人们习惯于以荀子为性恶论的代表，但实际上他是性朴论的代表，性恶论为荀子后学所持。刘向编《荀子》时把《性恶》夹在显然属于非荀子作品的《子道》和《法行》之间，这一历史细节非常重要。孔子所谓“性相近，习相远”亦显示出性朴论的取向。性朴论与性恶论尖锐冲突，无法协调。主张“性者，天质之朴”的董仲舒，是西汉性朴论的最重要代表。在他之前的贾谊和与他同时的韩婴也持性朴论。引入“性朴论”这一概念研究中国人性论史，可以产生很多新的、富有启发性的看法，同时也可澄清历史上的一些误解。

Investigatingthe Confucian Thought of “Human Nature Being Innate”:

From Pre Qin Period to the Western Han Dynasty                                  Zhou Chicheng

Xunzi is usually recognized as insisting that the human nature is evil, which however is contradict with the textual facts. The central idea of Xunzi on human nature is that it isinnate, while the idea of evil human nature is taken by certain students of Xunzi. It is Liu Xiang who put the essay “On Evil Nature” between “Zidao” and “Faxing”, both of which were obviously not the works of Xunzi, and thus gave rise to the impression that Xunzi himself held the view that the human nature is evil. Actually, the theory of “human nature being innate” is sharply conflicted with the theory of evil nature, and Confucius himself as the founder of Confucianism inclined to the former point of view. Until the Western Han Dynasty, Dong Zhongshu still took the human nature as that is plain and became the most important representative of the theory that the human nature is plain. Jia Yi and Yan Ying who were a little earlier than or contemporary with Dong Zhongshu also took the similar standpoint. From the perspective that the human nature is plain, it can not only deduced a series of new revelatory observations from the thought history on human nature, but also some misunderstanding in history can be corrected.