明代《張洪陽註解道德經》一書最引人注目之處，在於其以「道德」為軸心，透過聯繫「性命」、「有無」兩組哲學概念，進行義理思維的通貫與串聯。此乃成功將「性命」、「有無」二說，納入老子「道德」論述的思想體系當中，建構出別具一格的理論間架與內涵。因此，本論文乃取徑於以下兩個研究進路，希望能抉發出張位註《老》中「道德」論述的主要內涵。其一是「道德」與「性命」的義理通貫。張位以《老子》為性命之書，其針對「性命」一辭在形式架構的理解，蓋承《易傳》所言「性命」思路而來。然而，對於「性命」內在義理的了解，張位並不往儒家「性善」一路貞定，而是直接從道家「性真」一路汲取養分。此蓋是其儒、道會通的詮解方式，雖然資藉儒家言性命哲理的外在框架，然而內在精神仍隸屬於道家式的。其二是「道德」與「有無」的義理串聯。此中一方面論證「道」、「德」之間的深密關係，另一方面也極力申述「道德」與「有無」交相連屬的意義。此間，張位復以「道貴自然」、「德尚無為」，深入闡述「道德」的內在理蘊。「自然」、「無為」咸是心性體認的功夫修養；而「有」、「無」亦率皆性命玄修之事。如是，淡化、削弱了「有」、「無」原具的形上玄思、玄理，遂轉化、落實為心性鍛鍊的治身、理身之道。在此一思想前提之下，可以發現張氏特別看重老子思想的功夫義、內聖義，並認為《老子》是性命之書，也是功夫之書。因此，其乃進一步將老子的言說，視為對人行為的警戒與教示之語，同時亦專力駁斥將老子學說視為伎倆、智慮之術的看法，並以「消盡伎倆」為老子學說的重要旨標之一，力圖彰顯出「道德」內涵的實踐意義。凡此，其間種種義理向度的抉發與闡釋，除了有助於更進一步衡定老子思想的內在底蘊之外，對於明代老子學歷史圖象的具體建構與廓清，當亦有實質之助益。

The most striking place in Zhang Hong Yang Zhu Jie Dao De Jing is that it chooses to use ＂Dao De＂ to connect two philosophical concepts－＂Xing Ming＂ and ＂You Wu＂ This book successfully accommodates ＂Xing Ming＂ and ＂You Wu＂ into the Daoist discourse of ＂Dao De＂ and establishes a unique point of view. This paper will follow two lines of research: to examine how the connection between ＂Xing Ming＂ and ＂Dao De＂ is established; and then the connection between ＂Dao De＂ and ＂You Wu.＂ First, the connection established between ＂Xing Ming＂ and ＂Dao De＂ is actually a fusion of Confucianism and Daoism, with Confucianism as the external framework and Daoism as its core spirit. Second, there will be a discussion on the relationship between ＂Dao＂ and ＂De.＂ Zhang Hong Yang (Zhang Wei) especially pays attention to two concepts ＂kung fu＂ and ＂nei sheng＂ in Lao-Zi, and he believes Lao-Zi is a book of ＂xing ming＂ as well as a book of ＂kung fu.＂ Thus in his further discussion he sees Lao-Zi as teachings of human behaviors, and refutes to see it as a book about subtlety and trickery. In fact, he regards ＂to cease trickery＂ as one of the most important doctrines in Lao-Zi so as to highlight significance of ＂Dao De＂ in a practical sense. Through the examination of the above aspects, this paper helps explore further into thoughts of Lao Zi as well as clarifies the historical picture of Lao Zi study in Ming Dynasty.