對雷蒙．潘尼卡來說，多元論與對話的對話，在概念上雖是不同的，在實際上卻密不可分。從最深邃的角度看，二者都根源自事物的本性。一方面，事物本身即是多元的，它不能還原為一個單一體系；但在另一方面，這個多元實體世界，卻對它的參與者提出一個極端得近乎不合情理的要求：不是互不相干，而是相與對話。這篇論文即在探討潘尼卡的多元論與對話論者之間的關係，說得正確一點，它將以潘尼卡多元論為經，以他的對話論為緯，也就是，要經由潘氏的多元論看出其對話理論。在安排上，第一段將簡單地陳述多元論出現的時代背景，好對照出潘尼卡多元論的特色（第二段），文末（第三段）將述說潘尼卡幾點最常遭到質疑的地方，再設想他會如何回答。

For Raimon Pankikkar, pluralism and dialogical dialogue, though different in concept, are closely connected in practice. Seen from the deepest perspective, both are related to the nature of reality. On the one hand, reality is itself pluralistic; it cannot be reduced to a single system. On the other hand, this pluralistic world of reality, when facing its participants, nevertheless brings out a radical claim which seems very unreasonable: not to have nothing to do with one another, but to participate in dialogue. This article aims to investigate the relationship between Panikkar's idea of pluralism and that of dialogue. More correctly, it will elucidate the latter though an analysis of the former. The plan would be as follow: first, to summarize a brief account of the historic background of pluralism, then, to present Panikkar's theories on pluralism, and finally to underline some objections on Panikkar and to imagine how he would answer.