明儒羅欽順，號整菴，在有明一朝批判陽明學說最力，攻擊象山陽明等心學為禪，堅持心性二分說法，以為心學知心不知性，遺卻性理，即是釋氏知心不知性，此其學而之大綱目，並以此肯定朱熹格物窮理的工夫論學說，然而卻反對朱熹理氣二分之說，主張理於氣中認取，開放明代氣論思維的先聲，但是他仍面對善惡現象的解析，故而提出理一分殊說以為解決，究其實，環是不能擺脫理氣二元的思路。總之，羅欽順為辯證儒佛而以儒學內部作義理重構，既無助於辨證儒佛亦造成儒學內部義理失調，但亦確實站在朱熹立場發揚程朱之學，亦仍有功於儒學。總其理氣心性論之辯析，實為一存有論進路的思考，故而與工夫論進路的心學思路大相逕庭，本文即以哲學基本問題的研究進路，企圖解析羅欽順理氣心性論的存有論進路意涵。

Luo-Gin Shun was one of the Neo-Confucianism at Ming dynastic. He strongly criticized the philosophy of Wang, Yang Ming and stand with Chu-His. He divided the concept of mind and nature and thought that the Zen Buddhism and the philosophy of Wang, Yang Ming were both mistakenly taking the nature as the mind, therefore they lost the truth of the world and doing arbitrarily by their personal will. Since the nature deals with the universal principle and the mind held only on personal will. As for the universe, the principle should be recognized through the matter instead of been taking as an individual object. This is his idea that has been seen as different from Chu-Shi. But he soon propose another idea that which says the principle is identical and the matter is diverse, for dealing with the problem of the diversity of the personality and the identity of the nature. This makes his theory of principle/matter has some thing the same and some what different from Chu-His. The way8 Luo-Gin Shun doing his philosophical speculation is basically through the approach of ontology which means that for the purpose of arguing with Zen Buddhism he needs to suggest different metaphysical theory and through which to criticize some Confucian theories that are already confused themselves with the Zen Buddhism. Actually, the theory of Wang, Yang Ming is not talking about the metaphysics but the theory of practice that is why he should recognize the nature as the mind. Because one should cultivate himself by purify his mind to be unite to his nature. Anyway, Luo-Gin Shun made his contribution to recover the theory of Chu-Shi at Ming dynasty but fail to the understanding of the philosophy of Wang, Yang Ming.