朱子一訓陳淳，強調窮究根源；再訓陳淳，強調下學工夫。王懋竑認為程子、朱子不曾講窮究根源，進而懷疑窮究根源只是陳淳所見，是陳淳記錄訓語時雜以己意。其實，朱子本來就有兩種明理的工夫接引門人：一般人必須用格物窮理的下學工夫，高明人可用先見大本的高明工夫。所謂先見大本也即是窮究根源，本質上都是體認天命之性的工夫。朱子兩次訓陳淳的主旨不同，這是朱子在因材施教、因時施教：朱子一訓陳淳，見他資質高明，便揭示窮究根源的高明工夫；十年之後再訓陳淳，見陳淳已見大本，只是欠缺下學工夫，故而強調下學工夫。王懋竑誤批陳淳，這不僅是對陳淳的誤解，也是對朱子的誤解。

When Zhu Zi educated Chen Chun for the first time he emphasized the methods of exploring origin. When Zhu Zi educated Chen Chun again he emphasized the methods of investing things. Because Wang Maohong thought that both Cheng Yi and Zhu Zi didn't mention the methods of exploring origin, he speculated that the methods of exploring origin was merely Chen Chun’s idea. Actually, Zhu Zi had two kinds of methods of moral cultivation; one is the methods of investing things, another is the methods of understanding noumenon first. The methods of exploring origin was just the methods of understanding noumenon first. The purpose of Zhu Zi’s education of Chen Chun had changed because Zhu Zi wanted to educate Chen Chun according to his talent and wanted to educate Chen Chun according to time. At first Zhi Zi considered Chen Chun as a talented follower, so he taught him the wise methods of exploring origin. After ten years Zhu Zi thought that Chen Chun had understood noumenon so he taught him the methods of investing things. Wang Maohong’s criticism of Chen Chun was both misunderstanding of Zhu Zi and misunderstanding of Chen Chun.