戴震在清代考據學界極負盛名,他自認一生最重要的學術著作,乃是用以“正人心”的《孟子字義疏證》。該書的最大特點,則在于他認爲宋明理學錯說孔孟,而修正了理學從形上學路綫解說《孟子》的不適切性。故本文從戴震道德學的大本認同孟子性善說,而藉《孟子字義疏證》建立起“非形上學但具有道德創造性”的義理新說出發,探論斯作對于理學長期主導孟學詮釋的挑戰及對後世釋孟學的影響。筆者反對因戴震持自然人性論並主智重學,而將之歸宗荀學的看法。戴震持“理之爲性”之價值根源內在主張,批判荀子“無于內而取于外。”“知禮義爲聖人之教,而不知禮義亦出于性。”是其認同孟子之德性內在說;反之,其與荀子人性論存在“有/無”道德創生義之根本歧异。只不過他在性善說已獲得證立的清代,認爲道德學已毋須再致辨于“性善/性惡”問題,應將重心轉入“如何履善?”的討論。而關于如何履善?則他主張“善”必須是能接受客觀驗證的經驗落實,不是“得于天而具于心”的形上存有。是故戴震和理學的關鍵殊异,在于他强烈反對理學的道德形上學模式,他和理學具有“形上學/非形上學”的思想體系之争;而對于價值內在的“性善”說,他們其實是立場一致的。本文在闡釋戴震思想外,亦探討戴震自成一家言的孟學詮釋,對于後來釋孟學所造成的影響,期能提供有別于長期來主導孟學詮釋的、理學以外的其他義理思維方式及其意義思考。 Dai Zhen was acclaimed as the most famous academic in his study in the Qing Dynasty. He considered the most important academic work of his life as a “Mencius sense of morality” in his “True Hearts.” The most prominent feature of the book lies in his belief that Confucianism and Confucianism were misunderstood by Confucius and Mencius, while correcting the ill-fittingness of Neo-Confucianism in explaining Mencius from the metaphysical route. Therefore, this article from Dai Zhen morality to recognize Mencius kindness said, but by “Mencius meaninglessness evidence” to establish “non-formal schooling but with moral creativity The Challenge of Interpretation of Science and Its Influence on the Later Confucian Learning. The author objected to Dai Zun holding the view of natural human nature, Dai Zhen hold ”value of reason is “ the value of the origin of the internal proposition, criticizing Xunzi ”without the inside and from the outside. “ ”Know the ritual teaching saints, but I do not know ritual also out of sex. It is the internal theory of its recognition of the virtue of Mencius; on the contrary, there is a fundamental discrepancy between it and Xunzi ’s theory of human nature in the creation of morality. However, in the Qing Dynasty when he said that the goodness theory had been established, he thought that morality no longer needs to discern the issue of “sex / sexuality / evil” and should focus on the discussion of “how to improve?” As for how to improve it, then he maintains that “good” must be implemented in an attempt to accept objective verification, not in the shape of “heaven and heart”. Therefore, the key difference between Dai Zhen and Neo-Confucianism is that he strongly opposes the moral metaphysics model of Neo-Confucianism. He and Neo-Confucianism have the contention of the ideological system of “metaphysics / non-metaphysics”; while for the inherent “ ”They said they are in fact the same position. In addition to explaining Dai Zhen’s thought, this essay also explores Dai’s self-criticism of Meng’s interpretation, which later provides an alternative way of thinking other than Neo- Meaning of thinking.