《經濟學人》雜誌、「北京儒學論壇」都注意到孔子思想與當代經濟可以相提並論，甚至相信孔子對現代資本主義所帶來危機可以提供重要的補充與建言。經濟學之父亞當‧斯密(1723-1790)，在其著述的《道德情操論》與《國富論》中，建構了理想的資本主義世界，可避免當今所發生的社會失衡問題，但這兩本書被世人質疑為相互矛盾，而有所謂「亞當‧斯密問題」，因為斯密的《情操論》中所持的人性觀是利他的，而《國富論》的人性觀卻是自私、利己的。也有學者認為同情心、利己心都存在人性中，且兩者要共同發揮作用，才有美好人生與富足國家，這正是亞當‧斯密的本意。亞當‧斯密的理論和先秦儒家所提出的富民、德治理念相通，且儒家「內聖外王」的道德修養工夫，不但可以對照亞當‧斯密的理論，且更有邏輯推展性，不過儒家思想卻很少出現在現代政治舞臺，而亞當‧斯密被世人重視的也只剩下《國富論》。正因為只重財富，忽視道德的結果，資本主義才會帶來日益嚴重的現代化問題。不過若要以先秦儒家思想作為現代政治的指導原則也有其侷限性，因此本研究要找出先秦儒家與亞當‧斯密理論的相容處，以及可對現代政治給予的參考價值，也公允地指出先秦儒家進入現代化所面臨的挑戰。

Both The Economist and The Beijing Confucianism Forum have noticed the Confucian thoughts are comparable with contemporary economy, and have further believed that Confucian wisdom and insights could be alternative and corrective to the capitalism which has brought about crisis. Adam Smith, the father of economics, proposed a principle of ideal capitalism to get rid of the problem of an unbalanced society. The Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations, two of Smith’s corpus magnum, however, are considered to be incompatible at some aspects and so people argue that there exists the ‘Adam Smith problem’. While The Theory of Moral Sentiments suggests an altruistic view of human nature, The Wealth of Nations supports an egoist and self-interested inclination of man. A plausible interpretation is that selfishness and sympathy are both inherent in human nature and they must work together to maintain the well-being of the individual and the nation, and this interpretation makes Adam Smith’s thinking consistent and coherent. This paper shows a dialogue between Adam Smith and the Pre-Chin Confucianism. Both of them share the idea of wealth of nations and the ideal of virtue-governed politics. The discipline of ‘gentleman-in-private and sovereignty-in-public’內聖外王, on the other hand, not only concurrences with Smith’s theory but also implies more logical potentials. Unfortunately, Confucianism rarely presents itself on the modern political stage, and The Wealth of Nations is far more acknowledged than the other theoretical work. The priority of wealth to morality results in the serious problems with modern capitalism. The use of Pre-Chin Confucianism as a guidance to modern politics has its limits, too. It is this paper’s aim, therefore, to find the compatibility between the ideas of Pre-Chin Confucianism and Adam Smith, to affirm the reference and values the former can provide, and fairly to discuss the challenges that Confucianism must face when modernized and coming into the context of politics today.