朱熹為南宋理學大家，曾與湖湘學派（張栻）及陸九淵辯學，然其所爭議者，概為理學之義理內涵；而與陳亮之辯學，則為理學學說所遭遇之批判與挑戰。蓋陳亮處於南宋國力積弱、頻遭外侮之世，而其自許為「推倒一世之智勇，開拓萬古之心胸」者，故批判理學家性命之學，反對儒者「低頭拱手以談性命」，於是就其事功思想之立場，而與朱熹辯論「王霸之辨」，而「王霸之辨」的根本問題，即在「義利之辨」，是以「義利」、「王霸」即朱、陳辯論的主要問題，而「義利之辨」又為儒家哲學價值觀的重要議題，本文之主旨，在於透過朱、陳之往來辯論，探究朱熹哲學的價值觀，冀望在事功價值的挑戰中，凸顯出朱熹所堅持的道德理想與價值。

As the master of Neo-Confucianism in the Southern-Sung Dynasty, Chu Xi used to have academic debates with the Hu Xian School (Zhang Shi) and Lu Jiu-yuan. Their argument was about the content of the principles of Neo-Confucianism. Yet Chu Xi's debate with Chen Liang was the criticism and challenges that Neo-Confucianism encountered. As Chen Liang was born in the age when the Southern-Sung was weak and often invaded, he was committed to the criticism of the Neo-Confucian doctrine of life. From his utilitarian position, he argued with Chu Xi about the ”difference between the kingly way and hegemony,” while the ”difference between the kingly way and hegemony” is based on the ”distinction between morality and benefit.” Therefore, ”kingly way vs. hegemony” and ”morality vs. benefit” were the primary issue of Chu and Chen's debate, while the ”distinction between morality and benefit” was an important agendum to the values of Confucian philosophy. This paper is intended to explore the values of Chu Xi's philosophy through such a debate in wishes to accentuate the moral ideals and values that Chu stuck to through Chen's utilitariar challenges.