宋明理學雖是繼隋唐佛學之後興起之學派，然而其對佛學及道家思想卻是採取較為批判的態度，由此以區別於佛老，並重新建立新儒學的內容。此中，道統說無疑是十分重要的問題。蓋道統之說一方面說明宋明理學對先秦儒學之繼承，由是而確定其儒學之性格，另一方面則是以道統說明儒學之正統性與主流地位，由是而有效地壓制佛老而成為主流正宗。對宋明理學家而言，除了有正宗地位之爭取外，亦認為其學說事實上也是真正繼承了古典以至宋明的文化傳統，也就是在思想內容上亦是與道統之內容一致而無別。針對此，當代大儒方東美先生卻有不同的看法。方先生認為宋明儒學所標榜的道統說其實有其虛妄性。此中理由是：一、道統說無法經世濟民，缺乏實用及實效性。二、道統說與歷史不符，也就是一種學蔽使然。方先生認為宋明理學受魏晉玄學及隋唐佛學之影響甚巨，因此宋明儒學對佛老之排斥缺乏堅強的理論基礎。同時，道統說的系譜也十分單薄，無法由歷史中得到充分的支持。因此，方先生建議應以學統取代道統，以求傳統文化的開放與活力。本文即針對方先生之說予以客觀之展示，並反省其理論預設所在，最後再試予衡定其可能的得失。

Fang Tong-mei, the contemporary important Confucianist, thought the Confucian Orthodoxy in the Song Dynasty has its false nature indeed. The following reasons: firstly, orthodoxy cannot benefit people and lacks of practicality as well as effectiveness. Secondly, orthodoxy does not match the history for academic shields. Fang considered that the Song-Ming Philosophy (宋明理學) is much influenced by Wei-Ching Metaphysics (魏晉玄學) and Sui-Tang Buddhism (隋唐佛學). Therefore, Song-Ming Philosophy lacks of a strong theoretical foundation to reject Buddhism and Taoism. Meanwhile, the pedigree of orthodoxy is too superficial to be fully supported. Consequently, Fang advised us to replace orthodoxy by academic legitimacy to see the vastitude and vitality of traditional cultures. In this paper, I’ll objectively demonstrate Fang’s outlook and reflect on his theoretical pre-located. Finally, I’ll try to judge his possible gains and losses.