在為宋明理學進行分系的數種說法中，以理學、心學、氣學為基礎，結合了客觀唯心主義、主觀唯心主義與唯物主義的思想元素，將宋明理學分為理本論、心本論及氣本論三系乃行之有年的論述。唯心、唯物「兩軍對戰」區判法的過分簡化之失，已廣為各界學者意及，但三「本」論分系法之合理性及有效性卻始終未見討論。 本文透過對當代三「本」論分系說的檢視，發現以三「本」論梳理宋明理學存在若干困難：一、定義未清，判劃基點不一，缺乏區辨效力。二、名謂涵蓋面過狹，易造成理論結構的割裂。三、單一哲學範疇無法說明具備多元哲學視域的宋明理學。四、三「本」論的分梳架構遮蔽了宋明理學的哲學特質與思想共識。 基於以上檢視，本文認為以三「本」論釐辨宋明理學的思想模型，並非一恰適而有效的區判方式。

There are several ways to subclassify Song-Ming Neo-Confucianist philosophy, of which the practice of subclassifying it into li-centered discourse 理本論, qi-centered discourse 氣本論 and xin-centered discourse 心本論 has long been accepted as valid. This “tricentric discourse” takes lixue 理學, xinxue 心學 and qixue 氣學 and combines them with subjective idealism, objective idealism and materialism. The shortcomings of subclassifying Song-Ming Neo-Confucianist philosophy into idealism and materialism have been raised by scholars, but the reasonableness and validity of the above tricentric discourse have yet to be discussed. This article examines the important contemporary treatises on this tricentric discourse, and finds that subclassifying the philosophy of Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism using this methodology presents several difficulties. First, the definition of tricentric discourse is unclear and the basis upon which judgments are made is inconsistent, resulting in ineffective distinctions. Second, the range of the terms is too narrow to completely encompass Neo-confucianism’s entire theoretical framework, which may result in it being broken into parts. Third, Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism embraces multiple philosophic fields and cannot be explained using a single category. Finally, tricentric discourse’s analytical framework obscures Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism’s philosophic characteristics. In the light of the above analysis, this article comes to the conclusion that this tricentric discourse is not an appropriate or effective framework for distinguishing the modes of Song-Ming Neo-Confucianist thought.