Kaiho Seiryō (1755-1817), a samurai intellectual taught under Ogyū Sorai's classical Confucian learning, did not abandon his Confucian philosophy and completely embrace the economic thought of the merchants after traveling the country and recognizing the power of self-interest in generating creative problem-solving and creating new wealth. Rather, he synthesized these two ways of thinking and in so doing brought together the values and objectives of the merchant and samurai classes.
Many scholars focus on the radical discontinuity of Seiryō’s thought with the traditional Confucian precept of renouncing profit. While Sorai believed that the merchants were the thieves of the of the wealth that was created by the farmers, Seiryō believed that the merchants' labor simply relied more on intellectual creativity than physical labor and that they made their profits legitimately, as they were providing an essential service. As he recognized that there was the potential for merchant abuse through the establishment of monopoly and oligopoly, Seiryō encouraged the government to become a merchant itself, buying and selling products based on profit, based on the greatest need and demand for that product. Instead of focusing on the predatory merchants, Seiryō focused on Sorai's observations about the parasitic samurai, who were living luxuriously without working much, often providing only guard duty.
Upon closer observation, however, Seiryō’s objectives and the practical means through which to achieve them were quite similar to Sorai’s. Sorai and Seiryō wrote for the same goal of guaranteeing comfort and peace to all, and they both agreed that the most effective means to this end would be maintaining social order and ensuring material comfort through proper government. As they both believed in principle and an inner human nature that was unchangeable, they encouraged government to alter itself to be non-coercive toward its people and to give rank based on merit in order to increase prosperity and fully manifest the population’s inner virtue.
The key difference between Sorai and Seiryō, however, was that Sorai strongly doubted the ability of humans to correctly identify this cosmic principle apart from the historical norms of their day. Denying the ability of an individual to calculate objective truths for his own self-benefit, Sorai followed the conventional Confucian belief that altruistic self-sacrifice to the community would be in the individual's long-term interest, even if he could not understand how. Sorai encouraged the government to actively discourage the self-interested way of thinking of the merchants, as nobody could recognize the ultimate rewards of obedience and selfless contribution to the whole. Observing the manipulative relationships established by the merchants and believing that the rest of the people were too ignorant to avoid such relationships, Sorai doubted that one’s own economic profit coincided completely with the profit of society as a whole, relying on government intervention to punish self-interested pursuits that were at the expense of others.
Seiryō, understanding that the incredible wealth accrued by the merchants was not an unjust result of the unrestrained economy but resulted from their self-serving ingenuity, believed that if the government could structure society and education in such a way as to force the commoners to work for their own profit, they would eventually learn to avoid all exploitative relationships, which would inevitably result in the maximization of society’s profit. Believing that individuals could attain right judgment, Seiryō expanded upon Sorai’s ideas of reforming government and hiring talent outside of status by encouraging a completely voluntary and market-based society based on mutual benefit and rational selection. To validate this proposal, Seiryō had to trust the commoners to make economic decisions in their own long-term interest through careful calculation.
Sorai, writing to samurai intellectuals during the decadent Genroku period, emphasized the importance of changing the luxurious habits of the samurai class, which would allow the virtuous example of the ruler to diffuse to the people below. This could be achieved through slow reform and change, which would allow people to be utilized based on their inner virtue but would not create any social disorder or insecurity regarding one’s position, which would hinder prosperity. Sorai also mentioned the necessity of material comfort in ensuring social order and prosperity, recommending that the government take an active role in managing finances. Seiryō encouraged this type of budgeting and profit calculation even among the commoners, believing it would lead to the ultimate kokueki goal of increasing products and wealth in the domain, regardless of where it was distributed. Seiryō, writing to the merchants and commoners as well, emphasized the importance of personal effort and creative problem-solving in discovering new methods to create wealth, observing that the merchants and commoners were leading this practical development due to their self-interested motivations. Seiryō believed that channeling the power of this profit motivation rather than smothering it could effectively lead to the full manifestation of the people’s inner virtue and ingenuity and ultimately a leveling of status between states and within society, as unjust social arrangements would cease to form if everyone correctly understood the means to their long-term spiritual and material comfort, and were given the freedom to choose this course. Seiryō utilized Sorai’s ideas of non-coercive benevolent government to call for a radical and proactive reform of society, believing that government guidance could channel the incentive-driven nature of humans for the benefit of society.
