本文旨在反省道家哲學詮釋所涉及之方法論問題，以《老子道德經》第四十二章所言「道生一，一生二，二生三，三生萬物」為示例，並與劉笑敢教授之詮釋做一對比，進一步提出一「調適而上遂於道」之詮釋。首先，筆者將由自然哲學詮釋與本體詮釋學的對比，概括提出一嶄新詮釋之可能。關聯到老子之「有、無」，而論述如何由「不可說」而「可說」，進而由此「可說」而「說」，再進一步由此「說」而「說出對象」，進而由此「說出對象」而「執之成物」來﹔此正可以「隱、顯、分、定、執」五階段說之。再者，相對應於《易傳》「太極生兩儀，兩儀生四象，四象生八卦，八卦定吉凶」，指出兩者所涉為同源互補。最後則闡述此與「存有三態論」之由「存有的根源」而「存有的開顯」，進而為「存有的執定」，並以此闡明道家旨在成就一套「存有的回歸之道」，而這樣的回歸之道即隱含著一「存有的治療學」之可能。

The gist of this paper is to reflect on the methodology of interpretation of Daoism. Focused on “The Dao produced one; one produced two; two produced three; three produced all things” in Chapter 42 of Lao Tzu and compared with professor Liu Xiaogan’s interpretation of such paragraph, it suggests an alternative interpretation as “being tuned and accommodated to rise onto Dao.” Firstly, by comparing the interpretation of natural philosophy with onto-hermeneutics, the author shows a possibility of a brand-new interpretation. With “being” and “non-being” of Lao Tzu, the author elucidates the process from “the unarticulated,” “the articulatable,” “articulating”, “articulating the object” and finally to “making things by attachment,” which can also be seen as the five phases of “concealment, manifestation, separateness, determination and attachment.” Further, against “the Great Ultimate produced the two elementary forms. Those two forms produced the four emblematic symbols, which again produced the eight trigrams. The eight trigrams served to determine the good and evil” of the Commentaries in the Book of Changes, the author points out that both have the same root and are complementary to each other. Finally, the author refers to that, it is also conformed with the process of “the theory of the three manifestations of being” from “the source of being” through “the revealing of being” to “the attachment of being,” “a way of the returning of being,” which is what Taoist intends to open up and implies the possibility of “therapeutics of being.”