自《易傳》提出「形而上者謂之道，形而下者謂之器」以後，道器之辨或者說形而上與形而下之分，就成為中國古典形上哲學中的一個根本性討論。王船山對於道器問題作出了不同于宋明儒者的全新性理解，他的解釋立足於如下的兩個出發點：第一，《易傳》是言「幽明」（隱顯）而不言「有無」的，因此，形而上與形而下的區分應該在隱顯而不是有無的視域中進行；第二，《易傳》所謂「謂之」與「之謂」這兩個表達有著本質的區分，「謂之」不能脫離主體的實踐而加以理解。從這兩點出發，本文試圖重構王船山的道器之辨。本文的結論是，形而上與形而下之分，首先主體自身的兩種不同存在方式，也就是主體顯存在的兩種不同方式：由顯入隱的思與由隱入顯的感性實踐；其次，是主體這兩種活動所把握的對象：不可見的隱者和可見的顯者。

　　　　　The differentiation between the metaphysical and the under-metaphysical or the difference between Tao and Qi has been the basic ontological distinction in ancient Chinese philosophy since The Great Treatise put forth the saying that the metaphysical would see as Tao and the under-metaphysical as Qi. As the conclusion of ancient Chinese Philosophy, Wang Fuzhi's teaching advanced a new understanding of the above problem which based on the two presuppositions as follows: Firstly, The Great Treatise is found not on Being and Non-being, but on Absence and Presence which means that the above distiniction must be understood in the horizon of absence and presence (the visible and the invisible); Secondly, in The Great Treatise, the word 'Weizhi'(謂之) and 'Zhiwei'(之謂) has some essential distinction and the usage of 'Weizhi' shows that the differentiation between the metaphysical and the under-metaphysical cannot be understood without the existence of human being. This thesis will reconstruct the difference between Tao and Qi from these two principles. I believe that of Wang Fuzhi, the metaphysical and the under-metaphysical are two different life-forms in the essential sense, at the same time, they are the object of the two lifeforms. On other words, the metaphysical is the activity of mind, the meditating and object, the absent while the under-metaphysical is practice and its object, the present.