重估氣質之性，是明儒對朱子性氣關係的反思與質疑。朱子以理善論證性善，「氣質」是人成德的消極限制。在問題意識上，是如何馴化氣質之偏，以復顯性善本原。陽明則從「性即氣，氣即性」立基，嘗試打破天性與氣質的對立。並由「性在氣上始見」，將氣質從有待馴化的對象，上提至實現本性之善的必要條件。然而隨著王學的分化，王門弟子對於天性與氣質的關係，產生了彼此相左的見解。本文即藉由「氣質與氣質之性的衡定」、「性氣關係」、「人性善惡與氣質之性」，以及「變化氣質是工夫綱領或效驗」等四方面，呈現陽明學者論氣質之性的多樣性。

During the Ming Dynasty, the reevaluation from a Confucian approach to psychophysical nature involved critical reflection and questioning of Zhu Xi’s notion of the nature-Qi relationship. While Zhu Xi employed the theory of goodness to examine the goodness of nature, he suggested that “psychophysical temperament” passively limits one’s path to the cultivation of virtues. As such, Zhu Xi’s focus revolved around the discipline to minimalize deviation from psychophysical temperament, thereby restoring and epitomizing the goodness of nature in its original state. On the other hand, Wang Yangming posited the principle that “nature is Qi; Qi is nature” and attempted to dismantle the opposition between nature and psychophysical temperament. Specifically, his idea that “nature first appears in Qi” transformed psychophysical temperament from an object that remained to be disciplined to the necessary condition for realizing the goodness of nature. However, as Wang’s school of thought began to diverge, his disciples became divided over the relationship between nature and psychophysical temperament. This study presents the diversity of perspectives on psychophysical nature among scholars of Yangmingism by investigating the following four aspects: “the balance between psychophysical temperament and psychophysical nature,” “the nature-Qi relationship,” “the good and evil of human nature and psychophysical nature,” and “the change of psychophysical temperament as the outline or validation of personal growth.”

天地之性; 義理之性; 氣質之性; 變化氣質

Nature of universe; Moral nature; Physical nature; Transformation of one’s physical nature