東晉王坦之以〈廢莊論〉為題，進行了對莊學的批判；到了晚唐，李磎著〈廣廢莊論〉，擴充深化王坦之的〈廢莊論〉。二者「反莊」之論，皆是一方面批評莊子思想的謬誤，一方面站在儒家立場，捍衛名教。從理論上來看，二者「廢莊」之論為無效的論證；但就思想史來看，卻另有一層深意。他們自覺地援引荀子學說，為儒家思想辯護，在兩晉到晚唐尊儒抑道的風氣中，成為一股旗幟鮮明的主張。而他們的反莊之論，也不僅止於外緣性的否定莊學而已，更多的是針對當時思潮的若干主題進行反思與闡發。如王坦之以荀學的中道論進行儒道會通；李磎則進一步地以荀學論證莊子之非，從虛無、天人、性情之學證成儒家學說。由此看來，同題之「廢莊」著作，不只「廢」道，還要「立」儒。在思想史上，呼應了晉唐以來儒學的發展，呈現出異於韓愈道統論的尊孟立場。

In the Eastern Jin Dynasty, Wang Tan-chih wrote a critique of the theory of Zhuangzi titled Feizhuanglun. In the late Tang Dynasty, Li Qi's essay ＂Explication of Feizhuanglun＂ expanded on Wang Tan-chih's ideas from Feizhuanglun. Both ＂Anti- Zhuang＂ theories criticized the fallacy of Zhuangzi's ideas and defended the ideas of Confucianism. From a theoretical point of view, both Wang's and Li's ＂Anti-Zhuang＂ treatises presented no valid arguments; however, in terms of the history of ideas, another profound meaning can be found in these writings. They explicitly invoked the theory of Xunzi to defend Confucianism, and their respective critiques were cited by advocates in efforts to promote Confucianism and suppress Taoism from the Jin Dynasty to the Late Tang Dynasty. Their ＂Anti-Zhuang＂ theories provided not only an external negation of Zhuangzi's theory but also scrutinized and elucidated several topics that reflected contemporary thought. In the history of ideas, this echoes the development of Confucianism during the Jin and Tang Dynasties. The work also presents a point of view that is different from Han Yu's Confucian orthodoxy theory on following Mencius.