明代以「氣」做為儒學本體論的思想約略與陽明學派同時期逐漸形成。本論文以羅欽順、王廷相、魏校以及吳廷翰四位儒者為論述對象，而他們與理學家的思想差異之處可以分為幾個基本面向。首先是本體論，主張氣本論者反對理學以抽象的理範疇為本體，認為後者會造成現象界的旁落，因此須以氣為本體，才可真正在現象界中尋得安身。再者，理只能是氣化之名，是陰陽之氣在聚散變化過程中的規律，包含天地萬物與歷史變遷都是如此，因此不可能有亙古不易且獨立自存於氣外的理，亦即理的內涵可隨著環境、時代而有所更替。第三，氣本論者認為在心性範疇的論述中不可能將「人欲」完全排除在外，因為人欲與喜怒哀樂一樣，皆是天性所賦予。另外氣本論者也多看重後天學習，主張學以變化氣質，且能識得仁義禮智。明代氣本論與清初思潮以及乾嘉義理思想的脈絡有其重疊的趨向，皆是立足於現象世界中以經驗、實際做為建構出不同於宋明理學的義理思想。

Ming Dynasty as ”Qi” as Confucianism ontological thinking roughly the same period with Yangming school gradually formed. In this thesis, Luo Qin Shun, Wang Tingxiang, Wei and Wu Tinghan four Confucian school of discourse objects and their ideological differences with the Neo-place can be divided into several basic dimensions.The first is ontological, advocates of this theory opposed qi jurisprudence as an abstract category management body, that the latter will cause the phenomenal world changed hands and is therefore subject to qi as a body, in the real world of phenomena in order to find a place to live.Furthermore, in the name of reason can only be gasified, is the yin and yang of the qi in the process of change in the rules and everything, including the heavens and the earth and the historical changes are so, so difficult and impossible to have eternal uncaused in the qi outside the grounds, which is available along with the content management environment, the times vary replacement.Third, the qi is argued that in the context of discourse Mind impossible to ”Desire” is completely excluded, because human desires and emotions and Wisdom, as are all given by nature. Another multi-gas value of the commentators have acquired learning, learning to advocate changes in temperament, and can bewilderment Wisdom.Qi theory and thoughts and ideas of Ming Dynasty and Qing Dynasty that in the context Qianjia argumentation has its overlapping trends, are all based on the phenomenon in the world of experience as a construct is different from the actual moral principles of Neo-Confucianism thought.