Politics from the 17th century to the early 19th century had the following changes: from Bungdang Politics, to Tangpyoung Politics and Sedo Politics. In the process, a scholastic and philosophical focus of the time was changed from Sungrihak centering on Eurihak to practical science of Gyeongsechiyong and Liyonghoosaeng. Accordingly, the power of local scholars decreased while noble families who had a strong base in Gyeonggi. tended to dominate the world of studies and politics.
Therefore, as it was thought that local scholars were not interested in accommodation of advanced studies, they were recognized as local intellectuals, finding relief in only Sungrihak, However, when Ha family in Dongbok was examined, that is not always true.
Ha Yun-gu who lived in the 17th century developed Euriron, Ha Young-chung accommodated pragmatism Bukhak inthe 18th century and Ha Baek-won invented machines and produced maps in the early 19th century, from which it was confirmed that they weren't just local intellectuals who had no interest in advanced studies.
However, this family criticized the trend of the time. In the early 17th century, Ha Yun-gu criticized the wealth and military strength policy based on centralized authoritarianism after the Byongjahoran. Ha Young-chung criticized its inanity while joining in Horak debate of Kiho academic circle, which was the academic mainstream of the time. He admired Josik's principle focusing on practice which supported a different principle from Kiho circle. Such criticism was clearly shown in Ha Baek-won's principle. He completely criticized the academic tradition of the time which stressed nature and Lee-Ki debate as much as he was considered as giving up Sungrihak which still had a firm base at that time. Instead, he emphasized Liyonghusaeng and pragmatism.
Likewise, Ha family showed its own attitude to studies and accepted new methods of studies, actively meeting changes, demands of the time and pursuing academic trends. Therefore, Gyeonggi scholars dominated the academic changes of the 18th and 19th centuries, but it cannot be said that local scholars showed or accepted no changes at all.
This study suggests that future research should intensify understanding of the history of intellectuals through excavating examples of local scholars.