Near the close of the lecture, Sōseki addresses one more misunderstanding attached to the word “individualism” — the idea that it is the opposite of nationalism, something that endangers the nation. (The previous article saw Sōseki set individualism against factionalism.)
Individualism is not the opposite of nationalism
Sōseki flatly rejects this misunderstanding. “People take individualism to be something like the opposite of nationalism, something that tears nationalism down — but it’s nothing so incoherent and unreasoned as that.” His answer: “In fact, we are nationalists, and internationalists, and individualists, all at the same time.”
Sōseki explains this coexistence through the image of a thermometer.
The freedom each person enjoys rises and falls, like a thermometer, according to the nation’s safety. … When the nation is in danger, individual freedom narrows; when the nation is at peace, individual freedom expands. That’s simply how it naturally goes. (working translation)
When the nation is in crisis, individual freedom naturally contracts; when the nation is secure, individual freedom expands. This, Sōseki says, is the natural state of things.
A speech at Kumamoto high school
Sōseki backs up this point with an anecdote from his own youth. While teaching at a high school in Kumamoto, a society devoted to nationalism was formed, and Sōseki found himself made a member. At its inaugural ceremony, one member gave a speech directly opposing Sōseki’s own views. He had no choice but to answer, arguing that “going around morning to night saying ‘the nation, the nation,’ as if possessed by it, is simply not something we can do” — and then reaches for a deliberately mundane example.
A tofu seller who walks the streets selling tofu isn’t selling it for the sake of the nation. His basic aim is to earn his own food and clothing. Still, whatever his own intention, the result — supplying something society needs — may indirectly serve the nation’s benefit. (working translation)
The tofu seller sells tofu not for the nation but for his own livelihood. Even so, by supplying something society needs, he may end up indirectly benefiting the nation. Sōseki drives the same logic further, noting that he eats three bowls of rice at noon and four in the evening not for the nation’s sake but, “to be honest,” because of how his stomach feels — a still more mundane example that cuts right to the heart of his argument.
There’s no harm in encouraging nationalism as much as you like, but it’s dishonest to dress up as done “for the nation’s sake” something that, in fact, can’t be done that way. (working translation)
National morality and individual morality
Near the very end of the lecture, Sōseki adds one more important point: morality at the level of the nation is a lower standard than morality at the level of the individual. “Nations, dealing with other nations, however elaborate their formal language, don’t actually hold much in the way of ethical conscience,” he says frankly.
So when the nation is at peace, I think it only natural to place greater weight on an individualism with a high ethical conscience. (working translation)
When the nation is at peace, it makes more sense to place weight on an individualism with a high standard of ethics — this is Sōseki’s conclusion.
Worth checking as you read
First, Sōseki’s argument keeps 1914 Japan specifically in view. As his own qualifier — “Japan today is hardly all that secure” — makes clear, he accepts that individual freedom naturally contracts when the nation faces danger, and he never presents individualism as an absolute value that should take priority regardless of circumstance.
Second, the Kumamoto high school anecdote is Sōseki’s own recollection; this feature has not verified the audience’s reaction or the exact wording of the speech at the time.
Summary
| Point | Content |
|---|---|
| Rejecting the misunderstanding | Individualism is not the opposite of nationalism. The two can coexist |
| The thermometer image | Individual freedom naturally expands and contracts with the nation’s safety |
| The tofu seller example | A tofu seller works for his own livelihood, not the nation — yet still indirectly serves society |
| National vs. individual morality | Morality between nations runs low. In peaceful times, weight naturally falls to individualism |
In short — using the deliberately unglamorous example of a tofu seller, Sōseki shows that individualism and nationalism are not opposed, but naturally balance each other according to circumstance.