「得君行道」與「覺民行道」範式的提出體現了余英時對宋明兩代政治文化如何走向現代的思考。然而作為「得君」範式的自然轉折，「覺民」範式的相關論證卻並不足以支撐將士大夫「重建秩序」的目的落實為不同於傳統政治的現代政治文化的觀點。實際上，明代政治文化更凸顯為話語秩序自政治秩序中獨立並進一步多元化的發展過程，其對於秩序的消解意義遠大於重建意義。這一發展趨勢固然可以被解釋為通過瓦解舊秩序而走向新秩序，但相應的闡釋困境卻深刻揭示出權力本身的內在運作規律，即自一元走向多元的趨勢存在一種被技術控制的可能。當權力利用多元對神聖性的消解而進一步消除內部制衡時，其自身也由顯性走向了隱性。

The paradigm of “De Jun Xing Dao” and “Jue Min Xing Dao” shows Yu Yingshi’s thinking on how the culture of Song and Ming dynasty gave way to the modern era. Compare to the former paradigm which can be stated as “restoring order” in the traditional power structure, the latter one reveals more defects in describing the political culture of Ming dynasty, and the argument cannot support the modern political demonstration which is far different from traditional one. In fact, the political culture of the Ming dynasty is more prominent in the development process of the independent and further diversified discourse order from the political order, which is more significant to the deconstruction of order than to reconstruction. While this development trend can be interpreted as moving towards the new order by breaking up the old, the corresponding interpretation of the dilemma reveals the inner operation law of power itself. The trend from unary to pluralism does not mean the progress of history, but only means that the technical control of power starts to move from dominant to recessive, and the way of control is to use the dissolution of the sanctity of pluralism to further eliminate the checks and balances within power.