第一次遇見著名學者夏威夷大學安樂哲教授，是在2004年5月間在韓國漢城參加第五屆國際懷德海會議上。當時他宣讀了〈使此生有意義：創造的嚴肅工作〉一文，流露強烈的儒家現世精神，以及他想藉著創化的概念將中國思想與歷程哲學聯繫起來。之後在2007年3月在輔仁大學舉辦的「創化與歷程：中西文化對話國際學研討會」上，我們再次見面。該會是為了紀念最早將懷德海思想引介進中國的兩位當代中國哲學家方東美與程石泉而舉辦的。安哲受邀為主題演講人，他的論文在談到杜威的部分卻遠過於懷德海。這引發我對安樂哲有關杜威、懷德海和中國哲學之間的關係究竟有何看法的好奇心。2009年4月間，我赴美國夏威夷大學中西哲學文化中心執行國科會研究計畫時，終於有機會向安樂哲請教。訪談分兩部分，各有四個問題。第一部份「杜威與懷德海」，分別請安樂哲就杜懷兩人的歷程哲學、對現代科學與傳統的態度、對宗教的看法，以及與中國哲學的關聯等四方面進行比較。第二部分「比較哲學與中國哲學定位」，則另就安樂哲何以研究中國哲學、中國哲學定位問題、萊布尼茲與中國哲學，以及二十一世紀中國哲學的展望等提問，均獲得極有價值的答覆。

This interview with Professor Roger Ames of the University of Hawaii was part of my 2008 National Science Project concerning some aspects of the philosophy of John Dewey and Alfred North Whitehead and their relevance to Chinese philosophy. The interview was divided into two parts. The first part concerns Dewey vs. Whitehead with respect to process philosophy, their attitudes toward modern science and tradition, their ideas on religion, and their relevance to Chinese philosophy. The second part deals with comparative philosophy and the question of the status of Chinese philosophy, which includes our discussions on the legitimacy of Chinese philosophy, Leibniz's contribution to comparative philosophy, and Ames' views on the nature of Chinese philosophy and its possible contribution to the 21(superscript st) century. Through this interview, it seems to me that we may understand more why Ames preferred a pragmatic, humanistic, but pro-scientistic Dewey to a speculative, organismic, but pro-theistic Whitehead.