黃宗羲與陳確（乾初）的論辯，於明末清初的哲學轉型中，是一重要公案，也代表著宋明儒學的轉型而過渡到清儒實學的開始。在近人研究中，或是把陳乾初的思想看得太高，認為黃宗羲晚年思想受了乾初的影響而改變；或是把乾初的思想貶得太低，把它等同於告子生之謂性的傳統。同樣地，近人研究，對於黃宗羲思想的定位亦不清楚，亦不能給予一合理而中肯的地位。 有些學者以黃宗羲對於陳乾初墓誌銘的四次改寫作為研究題材，或是站在黃宗羲的前三次觀點，批評陳乾初思想「以欲為首出」；或是以黃宗羲的第四次墓誌銘改寫為觀點，認為黃宗羲晚年思想往陳乾初方向靠攏。以上論點，皆有未當，吾人認為，黃宗羲的前三次墓誌銘的改寫裡，錯認了陳乾初的思想，以為乾初否定宋明儒學思想，而為荀子、告子的後天之學的傳統。到了第四次墓誌銘改寫裡，看出了陳乾初思想的力行實踐之義理，故不予以批評，但亦看出乾初思想非蕺山學的正宗，有其自己的一套光明正大義理，不至於淪為荀子、告子的後天之學，亦不會下委流為以欲為首出的學問。

The forum of debate between Huang Zong-Yi and Chen Chien-Chu is a major publicly known archive in the transformation of Philosophy during the last of Ming Dynasty and beginning of Ching Dynasty. It also represents the beginning of the transformation of the Confucian Learning of Song and Ming Dynasty transition to the practical Confucians of Ching Dynasty. In the studies by recent generations, they have either eye the thoughts of Chen Chien-Chu too much higher by thinking that the final years of thoughts of Huang Zong-Yi was changed by the effect from Chien-Chu or have eye the thoughts of Chien-Chu too much lower by thinking that it is equal to the tradition of born with Nature by Gau-Tze. Similarly, the studies by recent generations are also vague in defining the thoughts of Huang Zong-yi and can not give him a reasonable and pertinent status. Many Scholars have used the four rewrites of Huang Zong-Yi on the Mu-Ze-Ming by Chen Chien-Chu as their subject of studies or to stand with the first three view points of Huang Zong-Yi criticizing Chen's thoughts being "Desire oriented". Or to use the view point of the fourth rewrites on Mu-Ze-Ming of Huang Zong-Yi to think that the thoughts of later years of Huang Zong-Yi has leaned toward Chen Chien-Chu. I do not agree to that, my personal view point is that within the first three rewrites of Mu-Ze-Ming by Huang Zong-Yi he has misunderstood the thoughts of Chen Chien-Chu to think that Chien-Chu has denied the Confucians thoughts of Song and Ming Dynasty and become the tradition of later learning of Shun-Tze and Gau-Tze. In the fourth rewrites of Mu-Ze-Ming, he then clearly sees the theory of justice of exertion and fulfillment in Chen's thoughts. Therefore I will not criticize it, but it can also be seen that Chien-Chu's thoughts were not from the authentic Gi-San Learning. It has his own set of upright theory of justice, nevertheless this is not likely to become the later learning of Shun-Tze and Gau-Tze and will not degrade to the fallen scholarship either.