本文乃鑑於黃黎星先生對熊十力先生《易》學之研究，內容雖豐富，然卻有數處值得再議，如批評熊氏以己意說經，及熊氏《易》學分為《易》本身之考辯與藉《易》建立自已之體系二部分；遂擬從三面向作探討：一、指出熊氏主張孔子作《易》之積極用意，二、析論熊氏《易》學之核心－「體用不二」論，並反省熊氏批評船山「兩端一致」為二元論是否恰當：三、考察熊氏《易》外王學之內容及立論基礎，指出熊氏《易》學之意義與價值，藉此釐訂熊氏《易》學之特色及價值。 熊氏論點之微疵在於：一、曲解《史記》論〈繫辭〉之原意，二、革命民主思想乃誤置結構層次與意義層次，且對民主與平等如何均衡欠缺說明。然熊氏之學術價值則為：一、熊氏之義其實是「仁體」即「乾元」（道體），此為宇宙、人生之創化根源；人世之內聖、外王亦當本此動能，不斷創造、革新。其思想近於明道「一本論」，其「作用言氣」說，則發前賢所未發。二、熊有論均平、革命、民主均由觀念層次立說，異於經驗制度層面思考，此為其《易》外王學之特色所在。

　　　　　In this article, I will discuss I-Ching theory of Hsiung, Shih ang Li-hsing had also discussed the same topic before, however I think some of this opinions were questioinable. For instance, Huang criticized Hsiung for using his own private views in explaining the classics, and was of opinioins that Hsiung's opinions could not form a complete system. On this issue, I will discuss the inadequacy of Huang's criticism from three angles, i.e. (1)Hsiung's stand on the motivation behind Confucios authorship of I-Ching, (2)To analyse the core of "unity between essence and action", insubsequently re-examine Huang's criticism on Wang Chuan-shan, (3)To study the contents and foundations of Hsiung's theory, its meanings and value, in order to appreciate its prominence and distinction. On the other hand, the weakness in Hsiung's contention are (1)he distorted the original meaning of "Shih-chi" in "Si-Tze", (2)his ideology of revolution and democracy has a misallocated structure and meaning, while at the same time he failed to explain properly the balance between democracy and equality. However, Hsiung's ideology's academic values are (1)he emphasized the idea of 'Ren-ti', especially he explained 'Chi' using action, although his stand was close to Cheng, Ming Tao's advocated monism, (2)Hsiung's theory insisted that equality, revolution and democracy are based on the concept of structural level. The above two points were the characters of Hsiung's practical-theory.