唐君毅立基於黑格爾的辯證哲學，且認為中國哲學有深刻的內在慧命相續。因此，他持此一立場來論述朱熹與王陽明在成德工夫上各盡其長、互補其短的可能性。本文企求從唐先生整體學思出發，一方面由朱子、王陽明的各別文本中梳理，釐清兩人分據「性即理」（朱子）、「心即理」（王陽明）的道德人性論立基點，注意兩人對心之本質屬性和功能作用之不同詮釋，揀別出兩人成德工夫之特質、理論之卓越處和侷限點，再進而細緻的研讀唐君毅對朱熹心性實踐工夫之詮釋與批判，以及辨析出他對陽明致良知教的理解、詮釋、評價，且進而建設性地提出他個人認為陽明致良知教可以補足朱子居敬窮理的格物踐德之不足處。

Based on Hege’s dialectic philosophy and convinced in the internal profound continuity of wisdom in Chinese philosophy, Tang Jun-yi investigated how it’s possible for Ju Xi and Wang Yang-ming to show their respective strengths and complement each other’s weaknesses. Here we approach Ju’s and Wang’s texts through Tang’s perspective to clarify their respective theories of “nature as principle” (Ju) and “mind as principle” (Wang) as the foundations of their doctrine on moral humanity, focus on their different interpretations on the attributes and functions of mind, differentiate their respective strengths and limits in terms of the attributes and theories of moral accomplishment. Then, we will further elaborate on how Tang interpreted and criticized Ju’s practice of mind-nature, analyzed Tang’s understanding, interpretation, evaluation of Wang’s realization of innate good and then constructively pointed out how Wang’s theory of the “realization of innate good” could have complemented the weaknesses of Ju’s theories of “studying the phenomena of nature” and “practice of morality”.