以往關於晚清「經世」思想的討論，往往依附於凸顯漢宋、今古之分的「學派史」書寫範式，或將之等同於具體的變革建議與「政策」分析。本文以晚清治經家孫詒讓研治《周禮》、著書立說的經歷為線索，意在強調，「經世」是一個在時政刺激下，將「學」提升到「政」的層面從而予以合法化的「套語」，本有超越學術派分的性質；它誘使士人對於王朝興替、政制變遷作出「學術化」的解釋，而這套由學及政的「思維模式」，也直接影響到「學」本身的命運。清代經典考據之風相對科舉「正途」，規模始終有限，而在觀念上，「士」亦始終以「仕」為原則性的目標，致使「政」「學」難以兩分。但經典考據雖有研求精密之「學」，以探求精確之「政」的期許，終卻只能以一種去精密化的形式進入「經世」語境，經典不言自明的正當性之下是始終曖昧難明，又始終難以回避探討的「實用性」。晚清西力東漸，西學西政自身的源流漸為士人所體認，經典復從正當性之源泉的一面退卻；治經之士固可基於自身訴求，置身經世浪潮，可經學與對經世之道的闡發終被視為歧出兩路，「所學」已然無關「所用」。結合時人表述與表述的社會形成機制，「經世」一語所指涉的近代觀念變遷，或可由此得到較前更直觀也更為立體的呈現。

Past studies on the ideological trend called ＂Jingshi＂ (statecraft) in the Late Qing period mostly centered on the history of schools of thought, or were equated with specific analyses on proposals for reform and policy analysis. With a focus on Sun Yirang’s academic career in the ＂Rites of the Zhou,＂ this article emphasizes that ＂Jingshi＂ was a widely used term that justified xue (learning) at the level of zheng (administration) and hence overcame the traditional boundaries of the schools of learning. The term also induced a vision attributing administrative change to the transformation of learning, and then directly influenced the fate of learning itself. In comparison to the imperial examination as a common path of self-fulfillment for the literati, the textual research on Confucian classics in the Qing Dynasty was altogether of a limited scale. Furthermore, the literati (shi) were regarded in principle as officials or quasi-officials instead of scholars, which made it practically impossible to distinguish xue from zheng. Although the textual research concentrated on understanding the accuracy of learning and through it the correctness of administration, ultimately it was only able to see ＂Jingshi＂ through a muddy lens. Compared with the self-evident legitimacy of the Confucian classics, the research was vague and it was difficult to avoid questions about its practicability, especially with the arrival of Western learning. Although its researchers were able to participate in the ideological trend of ＂Jingshi＂, their in depth research was considered as separate from the analyses of the classics. From the perspective of the interplay between the texts and the society, the related ideological transition in modern China could be viewed in a direct and multi-dimensional way with this research.