Gadamer’s hermeneutics offers several strategies for critiquing Chung-ying Cheng’s synthesis of Confucianism and Kant. Interpreting Kant’s Groundwork, Cheng argues that the distinction between perfect and imperfect duties is too rigid: if the “life principle” is the ultimate root of Kant’s four types of duty, then human inclinations are good; Kant’s perfect duties turn out to be imperfect in some situations, while his imperfect duties such as benevolence (or ren, in Confucian philosophy) turn out sometimes to be perfect. Although Cheng’s synthesis does not satisfy the Groundwork’s universal aim, it does show how to apply Kant’s insights to empirical moral situations.

伽达默尔的诠释学为批评郑中英对儒家和康德的综合提供了几种策略。在解读康德的《基础》时，程认为完美义务与不完美义务的区分过于僵化：如果“生活原则”是康德四种义务的终极根源，那么人的倾向是好的；康德的完美职责在某些情况下会变得不完美，而他的不完美职责，例如仁（或儒家哲学中的仁）有时会变得完美。虽然程的综合不能满足基础的普遍目标，但它确实展示了如何将康德的见解应用于经验道德情境。