當代戴震學評價，分歧最大莫過於梁啟超主張「情感主義」說及余英時主張「智識主義」說。誠然，二先生評論皆為真，難道在戴震哲學系統中，強調道德價值的「情感主義」和重視知識本質的「智識主義」注定衝突？抑或可能存在兼容並蓄，並行而不悖的兩種論述？正逢西方學界「德性」理論復興，特別是「德性知識論」探討人對於「知識本質」與「道德價值」關係是研究新趨勢。然而事實上，關於「知識」與「道德」的探討，中國哲學遠遠早已有之，清代思想家戴震更是標榜「德性資於學問」，以「聞見之知」以智達德「德性之知」。果如是，戴震以「人」做為知識認知與道德實踐者，如何「道問學」達至「尊德性」？「智足以擇善」達到知識、道德與情欲相融？本文無意削足適履以西論中，而是奠基在梁啟超及余英時前輩論點上，提供「德性知識論」一個反思視角，嘗試為戴震「問學所得，德性日充」知識論述的道德觀尋求新釋及調和二說之可能，為本文問題緣起與研究目的。

Today, the evaluations of Dai Zhen’s philosophy exhibit ambiguities, and has no consensus. Liang Qichao thought Dai Zhen was one of the emotionalisms, while Yu Ying-shih argued Dai Zhen as an intellectualism. The nature of emotionalism and intellectualism draw attentions to ethics and knowledge, respectively. Does Dai Zhen’s philosophy demonstrate conflicts or harmonics inherently from the two theories? Nowadays, it is the revival age of ethics in western philosophy. The “Virtue Epistemology”, exploring the relationship between knowledge and ethics, especially attracts lots of attentions. In fact. Chinese philosophers investigated this topic for a long time. Dai Zhen, a prominent scholar in Qing Dynasty, further emphasized to build the ethics based on knowledge. What is Dai Zhen’s methodology to achieve harmonics among knowledge, ethics and desire? This study attempts to provide perspectives from western modern philosophies, and look into Dai Zhen’s moral doctrine based on Emotionalism and Intellectualism.