當我們思考有關人的行為層面問題時，道德進路的探討是其中一個可能的思索方向；當我們翻譯西方文字所使用的“ethics”或“morality”為中文的「倫理」或「道德」等用詞時，不經意的錯誤詮釋與望文生義的解釋，常使得文字內涵的真義容易被想當然爾的一視同仁處理掉，而忽略了其中的差異。 影響中國傳統社會極深的孔孟儒家倫理思想，試圖由擬人化與道德形上化意義的天建立人性通天性的倫理臍帶關係，將人之為善動力由上天之心性賦與推論到人性之本然與自然流露，在充滿不忍人之心下，充分表露出一種自然情感道德論，及擇善固執的絕對道德觀。道德是人性之本然，亦是天性之自然，所謂為惡不為善皆是自我墮落與自我放失的結果，後天的修持涵養則可能幫助人們時刻流露出心性之良善面，君子人格則成為可以為人所學習與仿效的典範人物，聖賢之境只在為與不為之間。 同樣是回到人的本然質性探討人之行道德的可能，不同於孔孟的自然情感道德論，亞理斯多德的倫理思想表現出一種理性道德論特質。他看到的是作為主導的理性靈魂，如何在具體事項中展現出實踐智慧的判斷力，依據中道原則，衡量出一個無過無不及的恰當行為，實踐人的理性特質，表現出堪稱美德的道德行為。純思辯的至善生活與高貴的靈魂企求才是亞氏倫理思想的最終境地，它沒有任何人倫親情的臍帶關係，也沒有欲仁仁至的當下立地，它是一種純個人的靈魂境地，堪稱幸福神聖的理性生活。這是善的極致，多數人難以達到。一般人能持的只是，如何將行為保持在合乎中道原則的之上，讓實踐智慧的主導性勝過非理性靈魂的煽動。為惡是難以避免之事，教育與法律的約束成就了亞氏倫理實踐的輔助條件。

As we reflect on some practical issues such as human behavior, one of the possible required ways we could adopt is that of conducting moral research. When we translate the English terms “ethics” and “morality” into Chinese, an unintentionally wrong interpretation and definition of the word itself can cause its true meaning to be taken for granted, without any appropriate reservation, and the differences between the two languages could be ignored all the time. Confucianism, which has had an extremely deep influence on traditional Chinese society, established exceedingly high ethics connecting between the essence of human nature and universality with an impersonal and morally metaphysical universal one. it satisfactorily presents a human nature of compassion ethics, and an absolute moral theory that insists on moral goodness. Morality is the natural result of human essence and coexistence in universal. All evil behaviors is caused by self-degeneracy; constant cultivation of themselves during their ordinary lives might possibly help people to frequently reveal their natural goodness. A moral paradigm called “Jun Tzu” is the model for everyone. The virtuous man one can or cannot be, all depends on the choices we make in our usual conduct. Of the same persuasion, but different still from those of Confucius, the ethics of Aristotle display an intellectual moral theory. He elaborated mainly on how the intellectual soul displays practical wisdom in actual moral judgments. According to the principle of mean, people can judge suitable ethic behaviors by themselves without excessive and unsatisfactory results. Furthermore, it will also fulfill the character of human rationality and be virtuous. Aristotle’s ultimate land of goodness is the completely, purely contemplative life, and noble spirit. Despite any compassionate human nature link between blood-relation and the offhanded will “to be human”, the land Aristotle chiefly pursues is the personal spiritual mind and the rational life that may name its happiness. It is the extreme goal of goodness which most people cannot attain. What a normal person can insist on will only be how to maintain all practical action, thus fulfilling the mean rule, while the preferential direction of practical wisdom can prevail over any instigation of an irrational soul. To be evil is inevitable; education and legal restraint primarily achieve the secondary condition of ethical practice in Aristotle’s discourses.