從論辯的焦點、前提和展開看，嵇康（約223-263）〈聲無哀樂論〉應該置於樂象理論語境進行闡發。該論關注音樂能否承載哀樂以至道德等非音樂性內容，實質可看成兩種相異樂象理論之間的辯爭。對手認同音樂可以承載，並在改造《樂記》樂象論的意義上，主張一種音樂有象的「音（聲）象論」，對音樂作品意義和聽者理解方式進行規範，以實現特定的樂教功能。嵇康則從音樂的獨立本質出發，主張「和聲無象」，否認音樂的過分承載並解構理解規範，反而更多地回歸了《樂記》傳統的樂象和樂教觀。在嵇康這裡，音樂無法承擔過多的政教責任，私人領域的音樂審美由此得到一定辯護；但考慮到單純審美中情欲的發展，嵇康最終推崇一種合乎傳統的「中和」趣味。

Viewed from its focus, presuppositions and subsequent development, Ji Kang’s 嵇康 (c. 223-263) “Sheng wu aile lun 聲無哀樂論” should be interpreted in the context of musical symbolism. This article examines the capacity of music to convey non-musical content, such as the emotions of sadness and happiness as well as morality. Actually, Ji’s essay can be regarded as a debate between two different theories of musical symbolism. The opponent in the essay applauded the capacity of music to convey emotions, and in the context of reconstructing the traditional theory of musical symbolism found in the Yueji 樂記, he advocated a theory of vocal symbolism, which standardized the meaning of musical works and the way listeners understood them so as to realize a specific music-related educational function. Ji Kang, on the other hand, championed the harmonic voice without symbolism, which was based in his view that music possessed an independent nature. He furthermore denied that music could convey emotion excessively, and deconstructed the conventional rules for understanding it. Instead, he returned to the musical symbolism and conception of teaching found in the Yueji. In Ji Kang’s case, due to his contention that music could not bear too much responsibility for politics and education, musical aesthetics in the private field could be defended to some extent. However, in consideration of the development of desire within pure aesthetics, Ji Kang in the end chose to advocate a kind of traditional middle ground.