The ideas of 'reverse analogous interpretation' and 'dual orientations' as suggested by Professor Liu Xiaogan draw a lot of attention in academia. This essay evaluates the rationale of these ideas, aiming at helping improve the quality of relevant discussion. I argue that the idea of 'reverse analogous interpretation' may over-simplify the phenomenon of explaining 'Chinese philosophy' by means of Western ideas. The use of this idea may therefore distract the focus of discussion. For the idea of 'dual orientations', I argue that it tends to exaggerate the differences between various research methods. As a result, it fails to see the way of harmonizing them and making them supplementary to each other. To a large extent, I suggest that Immanuel Kant's idea of nature of philosophy and Buddhist idea of 'doctrinal classification' help communicate different research methods, and make Liu's idea more comprehensive.