自從孔子提出「仁者必有勇」之後，加上朱熹以「仁」總攝「仁、義、禮、智」的觀點，當代學者余英時進一步以「仁」來總攝「智、仁、勇」。其實，智、仁、勇作為三達德，各有其根源和功能，雖相互聯繫，但是本質上是相互獨立的。這種智、仁、勇「相參」的觀點王夫之早已做了詳細的論述。王夫之將智、仁、勇分別歸類於心、性、氣之功能，說「智者，心之能也；仁者，性之能也；勇者，氣之能也」。他承認仁義在智和勇的養成中的決定作用，但同時也指出智和勇也是成就仁德不可或缺的工具。一方面，他主張「以義貞智」，使智避免受血氣盛衰的影響；以道義養浩然之氣，成就大勇。另一方面，他又認為智使仁愛真切而不枉施於非人，且使人避免不仁之舉；勇則當大疑、大恐、大哀等非常之際，使人能夠決然踐行仁義之舉，是一種超越理智計算的膽識。他區別「因循行道義而成之勇」與「因血氣而生之勇」，反對以「仁、智」涵攝「勇之德」，堅持智、仁、勇並峙而三。溯其本體論之根源，王夫之認識到了氣相對於理的獨立性，看到了理和氣（勇和欲都可以歸結為氣的功能）之間的相互支持和成就關係，而不是朱熹以來的相互對立和否定關係，從而使心性修養的理論上升到一個新的高度。

Since Confucius proposed “a benevolent man is bound to be courageous,” Zhu Xi went on to insist that benevolence would subsume righteousness, ritual propriety and wisdom under itself, and Yu Yingshi claims that benevolence can subsume wisdom and courage. However, these assumptions had been refuted or corrected by Wang Fuzhi at the Ming-Qing transition. Wang Fuzhi insisted benevolence, wisdom and courage stand shoulder to shoulder one another, saying, “Wisdom is the function of heart-mind; benevolence is the function of human nature and courage is the function of qi/vital force of human body.” Wang admitted that benevolence and righteousness were crucial to the development of wisdom and courage, but he also emphasized the inalienable role of wisdom and courage in the achievement of humanity. Hence, on the one hand, he suggested disciplining wisdom with righteousness so as to get rid of the negative influence of blood on wisdom; and he cultivated the great courage by abiding by the Way and righteousness. On the other hand, he indicated that wisdom helped a person avoid inhumane behaviors and do benevolent deeds prudently and earnestly. Courage enabled a person to carry out benevolence and righteousness determinedly at the moment of overwhelming scare, sorrow and uncertainty. He saw courage as a sense of duty and daring judgment, transcending any calculation and deliberation. He distinguished animal courage from the courage generated by the practice of the Way and righteousness, and rejected to subsume courage under either benevolence or wisdom. Ontologically speaking, this is because Wang Fuzhi realized the independence of vital force/qi to principle/li, and their mutual support each other, and did not endorse Zhu Xi’s antithetical standpoint. As a result, Wang did not follow Zhu Xi to see courage and desire as burdens to moral cultivation, but believed that they could help the completion of humanity and righteousness. In this way, it can be said Wang advanced Confucian moral cultivation to a new milestone.