint of Lê Quý Đôn (黎貴惇, 1726~1784), a representative intellectual and official of the 18th century.BR/ Hồ Qúy Ly’s reform ideas and attempts, which were anti-neo-Confucian, practical, and open-minded, did not bear fruit due to the Ming Dynasty’s rule over Vietnam. However, the Neo-Confucianism, which was introduced during the Ming Dynasty, influenced reforms in Vietnam. Lê Thánh Tông’s ‘Thực Học’ was a political and social movement that promoted faithful Confucianism, that is, classics, while hoping for the emergence of true Confucian scholars who possessed practical and empirical knowledge. Yet, due to the domestic and international political turmoil and crisis in Vietnam in the 16th~18th centuries, it is difficult to confirm the specific achievements of Thực Học proposed by Lê Thánh Tông in the late 15th century. The aftermath has caused the country’s inadequate intellectual infrastructure, rigidity in education, and a decline in the quality of the scholars.BR/ The case of Lê Qúy Đôn, which emerged in this context, presents new possibilities to the barren intellectual trends of Vietnam in the 16th to 18th centuries. In the intellectual history of traditional Vietnam, scholarly lineage or school are rarely found. However, his intellectual growth process, as seen through the academic lineage of Lê Qúy Đôn, was comprised of the practical and pragmatic academic views of his seniors, the intellectual influence of reformist intellectuals in late Ming and early Qing China, 20 years of experience as an official (1754~1783), experience in China through mission to this country, and Western learning. So, he understood ‘things’ and ‘daily use’ and valued ‘the study of things’ leading to ‘investigation of things and knowledge’, and was able to escape from the Sino-centric worldview by coming into contact with various Western learnings.