本文主要在於重新評估《莊子》的天人思維，尤其回應「蔽於天而不知人」這一類批評，實未能完整把握《莊子》天人「兩行」的辯證思維。為了講明莊周平衡「天／人」雙重身分的當代意義，筆者嘗試與法蘭克福學派創始者阿多諾《啟蒙的辯證》進行跨文化對話。就阿多諾而言，人文的啟蒙未必直線進步，反而啟蒙與神話應該重新辯證，人應該再度與自然重新和解。本文認為阿多諾對啟蒙辯證的文化批判治療，以及否定辯證的文化生成邏輯，極富啟發性。因此嘗試和《莊子》的天人思維，進行跨文化對話。最後，筆者重新定位《莊子》的天人思維在於：神話與啟蒙之間的來回運動，莊周乃具有自然之子（天）與啟蒙之子（人）的雙重身分，並嘗試讓「天人不相勝」地「兩行」運動，這同時也是人文化成生生不息的關鍵。

This study reevaluates the ideas of heaven and man depicted in the Zhuangzi, particularly regarding criticisms made against the subject of “knowing only nature but not people” (biyu tian er buzhi ren 蔽於天而不知人). It is contended here that these criticisms fail to fully grasp the text’s concept of liangxing 兩行, or the nature of affairs in balance. In order to explain Zhuangzi’s efforts to balance the roles of heaven and humans, comparisons are made between the aforementioned concepts and the Dialectic of Enlightenment written by Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno, founder of the Frankfurt School. For Adorno, enlightenment in the humanities should not evolve on its own; myths and enlightenment should develop together and the meaning of the human and of nature should be reexamined. This study finds the criticisms made in the Dialectic of Enlightenment to be highly insightful, and the said work is compared with the Zhuangzi. This study repositions the ideology of humans and nature as a catalyst that transforms myth into enlightenment. Zhuangzi played the roles of the son of nature (heaven) and of a teacher (human) to facilitate the teaching of tianren bu xiangsheng 天人不相勝and liangxing, enabling our human-centric culture to continue to prosper.