本文討論「朱陸異同」與「朱王異同」在顧憲成的調和模式中，展現出哪些用意。第一，憲成對「朱陸王異同」採取「大方向」的調和，對理論細部差異著墨甚低。第二，憲成的此種「大方向」調和策略，事實上內含一「人生的價值理想」與「理論的形構」之回歸。然此「人生的價值理想」即「道德實踐」，「理論的形構」則屬「性體」。 再探究後發現，陽明學的某些內涵對憲成來說容易撼動此「人生的價值理想」，因此提出「性有定體」這一理論上的核心作為回歸。因此在「朱陸異同」與「朱王異同」兩大議題下，憲成有著明顯修正王學的意識卻不批評陸象山。最後，本文雖認為憲成這樣的調和模式雖屬簡化也效用有限，但仍可清楚的說明他的用意與考量為何。

This paper aims to evaluate the significance of “the similarities and dissimilarities between Zhu and Lu” and “the similarities and dissimilarities between Zhu and Wang” in Gu Xian-Cheng’s strategic reconciliation. To begin with, “the similarities and dissimilarities among Zhu, Liu and Wang” is assimilated into a general assumption, and little attention is paid to their differences in details. Moreover, such strategy involves a return to “the central value” and “the core of theory”—the former means “moral practice,” while the latter refers to “Xing Ti” (essential good). After Gu Xian-Cheng’s further explorations, he finds out that some principles of Wang Yang-Ming results in the disintegration of such central value, so he proposes the theory of “Xing You Ding Ti” (essential good) to cohere these discrepancies. Thus, concerning the issues of “the similarities and dissimilarities between Zhu and Lu” and “the similarities and dissimilarities between Zhu and Wang,” Gu Xian-Cheng demonstrates an overt intent to amend Wang Yang-Ming’s doctrines while obviating any critique on Liu Xiang-Shan. Finally, this paper suggests that such strategy is simplified and with limited effect, but vividly expresses Gu Xian-Cheng’s purposes and considerations.