作為詮釋儒家倫理學特徵的兩種理論形態，德行與角色倫理學都支持回到具體生活重新發現人的倫理價值。相較於德行倫理學對行為者之所是的關注，角色倫理學持有更加激進的反個人主義的立場，將「自我」觀念視之為空無一物的「洋蔥」，解構為更具社會色彩的「關係」與「角色」。但它的理論基礎是脆弱的，首先，角色倫理學不可能完全放棄抽象我的位格，否則它就無法解釋自己如何作為西方社會的批判者出現；其次，角色倫理學需要吸收拉康對空洞自我的詮釋完善它的角色理論，從而回答自我為什麼需要成為角色以及如何避免重蹈儒家聖王傳統之覆轍的難題。

As two theoretical forms to interpret the characteristics of Confucian ethics, virtue and role ethics both support returning to life to discover the ethical value of individuals as human beings. Compared with virtue ethics, which focuses on what the actor is, role ethics takes a more radical anti-individualistic stance, treating the concept of “self” as an empty “onion” and deconstructing it into social relationships and roles. But its theoretical foundation is fragile. First of all, role ethics cannot completely abandon the abstract self, otherwise it cannot explain how it appears as a critic of Western society. Secondly, role ethics needs to absorb Lacan’s interpretation of the empty self to improve its role theory, so as to answer the difficult questions of why the self needs to be a role and how to avoid repeating the mistakes of the Confucian Holy King tradition.