Introduction: A Nation at a Crossroads
In the summer of 1878, a pivotal moment unfolded in Japan that would shape the nation’s educational and political future. At stake was a fundamental question: What kind of people should education cultivate? Should schools nurture independent, modern citizens capable of self-governance, or should they produce obedient subjects loyal to the imperial throne? This debate, often referred to as the Great Moral Education Debate, was not merely an academic dispute but a clash over Japan’s national identity and path toward modernization.
This article explores the background, key players, ideological conflicts, and long-lasting consequences of this debate, shedding light on how Japan wrestled with tradition and modernity during the transformative Meiji era.
Background: Japan’s Rush Toward Modernity
Following over two centuries of relative isolation under the Tokugawa shogunate, Japan’s forced opening by Western powers in the 1850s exposed the country to the technological and institutional advancements of the West. Recognizing the urgent need to strengthen the nation, the Meiji government embarked on a program of rapid modernization and Westernization.
Central to this project was education reform. In 1868, the newly restored emperor promulgated the Charter Oath, which included a commitment to “seek knowledge throughout the world” and to “break with old customs,” signaling a clear break from feudalism and an embrace of Western-style governance and learning.
During the early Meiji years, education became the vehicle for creating a modern nation-state. The government imported Western educational models, emphasizing liberal values, scientific knowledge, and individual rights — concepts essential for nurturing citizens who could participate in a constitutional polity.
The 1878 Imperial Edict: A Shock to Reformers
Amidst this reformist momentum, the summer of 1878 saw the issuance of an imperial edict known as the “Educational Outline.” Drafted not by the emperor himself but by Genro Nagata, an influential imperial tutor and advocate of traditional Confucian values, this document sharply criticized the ongoing Westernization of education.
The edict condemned the liberal education reforms as having “pursued the extreme ends of civilization and enlightenment,” which it argued had “damaged morals and customs,” potentially leading to a society “ignorant of the great principles of ruler-subject and parent-child relationships.” It called for a return to Confucian ethics, particularly emphasizing virtues such as benevolence, righteousness, loyalty, and filial piety as the foundation of moral education. Other academic subjects were to be left to individual study.
For reformers, this was a direct repudiation of their efforts to build a modern civic culture based on individual rights and constitutional governance. The edict seemed to advocate for a reversion to feudal values that promoted blind loyalty to the emperor and suppression of independent thought.
Key Figures and Ideological Divides
The edict was the brainchild of Genro Nagata, a court scholar who served as the emperor’s private tutor and championed the idea of “imperial direct rule” — a political philosophy asserting the emperor’s absolute authority above all else. This was at odds with reformist leaders like Ito Hirobumi, who favored a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system.
Ito and his allies viewed Nagata’s Confucian revivalism as a dangerous regression that could throw Japan into political chaos. They feared that an education system promoting unquestioning obedience would stifle the development of a modern polity capable of self-government and adaptation to global norms.
In response, Ito commissioned Inoue Tetsujirō, a respected official in the Ministry of Home Affairs, to draft a counter-document known as the “Educational Argument.” This text defended the Westernizing reforms, arguing that moral decay was an unfortunate but inevitable side effect of rapid modernization, not the result of adopting Western values. It advocated for continued modernization while improving methods of moral education to address social issues.
Nagata promptly replied with a rebuttal, the “Supplementary Educational Argument,” accusing Ito and Inoue of misunderstanding the imperial will and reaffirming the necessity of restoring Confucian virtues as the remedy for social disorder.
Broader Intellectual and Educational Responses
This moral education debate quickly attracted the attention of Japan’s leading intellectuals and educators. The renowned thinker and educator Fukuzawa Yukichi, a staunch advocate of Western liberalism and individualism, published influential essays such as “On Moral Education” and “Additional Thoughts on Education.” Fukuzawa strongly opposed Confucian moralism, arguing that true moral education must be founded on freedom of speech and critical thinking rather than rote recitations of loyalty and filial piety.
Similarly, the first Minister of Education, Mori Arinori, condemned Confucian ethics as outdated. He promoted an education that fostered spontaneity and self-awareness in students, rejecting the practice of indoctrinating children with rigid moral maxims through memorization.
However, the intellectual climate was complex. Conservative nationalism was also on the rise, and many prominent figures sympathized with Nagata’s views. Philosopher and educator Nishimura Shigeki advocated for a Confucian-based education supplemented by Western learning, emphasizing that Confucianism’s moral teachings were unparalleled in the world.
Nationalist thinker Sugi Fuchū took a similar stance, proposing that moral education should blend Confucian principles with Japanese traditional ethics, forging a unique national spirit rooted in loyalty and virtue. Even Tokyo University’s president, Katō Hiroyuki, lent support to these conservative ideas, underscoring the ongoing contest over Japan’s cultural foundations.
The Political and Cultural Stakes
The moral education debate was far from a mere academic quarrel; it reflected deeper tensions about Japan’s identity and future. The reformists envisioned a Japan that embraced constitutionalism, individual rights, and global progress — a citizenry empowered to participate in governance and capable of critical thought.
Conversely, conservatives feared that abandoning traditional Confucian ideals would erode social cohesion and respect for authority, threatening the unity of the nation and the sanctity of the emperor’s rule. For them, cultivating loyal subjects who internalized values like filial piety and unquestioning obedience was essential to maintaining order amid rapid change.
This fundamental divide—citizens versus subjects—represented two competing models of nationhood. The choice would influence Japan’s political trajectory, shaping its institutions, social relations, and cultural narratives for decades to come.
Legacy and Impact on Japanese Education and Society
Although the “imperial direct rule” movement ultimately failed to overturn the Meiji government’s modernization agenda, Nagata’s ideas left a lasting imprint on Japan’s educational philosophy. The government incorporated elements of Confucian ethics into moral education, balancing Western liberal ideals with traditional values.
This compromise manifested in the later development of the Imperial Rescript on Education , which enshrined loyalty, filial piety, and social harmony alongside calls for diligence and patriotism. The Rescript became a moral foundation for Japanese education well into the 20th century, shaping the character of generations.
Moreover, the debate highlighted the challenges of modernization in non-Western societies: how to absorb foreign innovations without losing cultural identity, and how to nurture citizens who could navigate both traditional obligations and modern political rights.
Japan’s ability to negotiate these tensions contributed to its rapid transformation into a powerful modern nation-state, capable of standing alongside Western powers while maintaining a distinct national character.
Conclusion: The Enduring Question of Education’s Purpose
The Great Moral Education Debate of 1878 stands as a defining moment in Japan’s modernization journey. It forced the nation to confront a profound dilemma: Should education cultivate independent citizens or loyal subjects? This question resonates beyond Meiji Japan, echoing in societies worldwide as they grapple with balancing tradition and modernity.
Ultimately, Japan’s experience demonstrates that education is never neutral. It is a battleground for competing visions of identity, power, and social order. Understanding this history deepens our appreciation for the complex processes through which nations shape their futures by deciding what kind of people they seek to create.