In contemporary Korean society, which contains diverse thoughts, ideologies, and philosophies, the intuition-first principle needs to be reconsidered. Korean society has already shifted from a collective agricultural society to an individualistic commercial society. People over their 60s tend to suppress personal independence while encouraging dependency inside the group. However, those under their 50s emphasize one’s independence and self-control, and encourage individuals to make their own choices. Particularly, younger generation under 30s, who shows strong individualistic tendencies, are familiar with the concept of deductive reasoning. They tend to understand and judge based on realistic proof, and are not persuaded by intuitive, implicit logics, especially if the explanation for essence and reality is not guaranteed enough. Korean Buddhism, which places enlightenment through intuition at the center of its practice system, needs to contemplate the spirit of the times. The concern about losing its persuasiveness to deduction-familiar generations is based on this point. The Indian epistemology of deductive reasoning has disappeared in Chinese Buddhism, while idealizing intuitive enlightenment is crucial in modern Korean Buddhism. This paper focuses on the comparison between deductive and intuitive reasoning and concludes that the exclusion of discrimination has resulted in Korean Buddhism being perceived mystical religion among young generations. The emphasis on intuitive enlightenment will fortify the compressive image of force-feeding the faith for those aged under 40s. This is a problem that modern Korean Buddhism must address in terms of its religious philosophy. This study presents some limitations. Future research will be devoted to discovering Gyohak of Tang Dynasty in China and the sprit of Seon, which encompasses diverse practice systems. The early first and second Seon masters of Korean Seon schools, who brought Seon practice to Korea, emphasized that two concepts are not seperated but integrated and are in complementary relation. Also, this study was originally intended to but failed to conduct a deep study on the comparison between the meditation practices of Indian Buddhism and the Seon practices of China and Korea. This is because “Sati,” the core of the logical system of meditation, is translated superficially only as "mind" in Chinese. This seems to be a limitation of China's intuitive reasoning logic system and needs further research. Finally, I would like to firmly insist upon Korean Buddhism as a Korean Buddhist. With narrow and closed perspective only inside Korean buddhism while not trying to look beyond boundaries, Korean Buddhism will fail to solve any problem. An optimistic perspective that lacks critical awareness will not be able to provide any significant solution to crumbling Korean Buddhism.