莊子認為知識造成人間種種弊害，主張取消人之思慮分別，以「無知」來體會道的意義。方以智不像莊子將知與無知分屬不同的範疇，提出「知而無知」、「知即無知」的觀念。方以智採用僧肇與王陽明的見解，肯定知與無知的一致性。知以無知作為超越性的根據，也是無知的具體表現，由此方式肯定種種知識學問的價值與不可或缺。同時方以智認為「心以無知之知為體」，指出心之本質，也與莊子不同。方以智對莊子的知與無知的觀念有批判性的解釋，與其「質測」、「通幾」並重的治學方法有密切的關係，也是在會通儒釋道三家後對知識的反省。

Zhuangzi believes that knowledge causes various kinds of damage in the human life. He advocates the abolition of people's different thinking processes and promotes the concept of ＂non-knowledge＂ to appreciate the meaning of Dao. Unlike Zhuangzi who treats knowledge and non-knowledge as independent variables, Fang Yizhi believes that the two have a homogeneous relationship. He proposes the concepts of ＂knowledge followed by non-knowledge＂ and ＂knowledge that is non-knowledge.＂ Fang Yizhi adopts Seng Zhao and Wang Yangming's opinion and affirms the consistency of knowledge and non-knowledge. Knowledge uses non-knowledge as the base to transcend and, at the same time, it is a solid expression of non-knowledge. Thus he affirms that all kinds of information and learning are valuable and indispensable. Fang Yizhi also points out the essence of mind. He emphasizes that the mind dominates the process of understanding ＂Dao＂, which is also a different point of view than Zhuangzi's. Fang Yizhi's critical interpretation of Zhuangzi's concept of knowledge and non-knowledge is closely related to his emphasis on both learning methods: ＂real object observation＂ and ＂overall theoretical thinking.＂ Fang Yizhi's criticism of Zhuangzi's knowledge also reflects his understanding and interpretation of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism.