本文在達沃斯論辯的大背景下檢審舍勒（作為達沃斯論辯的隱匿的第三者）和卡西勒（達沃斯論辯的主角之一）有關精神與生命關係問題的討論。本文首先在精神與生命問題的語境中勾勒卡西勒對舍勒批評的要點，繼而在舍勒哲學人類學的背景中檢視這些批評，隨後再轉向卡西勒並嘗試展示其文化哲學人類學的基本觀念，最後在與海德格（達沃斯論辯的另一主角）的對勘中關注舍勒哲學人類學的最終目標。卡西勒和舍勒（以及海德格）的差別根本還在於他們對待形而上學的不同態度。根本來說，在達沃斯論辯前後，舍勒、卡西勒和海德格三個人都帶著「人是什麼？」的問題意識從事各自的哲學研究，最終他們殊途而不同歸。

The author of this essay examines the discussions of Scheler (as the concealed one in Davos disputation) and Cassirer (as the major character in Davos disputation) on the relation of spirit and life against the background of Davos disputation. The author sketches firstly the points of Cassirer’s criticism on Scheler in the context of spirit and life, and then proceeds to inspect the criticism under the view of Scheler’s philosophical anthropology. After that, the author turns to Cassirer and tries to present the basic ideas of his philosophical anthropology. At last, it is the ultimate goal of Scheler’s philosophical anthropology that is aimed at in the collation with Heidegger (as the other major character in Davos disputation). Essentially, the difference between Cassirer and Scheler (with Heidegger) comes from their different attitudes on metaphysics. In a word, Scheler, Cassirer and Heidegger are doing their own philosophies with the awareness of question of “what is man” around Davos disputation, and at last they reach different goals by different means.