南宋朱子與陸象山之學術諍辯，乃中國思想史上之大事。朱、陸二人對自家之學問進路皆自信甚堅，不易同情理解對方。象山輕蔑朱子之重道問學，以為無尊德性即無道問學，乃言朱子之學支離、不見道。朱子則說象山不讀書，不下窮理細密工夫。朱子始則尚能欣賞象山，欲其門人兼取象山在德行踐履方面之長處。然在彼此論學之過程中，朱子明顯感受到不受尊重，蓄積既久，乃誦言以攻象山。朱子以其所理解虛靈知覺之心看待象山所言「心即理」之心，遂謂象山認心作性，與告子「生之謂性」及禪家「作用是性」之說無別，皆是以知覺運動言性，於是批判象山之學只是禪；於象山之亡也，遂逕言「可惜死了告子」。然象山誠能真切把握孟子之道德本心者，故朱子對象山之終極論斷，並不得其實。

The academic debate between Zhuzi and LU Xiangshan in Southern Song Dynasty is a big issue in the history of Chinese Ideology. Zhu and Lu both were very confident of their own knowledge and directions and were unable to comprehend the other's study. LU Xiangshan defied Zhuzi's focus of ＂learning by asking＂ and thought if a person does not advocate moral honesty, he is unable to comprehend the skill to ask and learn. Thus, he criticized Zhuzi's learning discrepancy and was unable to find truth. Zhuzi then said LU Xiangshan did not focus on study and was unable to comprehend detailed knowledge. In the beginning, Zhuzi still admired LU Xiangshan and wanted his apprentices to learn from Lu's merits in virtue pursuits while meanwhile still focus on learning by asking. However, during their discussion procedures, Zhuzi did not feel respect from Lu. From time to time, Zhuzi then started to criticize Lu in public. Zhuzi used his comprehension of clear and cognitive mind to explain Lu's theory of ＂consciousness is justice＂, so Zhuzi deemed Lu as considering experienced heart as surmounting nature, which had no differences with Gaozi's theory of ＂naturally born talent was considered as nature＂ and Zen's theory of ＂the sense of four limbs' functions is nature＂. Zhuzi considered those theories were considered all cognitive, sensing, and physical activities as nature, so he criticized Zu Xiangshan's theory was only a Zen theory. Therefore, when Lu was dead, Zhuzi even said that it's pity that another Gaozi was dead. Nevertheless, Lu Xiangshan in fact can truly realize Mengzi's moral conscious, so Zhuzi's extreme criticism of Lu Xiangshan was not completely true.