過去對於羅欽順的思想定位，學界仍有不同看法，本文嘗試由羅欽順論禮思想切入，發現和其理氣論和心性論一致，羅欽順在以氣為本、理為氣之理的思維下，將禮分為禮之理和具體禮制兩層，兩者一貫但不同一，並且較為看重禮之理。因此在工夫論上，羅欽順便主張透過克己復禮和格物，返回至善的禮之理。這便和張載「知禮成性」說有相近之處，張載以太虛之氣作為本體，同樣將禮分為天地之禮和具體禮制二者，並強調以「克己」工夫來返回最初的天地之禮。清代氣學的代表人物戴震，則和兩人不同，強調發展、增加心知之能力，使情欲之性表現為仁義禮之懿德，並且明確反對「復其初」的思維。故透過論析三人論禮之不同，可以發現張載和羅欽順兩人相對於戴震，一重返回、回歸，一重發展、累積，是兩種不同的論禮思想，也代表氣學內部兩種不同的思想型態。

Academics are hard to reach a consensus on Luo Qin-shun’s theory is a part of Neo-Confucianism, or a part of Qi theory. This research will discover the consistent context in his Qi theory of ritualism. Luo Qin-shun had distinguished the “principle of ritual” and “ritual”, and he had valued the principle more than the ritual. Therefore, Luo Qin-shun had paid more attention to the theories of self-cultivation, which were focused on how to return the principle of ritual. “Returning” is the same emphasis in Chang Tsai’s philosophy, he had also distinguished the “ritual of Heaven and Earth” and “ritual”, and human being should abandon desires to return pure and good nature. Dai Zhen – the most important philosopher of qi in Qing dynasty – who had placed greater emphasis on the thinking ability of heart, and paid more attention to expansion and developing of virtue. “Returning” and “developing” are diff erent aspects between Luo Qin-shun and’ Dai Zhens’ ritualism, and it had characterized two diff erent kinds of Qi theory.