道家與道教在理解上向來具有模糊性，若是將其相混，便有著化約兩者豐富性的危機。本文以探究兩者的「主體」為主題，藉此釐清差異。透過「價值系統」見其「主體性」而歸結出《老子》是「法自然」的「第二序標準」，《想爾注》是恪守「道誡」的「第一序標準」。不同的思維向度會從根本上開展出兩種截然不同的人生圖像，因此道家與道教是兩個不同的主體。再以「作用範圍」解釋差異緣由，從中可見各自的功能與貢獻。

The distinction between daojia and daojiao is usually ambiguous. There could be a risk of reducing the richness of both if mixing up them. This atticle raises questions concerning the subject and aims to clarify the differences between them. Viewing the subjectivity in terms of their value systems, this article concludes that Laozi can be regarded as a second order standard concerning “imitate ziran,” while the Xiang’er Annotation of Laozi is taken as the first order standard concerning “daojie.” The very distinctive lifestyles developed from the different ways of thinking of two literatures demonstrate that they have very distinctive subjects. Furthermore, by analyzing their scopes of application, we can expect their respective contributions.