近代以降，「仁知之辯」常被化約為「道德與知識」的關係問題；然考其源流，至少匯聚「小大之別」、「義利之分」、「道器之爭」三重光譜。仁者大受而不慕小知、安義而不忽利用、明道而不廢事功。倘若混同大小、割裂義利、斷絕道器，不僅加劇仁知張力，極易顧此失彼；甚至還會形成二者相悖、不可得兼的誤識。仁、知兩德，既涉及物的變革（「成物」），也關乎人的成全（「成己」）。在工具理性甚囂塵上，科學與人文不僅失衡，而且失和的今天，重談「仁知之辯」更有一番現實關懷：重仁輕知，固是錯舉；揚知棄仁，亦非善方。

In modern times, “the Distinction between Ren and Zhi” is often reduced to the relationship between “morality and knowledge”; However, considering its origin and flow, it at least gathers the triple spectrum of “Small vs. Large; Duty vs Self-interest； Dao vs. Tool”. People who have the quality of Ren cannot learn from small things, but can accept heavy responsibility. They are able to content with moral but not shy of talking about Self-interest, content with moral but not abandoned in things hone their own. If we confuse the Large and the Small, separate Duty and Self-interest, cut off Dao and Tool. It will not only aggravate the tension between Duty vs Self-interest, but also easily neglect one and lose the other, even form a misunderstanding that the two are contradictory and we can’t have both. The two virtues of Duty and Self-interest are related to “the maturation of the self” and “the refinement of things”. The so-called “success” involves not only the transformation of things, but also the fulfillment of people. Living in the age of instrumental rationality, science and humanity are not only unbalanced, but also disharmonious today, re-discussing the “the Distinction between Ren and Zhi” is more realistic concern: emphasizing Ren over Zhi is wrong; Exalting Zhi and abandoning Ren is not a good way either.