本文探討多瑪斯•阿奎那在《神學大全》中有關道德的反思與儒家思想之跨文化對話的可能性與適宜性，以此來應對當代危機。在分析過關於儒家思想應被理解為德行倫理學或角色倫理學的持續爭論後，本文將轉向黃勇將亞里士多德、阿奎那與朱熹思想進行平行對照的著作。黃勇主張將儒家思想解釋為一種德行倫理學，其根基在於人性與道德修養。他認為朱熹的倫理學模式比亞里斯多德的更貼近德行倫理學的「理想類型」。朱熹思想的旨趣在於將人際關係能力與品性奠定為反思道德的基礎。李勇也持此觀點，不過他的論證建立於孟子和阿奎那的體系之上。耐人尋味的是，上述思想家皆對傳統現象有根本性的信任。新儒學與經院哲學的註釋實踐，體現了能促進道德反思的跨代傳承與創新的詮釋倫理學。我們也可在阿奎那對德性的定義中發現這一點，他同時考察德行的跨文化基礎與目的論基礎。在這種意義上，正如幾位詮釋者所示，建基於經院哲學與儒家思想之匯通的跨文化德行倫理學，以追求整合各哲學傳統中理性、情感與靈性維度的道德知識為已任。

This article explores the possibility and relevance of engaging Thomas Aquinas’s moral reflection in the Summa Theologica through a transcultural dialogue with Confucian thought to face contemporary crisis. It opens by examining the ongoing debate on whether Confucianism is best understood as a Virtue Ethics or a Role Ethics. Then it turns to Huang Yong’s work, which draws parallels between Aristotle, Aquinas, and Zhu Xi. Huang defends an interpretation of Confucianism as a form of Virtue Ethics, rooted in human nature and moral cultivation, and argues that Zhu Xi offers a model closer to the “ideal type” of Virtue Ethics than Aristotle. The interest of Zhu Xi’s reflection is indeed to put relational abilities and dispositions at the foundation of moral reflection. This is also what Li Yong establishes, although relying on Mencius and Aquinas.
Interestingly, all the thinkers mentioned share a fundamental trust in the phenomena of tradition. The commentarial practices of Neo-Confucianism and Scholasticism embody a hermeneutical ethics that enables intergenerational transmission and innovation in moral reflection. This can also be observed in Aquinas’s definition of virtue, examining both its transcultural and teleological foundations. In this sense, transcultural Virtue Ethics, built on the bridging of Scholasticism and Confucianism, as exemplified by several commentators, advocates for the pursuit of moral knowledge that integrates rational, emotional, and spiritual dimensions across philosophical traditions.