孔子曾自道其方法论:“我欲载之空言,不如见之于行事之深切著明也。”——我与其空泛地谈论单纯的道理,不如切实地考察具体的事例,从而能把我对人伦世事的看法阐释得非常深刻且非常清晰。若依这一方法论来审视《论语》,则不难辨识其间既有一些能够“见之于行事”的内容,即有具体实例支持的论述,如“吾党直者”说;也有许多未能“见之于行事”的内容,即无具体实例支持的论述,如“讷近仁”说、“仁者不忧”说。前一内容因述说具体事例而处于一定语境中,故有较确定的含义。后者则因泛言抽象道理而超然于一定语境之外,故缺乏较确定的含义,很容易发生歧义,此亦是,彼亦是。若依这一方法论来比较《论语》与《春秋》、《传习录》、《圣经》,则也不难解读出一些意味深长的差异来。 Confucius once believed in his methodology: “I wish to carry a gossip, it is better to see the action of the deep and clear. ” - and I talk about the simple truth empty, it is better to examine specific examples, which can put me right The outlook on the world is very profound and very clear. If we look at the Analects according to this methodology, it is not hard to discern some of the things we can say about acting in the meantime, that is, there are arguments supported by concrete examples such as “ There are also many failed to ”see the action“ of the content, that there is no specific example of support for the argument, such as ”Nene Ren “ said, ”benevolent " said. The former content is in a certain context because of the specific examples, so it has a more definite meaning. The latter, because of abstract generalizations, is beyond the bounds of certain contexts. Therefore, it lacks the more definite meaning and is prone to ambiguity. If we compare the Analects of Confucius with the Spring and Autumn Annals, the Biography of the Bible and the Bible according to this methodology, it is not hard to interpret some meaningful differences.