作者首先透過介紹當代來自於不同學術背景的學者們所對於「超越性」與「內在性」的界定與論述，釐清了超越性與內在性的不同涵義。接著他以唐君毅對於中國傳統文化所蘊含的「宗教性的超越感情」的闡發作為論述的起點，並且以唐君毅「既超越又內在」的天道思想作為論述的主軸。最後他在確定唐君毅所論述的超越性與內在性不是二元對立之嚴謹意義的超越性與內在性之後，分別從五個方面探討「天德流行」的超越性與內在性：1.「生命靈覺」與其形上根源的關係。2.「天命」與「性命」的關係。3.天地乾坤具高明、博厚之德。4.「仁心仁性不為我所私有」。5.「本心即天心，人德即天德」。 　　作者的結論是：雖然唐君毅有意要開展一個「乾坤並建」，「天命」與「性命」並存之「既超越又內在」的天道觀；（在這天人關係的闡發上無疑具備了高度的價值，啟發了現代人融合宗教精神與人文價值的超越向度。）但結果卻只成就了一種內在於人的主體的超越性。雖然他已然挺立了人的孤峭的道德主體性；卻同時遺忘了天道涵藏萬有、生生不息之動力的開顯。

　　　　　 Transcendence and immanence have different definitions in contemporary scholars' thoughts. The writer's discussion begins with Dr. T'ang Chun-l's notion of “transcendent passion of religion” which is implicit in Chinese traditional culture. And he regards Dr. T'ang's notion of “Tien Tao” as the center of his argument. Regards it as main body that the notion of “T'ien Toa” of Dr. T'ang. The writer affirms that Dr. T'ang's definitions of Transcendence and Immanence are not dualistically conflicting in a rigorous sense. He inquires into the transcendence and immanence of “the movement of the virtues of Heaven” from five viewpoints. They are: (1) the relation between “self-consciousness of life” and its metaphysical sources, (2) the relation of “Tien ming” (the Heavenly Ordinance) and “hsing ming” (human nature itself), (3) the virtues of Heaven and Earth such as superior, broad and profound, (4) “Jen hsin” (the heart of man) and “Jen-hsing” (human nature) are not privately owned, (5) the identity of “Jen Te” (the virtues of man) and “Tien Te” (the virtues of Heaven). The conclusion of this paper is that although Dr. Tang wants to open up the notion of “tien Tao” by paying equal attention on “Tien ming” and “hsing ming”, yet he forgets to open up the all-embracing plenitude and dynamic vitality of “Tien Tao”.