「自生」與「玄冥」這兩個觀念，並非郭象所首創，但是郭氏賦予新義，並且以此為核心發展出自成體系的本體論、宇宙論與工夫論。我們從這裡著眼，對於郭氏的思想及其在魏晉玄學發展史上的意義可以有較明確的認知。 　　筆者從哲學史的角度來探討郭氏著作中「自生」 與「玄冥」的義蘊。發現郭氏的「自生」義本於他對「自然」的體認。他揭示了 「自然」 的自動、純素與自足性，相應於此，他的「自生」 也著重於無主、獨化與無待義。這就構成一套本體論、宇宙論，可據以對治當時思想界貴無賤有及票有棄無的一些論調。郭氏的「自生」說，蘊含一套「無心玄應」 的工夫論。 無心玄應』 所體男的境界即為「玄冥」，郭氏在這裡上契老子「無為而無不為」 的玄義，論述以不治治之的治道]及「所遇斯乘」遊於無窮的逍遙。 　　從郭氏的「自生」說與「玄冥」論，我們可以看出郭氏對於老、莊的玄理實有相應的了解，而對玄學家們貴無、崇有的議論也有積極的回應。他在繼承傳統思想、因應時代問題方面所展現的睿識，是值得肯定的。

　　　　　Kuo Hsiang did not invented the Concepts of "Self Creation" (tzu-sheng) and "Mystical Unification" (hsuan-ming), but he imparted them with new significance, and made them the core concepts from which a system of ontology, cosmology, and theory of cultivation are elicited. From this angle, we may have a clearer insight of the thought of Kuo Hsiang and its significance in the history of the Wei-Chin Hsuan Hsueg philosophy. 　　Studying the implication of the "Self Creation" and "Mystical Unification" in Kuo Hsiang's writings, the author finds that Kuo's definition of "Self Creation" is based upon his understanding of "Self-being-so" (tzu-jan). As he drew out of "Self-being-so" the implication of self-movement, unembellishment, and self-sufficiency, so his "(Self-Creation" suggested the meaning of without-a-master, transformation by itself, and no-reliance. Based upon "Self Creation", his ontology and cosmology is able to refute both thoeries of "Preferring Nothing to Something" (Kuei-yuchien-wu) and of "Preferring Something to Nothing" (kuei-wu chien-yu) in those days. Kuo Hsiang's theory of "Self Creation" also implied the theory of cultivation of "Mindlessly Mystical Response" (wu-hsin hsuan-ying). The state exemplified by "Mindlessly Mystical Response" is "Mystical Unification." At this point Kuo Hsiang inherited Lao-tzu's theory of "doing everything by doing nothing", and developed the political theory of "ruling by not ruling", as well as the life style of "riding on everything encountered in order to wander freely in the unlimited world. 　　From Kuo Hsiang's theories of "Self Creation" and "Mystical Unification", it is right to say that he had a real understanding of the philosophy of Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu, and that he had a clear response to the theories either of "preferring Nothing" or of "Preferring Something" by the Hsuan Hsueh philosophers. It should be acknowledged that he had wisdom both in inheriting tradition and in managing problems of his time.