陈鼓应先生认为:在一个大道流行的完美状态中,仁义礼本就蕴含在大道里,行仁由义是自然自得自适,如“鱼相忘乎江湖”;因此,老子不仅不排斥仁义礼,反而对仁义礼采取肯定的态度;老子所批评的礼是流于形式而虚伪的异化之礼。按陈先生的看法,道家的道德与儒家的仁义道德没有什么实质的分别。陈先生的解释遮蔽了老子的真正观点:在大道流行的理想状态中,根本不存在仁义礼;理想状态崩坏而大道废弃时,才迫切需要仁义礼来救治,仁义礼是衰世的产物,背离了大道之真实、质朴、虚静的特性,因而予以否定。陈先生带着其主观先见,对《老子》文本进行了误读。 Mr. Chen Gu-ying believes that in the perfect state of a boulevard, the righteousness is contained in the boulevard, and the justification of human beings is naturally self-adaptive. For example, Lao Tzu not only does not Rejecting righteousness and righteousness, on the contrary, it takes a positive attitude toward righteousness and righteousness. The ritual criticism that Lao Tzu criticizes is a mere formality and hypocrisy of alienation. According to Mr. Chen, there is no substantial difference between Taoist morality and Confucian virtue and morality. Mr. Chen’s explanation obscures the true view of Lao Tzu: In the ideal state of popular avenue, there is no righteousness at all. When the ideal state collapses and the avenue is abandoned, the righteousness and righteousness are urgently needed for treatment. The righteousness and righteousness is the product of the decline, Deviate from the real, rustic, quiet characteristics of the avenue, and thus be denied. With his subjective foresight, Mr. Chen misread the text of “Lao Zi”.