本論文旨在對於顧憲成與高攀龍這兩位晚明儒者的思想型態給出衡定。對於涇陽與景逸的思想型態的爭論由來已久，過往的研究成果或認為二人是晚明朱子學的復興者，或是陽明學的修正者，又或是會通朱子與陽明思想的理論調和者，這樣分歧的研究成果正好凸顯了顧、高二子思想的複雜性。涇陽與景逸以其身處於朱子與陽明之後的思想史位置，又同時是晚明東林書院的主盟者，為東林學派的重要代表人物，與同時代的學者、哲學問題有諸多牽涉，對於二人的思想型態的討論不僅關係著我們對顧、高義理內容的理解，同時也是對於晚明思想史中朱子學與陽明學的發展樣貌的一種考察。通過這一型態衡定的工作，亦有助於我們在比較的方法中去彰顯朱、王兩大型態的思想核心價值，與其在不同時代背景中所面對的理解與挑戰。 本論文在寫作上可區分為兩大區塊，一是關於顧涇陽與高景逸對於陽明學的理解與反省，二是回到二子的心性論架構中，以針對各項重點給予主題式的探討。前一部份的討論集中在本論文的第二、三、四章，該部份首先自顧、高對於朱子與王陽明的評價展開分析，透過二子對於朱、王之為道德實踐的模範的取捨，以分析其理據，並釐清兩人所抱持的基本立場；其次，本文也涉及涇陽與景逸對王陽明四有句之「無善無惡心之體」說法的回應，以及有關於王門中對「良知」問題的論辯與理解，經由二子對於陽明思想中具備關鍵性的哲學概念的詮釋與反省，來加以衡量顧、高對於王學的消化、理解程度，及其在思想型態上與陽明、陽明後學之間的距離，也由此進一步回應過去研究中，二子於歷來為人所質疑其學近於陽明的觀點，而給出本文的解釋。在後一部分裡，本論文聚焦於涇陽與景逸在心性論議題上的觀念分析，通過第五、六章的主題式討論，以便能直接針對涇陽與景逸有關心與性的論述給予直接的檢視，而能夠對於兩人的心性觀點與其內涵給出說明與反省。由其心性論思想的探究，本文得以考察顧、高在繼承伊川、朱子主理型態架構下，如何對於性理給出對於法則性的注重、以及在性善論觀點下對於人性本質的理解與詮釋，最後則以心性論的設計為基礎，進一步討論二子在格物工夫中將遭逢的理論問題，以及由此問題所引發的實踐動力思考。 ;The purpose of the essay is to compare the ideology between Gu Xian-cheng (顧憲成) and Gao Pan-long (高攀龍) who were the Confucian scholars in late Ming period. The argument of the two scholar’s ideology has lasted for a long time. According to previous research results, there are different statements: One statement is that they are the revivers of Zhu Xi School (朱子學), another is the correctors of Yang-ming School (陽明學), the other is they were the reconciliation of the two above-mentioned schools. These different results showed the complexity of the two ideologies clearly. Active in the history of thought between Zhu Xi School and Yang-ming School and were the promoters of the Dong-lin Academy (東林書院) made Gu Xian-cheng and Gao Pan-long the representatives of Dong-lin School (東林學派). The discussion about the two ideologies is not only related to the comprehension of their main idea but also shows the observation and development of Zhu Xi School and Yang-ming School in late Ming period. There are two parts in the essay. First is about the understanding and reflection of what they talked about Yang-ming School. This part is mainly discussed in chapter 2,3, and 4. The part is also focused on what they accepted and rejected of Zhu Xi and Wang Yang-ming’s thoughts and also both of their individual standpoints. At the same time, we touch upon their feedback of The Mind-heart Substance Is of Neither Good Nor Evil (無善無惡心之體) from Wang Yang-ming respectively as well. We compare the two ideologies by their feedback and also the comprehension of Pure Consciousness (良知) from Wang School. Second, we emphasized on the theory of Mind and Nature from Gu Xian-cheng and Gao Pan-long. This part is talked about in chapter 5 and 6. We probe into the Discussion of Mind and Nature (心與性) from the two scholars, the meaning of their thoughts separately and the Aspect of Emphasis on Moral Law (主理型態) and transcendental practical incentive of the Moral Practice about the Discussion of Mind and Nature in the two chapters.
