船山哲學是近年學界研究宋明清儒學的焦點之一。但儘管唐君毅與勞思光，兩位當代儒學彥碩，對船山哲學有近乎兩端的評價。學界卻較少有專文探討此一現象。故本文試以「船山繼善成性觀的當代省察」為題，探究二氏之異詮與交鋒。本文研究進路有三：一、整理唐、勞著作中，有關船山繼善成性觀之論述。並以二者徵引船山文獻為指標，初步建立對比二氏詮釋船山哲學的論點交鋒。二、以《船山全書》為據，由第一手文獻檢視二氏徵引船山文獻是否正確？並釐清二氏詮釋船山哲學的關鍵分歧。建立第二序評述二氏詮釋船山哲學的文獻基礎。三、藉由二氏其後的船山學研究，探討何者更能近年船山學的發展相呼應？由此作為本文辨析唐、勞論船山繼善成性觀的旁證之一。

Chuanshan philosophy is one of the recent focuses of academic research on Confucianism during the Song, Ming, and Qing dynasties. Although Tang Chun-i and Lao Sze-Kwang, two prominent Confucianism scholars, expressed divergent opinions regarding Chuanshan philosophy, few academic studies have analyzed their disagreement. Thus, this study discussed the different interpretations between the two scholars in terms of the examination by contemporary scholars on the Chuanshan concept regarding the experimental stage of moral existence. The following three research methods were employed. (1) The study gathered the discourses of Tang and Lao on Chuanshan philosophy. A preliminary comparison was conducted using the opposing arguments of the two scholars regarding their interpretation of Chuanshan philosophy. (2) Using the Complete Works of Chuanshan as a reference, we determined whether the arguments proposed by the two scholars matched the original source and clarified the key divergences between the scholars' interpretations. The second evaluation and description was then established regarding the scholars' interpretations of the fundamental research of Chuanshan philosophy. (03) Using Chuanshan philosophy research published after those of the two scholars for comparison, we discussed which scholars' interpretations were closer to those of the current research school on Chuanshan philosophy. This study used the aforementioned methods to analyze the interpretations of Tang and Lao on the Chuanshan concept regarding the experiential stage of moral existance.