First of all, the point of the writer seems that the jigak is like 'perception in English', who explains that it is a stimulation and response of the object, So jigakists says it is empiricism. However the perception is the lower level than Buddhism and Taoism which become enlightened deep self. In Sengli Study the jigak is not the simple response but inner part included. Then it has the problem that the jigak becomes as the empiricism. Next the writer's theory in the eastern philosophy is very rough. The writer binds the lineage of Sunzi, Husiang study, Lo Jin Shun, lee yi which is called 'mind-mattter study' as one frame of the jigak, but ignores the difference of the contents. Husiang study seems a point of similarity with Buddhism, but different with Sunzi in that point. Lo Jin Shun who seems the ji gak critical is not belong to them. It has the problem which lee yi has been seemed as the jigak only with Lee's doing nothing of li and physical mind(人心) and moral mind(道心) have the same beginnings and endings(人心道心終始說). The lineage of Yang ming-Choshik called 'mind-principle study' ignores the difference of pleasure and Kong Fu. The reviewer does not the new diagram about these yet. however it needs to be made clear every philosophy's view analyzed thoroughly.