Methodology has two aspects: as organ with which to acquire truth and as principle upon which truth to be founded. From this point of view, methodology is to be classified into three grades; formal logic, scientific logic, philosophical logic. The philosophical logic is still more to be divided into three grades; epistemological, ontological and philosophical in a nerrower sense. Among these methodologies, the former is to the latter each other what the method as organ is to the method as principle. Therefore the philosophical methodology in a narrower sense is in the highest grade of all. This philosophical methodology is to be divided into two parts; theory of elements and theory of methods. The former is the basic ground of the latter. Then the theory of elements is the narrowest or ultimate philosophical methodology. We are trying to study this ultimate one historically and systematically. The ultimate one, after all, consists in the point of view or standpoint from which to find truth. First we try to find it outside of us. And then inside of us. At last in the communication of each other. When we try to find it outside, nature cannot answer us directly. One who can answer directly is another people. Then the method is to be dialogical. But dialogical is to be pushed into monological. Then we must try to reflect in ourselves. The reflexive method is divided into three grades; naive, dogmatical, critical. When we cannot discern outside from inside and stand on a simple mixed point of view self-unconsciously, it is naive. Then although we become aware of the difference, when we dicide the conformity of the two sides arbitrally, it is dogmatical. At last when we try to fix how far the two sides can conform, it is critical. The naive method, presupposing the conformity of logos and thing simply, is to be divided into two grades; prescientific and scientific. The former is archaical or analogical, the latter is inductive or deductive. In the latter we are unware they are operating methods, but not constructive ones. Then we must be aware of the difference between logos and thing. The dogmatical method is to be divided into two grades; speculative and intuitive. In the former we, distinguishing logos from thing, decide the parallelism or identity of the two phases without proof. In the latter we, at one stroke, decide the conformity or fusion of the two sides (outside and inside), neglecting logos. The critical method is to be divided into two grades; sceptical and critical in a narrower sense. The former is absolute or relative. The relative one is, in spite of negative, methodologically efficient and it comes near the critical one. The critical one in a narrower sense is still more to be divided into two grades; formal or material, abstract or concrete, transcendental-logical or phenomenological. The former trys to find the conditions and limits of our true knowledge. The latter intends to find the basic foundation of all the sciences, and trys the intentional analysis of the pure consciousness and the verification of experiences or evidences therein. They have not only an epistemological aspect, but also an on-tological one. From both standpoints, first an objective ontological methodology, and then a subjective ontological one are to be led out. The reflexive method ends at the former. Next the communicative method begins with the latter. (The latter will be still more divided into many grades, too.) To be continued.