經典詮釋的問題在今日的臺灣有其急迫性。此急迫性源於兩方面力量的交互作用，一是從清末持續至今的「意義危機」。經典詮釋另一急迫性的根源，可能在自於當代民主社會的發展。此一急迫性可分兩個層面說，一是庸俗大眾文化帶來的現象。二是臺灣這個社會所形成的「怨恨的共同體」。解決此一危機的最佳方式是對經典加以追問。這個追問，在本質上不是問出一個客觀問題而已，而是必須在人的存有中進入追問的狀態。 這個追問將我們導入了「游於藝」的探索。從志道、據德以致於依人，皆是儒學中內聖成德之學，配之以六藝，可構成一整體之意義世界，那就是志道、據德、依仁、游藝，四者是一個整體。「游」是從容潛玩於藝，而這個「游」與「志道、據德、依仁」是同時進行的。事實上，「游於藝」的重要性正是建立於中國經典所欲陶養的居子，一個文質彬彬的君子，既追尋內在德行之充盈，復尋求四體舒暢豐美，光輝外著的理想人格。朱子將「游於藝」與「興於詩，立於禮、成於樂」聯繫起來詮釋，使我們必須深思其中的意蘊。 這個深思就是，「興於詩，立於禮、成於樂」提供我們「共同性生活的規章制度和目的」的「共同體」。志道、據德、依仁、游藝四者一體的生活實踐，培養共同體成員對於事物的「判斷力」，這種判斷力背後所聯繫的原則是通過日常事物，在一件件事件中建立一種「健全感覺」（一種「社會感」），我們依恃這種「健全感覺」處理我們與人的關係。詩和禮最後被歸結於樂，讓我們考慮到「興於詩，立於禮、成於樂」所建構的共同體，其實是一種「語言共同體」。 因此我們可以說，經典教育意欲建立一種以詩禮為核心的「語言共同體」，並希望以此能夠改變當今臺灣社會「怨恨的共同體」的現象。

Today in Taiwan, it is so much urgent for us to search for the answers to the questions of how to interpreting classics. This urgency springs from two interacting sources. One is the ‘Crisis of Meaning’, which lasts until now as its first appearance in the wane of Ching Dynasty; the other is possibly the development of modern democratic society. The latter can be analyzed further into two dimensions: one is a very particular phenomenon the modern vulgar mass culture brings about and the other is a ‘community of hatred’ found in Taiwan society. The best way to resolve the above-mentioned crisis, in my opinion, is to question the classics. Essentially this questioning is not just to pose an objective question, but, most importantly, to do it when realizing one as an authentic being. It is this process of ever-lasting questioning that brings us to the quest for the true meaning of ‘Yu-yu-i,’ by which plus ‘Zh-dao’ (志道), ‘Jyu-de’ (據德), ‘I-ren’ (依仁), an Confucian ideal man of complete virtues is attained. Besides, Zhu-xi (朱熹) had ever connected ‘Yu-yu-I’ with ‘Xing-yu-shih’(興於詩), ‘Li-yu-li’ (立於禮), and ‘Chen-yu-yue’ (成於樂) and tried to interpret all these four as a whole. What Chu-Hsi had done provides a thoughtful insight for our quest here. It is that ‘Xing-yu-shih’ (興於詩), ‘Li-yu-li’ (立於禮), and ‘Chen-yu-yue’ (成於樂) provide us with an community of common rules and institutions, and ‘Zh-dao’ (志道), ‘Jyu-de’ (據德), ‘I-ren’ (依仁), and ‘Iou-yu-i’ (游於藝), all of them cultivate our power of judgment through the daily practice. And behind this power of judgment stands a ‘sense of fullness’ with which we can make sure our sociality and interaction with others. Lastly ‘Shih’ (詩), and ‘Li’ (禮) can be merged into ‘Yue’ (樂). What this means is that the community we just referred to is a ‘community of language.’ So this brings us to our conclusion that what the education of classics intends to do is build up an ‘community of language,’ which pivots upon ‘Shih’ (詩), and ‘Li’ (禮). This we hope can be the cure for the sickness caused by the ‘community of hatred’ found in today's society of Taiwan.