本文以關永中與楊儒賓對於「《莊子》思想是否為冥契主義」的論斷
分歧為例，反省當代中西哲學理論對比研究之模式。哲學研究通常奠基
於文本解讀研究，而中西文化語言本質不同，以至於批評者認為中西哲
學之間的理論對比研究，因文本語言差異而無法進行，然筆者認為文本
僅是人類哲學思維活動下的產物，而非哲學思維活動本身，「人的思維活
動」才是哲學研究的主要對象。若我們重新確立學界共通的研究關懷網絡，學術立場的衝突可能得以透過不同層級的研究關懷之關係而化解，
因此在關注「人類共通哲學思維活動」的研究關懷下，當代中西哲學理
論之間的對比研究，將可以在「探究跨文化哲學理論是否等同」的文本
解讀研究模式之外另闢蹊徑，轉而為「探究人類共通的哲學思維活動究
竟如何運作」的研究取向。

Extending from Wing-chung Kwan’s and Rur-bin Yang’s disagreement on whether the thoughts of Zhuangzi are characteristic of mysticism, this
study attempts to examine the contemporary comparative studies of Chinese
and Western philosophies. Philosophical research is usually conducted on the
basis of text interpretation; however, owing to the differences in nature of the
Chinese and Western cultures and languages, some critics argue that the
comparative studies of Chinese and Western philosophical texts cannot be
performed. Against this stance, I argue that philosophical texts are not so
much thinking activity per se as products of human beings’ philosophical thinking. Thus, it is the thinking activity of human beings that should serve as
the object of philosophical research. For this reason, if we map out the
network of common concerns among researchers, the conflicts among
different research positions will be resolved. With the spotlight cast upon the
common philosophical thinking of human beings, a new approach to
contemporary comparative studies of Chinese and Western philosophies can
be developed, beyond the limitation of the mode of textual interpretation
which centered in exploring whether philosophies of different cultural
backgrounds can be treated as equivalent or not.