王船山在遍注群經之中，提出「以物為師」的說法，其中的「物」是取其相對義，指事、物等具象的概念。以事與人而言，船山強調依事不依人；以物與理言之，則強調即物以顯理。這樣的說法，是由《易傳》發展出來的，船山打破形上與形下、道與器之二分，進而提出道在器中的天下唯器說。把道直接落在器上說，因此，船山強調道德實踐也是在事上，而不是在心或理上。 船山雖然也說器與道是相需、相涵的，但是，船山是由形上的道往形下的器發展，只是在發展的同時，器是不離道的，也就是在「往」的同時，隨時涵著「復」的意味，然而其所重仍然是在器的形下經驗價值。由是，本文認為船山哲學是由《周易》的「無往不復」說所發展出來的動態哲學觀。船山強調道在器中，由器而言道，在思想發展的軌跡上，正好和先前儒、道二家由道至器的思想形成一個上下往返的圓融。

While extensively annotating the Chinese classics, Wang, Chuan-Shan advanced the argument of “Taking the object to be a teacher.” “The object” took the relative meaning that meant the concrete concept of a matter or a thing. For matter and person, Chuan-Shan highlighted depending on the matter but not the person. For object and reason, he stressed using the object to manifest the reason. This kind of argument developed from “Yi-chuan.” Chuan-Shan broke the dichotomy of metaphysics and concrete science, and Taoism and implements, and brought up the theory of “There are only implements in the world” that Taoism was within implements to fulfill Taoism directly on implements. Hence, Chuan-Shan emphasized that the practice of morality was on matter, but not in one’s heart or on reason. Although Chuan-Shan said implements and Taoism were mutual required and contained, Chuan-Shan’s theory was developed from Taoism of metaphysics to implements of concrete science. But the development of implements did not diverge from the one of Taoism. That was, while being “to,” it had the implication of “fro” at any time. However, what he attached importance to was the metaphysical experiment value of implements. Therefore, in this article, I think Chuan-Shan’s philosophy was the dynamic philosophical outlook that developed from the argument of “All ‘to’ has the trend of ‘fro’ (Wu-wang-bu-fu)” of the Books of Changes (Jhou-yi). Chuan-Shan stressed Taoism was within implements, and spoke of Taoism from implements. On the locus of development of thought, it formed an endless circle with the Confucian school and Taoist school’s thinking from Taoism to implements.