Principle
First of all, Sorai accepted the general concept of an underlying cosmic principle that determined human nature regardless of historical circumstances. He made this clear when he stated that “Principle is in all things”[1]. Seiryō shared this belief, stating that “In the first place, Heaven and Earth conform to principle”[2]. Najita had incorrectly determined that Seiryō held a belief in cosmic principle independently of Sorai when he stated that “To Kaiho [Seiryō] norms were not simply of the social world, but were anchored to a cosmic, universal, principle, ri, a concept, basic to Neo-Confucianism, which Ogyū [Sorai] and Dazai [Shundai] had rejected”[3]. This was a misunderstanding which stemmed from Sorai’s belief that “the idea of ‘universal principle’ has no form and thus is not a fixed norm”[4]. While still believing in a universal principle and an inborn human nature that influenced social norms, he merely denied that this principle set out a fixed way to live and govern for everybody regardless of time, place, and circumstance.
In actuality, Sorai did believe that a cosmic principle altered the social norms of the day, merely rejecting the Neo-Confucianist claims that one could become sufficiently unbiased enough to separate and evaluate this principle apart from one’s circumstances. Sorai believed that because “Each person determines what should be observed and excludes what is not necessary…they observe the same object in different ways”[5]. As a result of this doubt, along with his belief that “Only the [Ancient] Sages, in short, are capable of investigating the principle in things”[6], Sorai relied heavily on a government modeled on the Ancient Sages’ example to guide the people toward prosperity by acting in their best interests, regardless of the people’s own short-sighted desires.
As Sorai believed that the underlying principle that determined human nature had been most accurately understood by the Ancient Sages, he thought that the correct Way to govern and to maintain peace was fundamentally unchanged from the time of the Ancient Sages. This Way of governance held that “there is no such thing as the Way apart from rites, music, law-enforcement, and political administration”[7]. As a result of his conception of principle, however, Sorai did not encourage an exact replication of the Ancient Sages’ methods but accepted that the specific means of conveying these regulations to the people had to be formed around the biases and inner natures of the people. Seiryō also encouraged the government to guide the people in these ways. While Seiryō’s disdain for ancient rituals and customs seemed to depart from Sorai’s devoutness to the ancients, in actuality they both supported changing these rituals in order to express a clear message to the people.
Living in Accord with the Mean and Inner Virtue
These government institutions were meant to bring out the people’s inborn and unchangeable nature. According to Sorai and Seiryō, “One’s inborn nature is endowed by Heaven and produced by one’s own father and mother”[8]. They believed that this human nature was biological and therefore unmovable. Government could not change a human’s natural inclinations, “nor can an individual through intense personal cultivation fundamentally alter his virtue from one thing to another”[9]. Due to the fact that a person’s nature was determined at birth and could not be changed, they believed that the government’s “forcing people to be what they are not is most unreasonable”[10]. They believed that the government had to allow the people to pursue their talents based on the individual’s own motivation to attain comfort. In this way, the people would be obedient to the benevolent government.
Both Sorai and Seiryō also believed that the government had to bring out the potential strength of the people in order to ensure material wealth and ultimately social order and contentment. Sorai believed that “A system that destroys ‘evil’ in accordance with a simplified concept of the ‘good,’ but which cares not for the littlest human virtue is to be deemed ineffectual”[11]. Sorai and Seiryō both believed that channeling the people’s inner virtue was necessary for a harmonious, comfortable, and prosperous society. Seiryō believed that government had to create the circumstances in which “those both above and below will not suffer…To pursue the middle way is the principle of Heaven”[12]. To pursue the middle way meant to live and govern according to the mean. Sorai stated that “The so-called mean is the virtue that defines one’s inner nature”[13]. Essentially, they believed that living within the mean meant to live in accord with one’s inner nature. As motivation and work ethic were derived from one’s inner virtues and could not be extracted coercively, “The objective in each person, Sorai therefore insisted, was to identify with his own heaven-given nature and work consistently toward realizing the potential within it”[14].
If the government could non-coercively bring out the people’s inner virtue, this virtue would become manifest in actual performance and achievement. Sorai reiterated the inseparability of virtue and actual practice by stating that “Virtue means achievement”[15]. Clearly, if one’s inner virtue was pursued, virtuous action would inevitably result, and therefore one could measure the value of an individual in society based on his actual contribution and work. Seiryō took this concept to its extreme by adopting the belief that “Work was synonymous with benevolence or humanness and was shaped by the knowledge of precision.”[16].
As Seiryō equated work with inner virtue and benevolence, he was able to evaluate a human’s worth based on his actual actions, yet this would only hold true under a non-coercive and benevolent government. For Seiryō, the mean “was not about self and inner goodness but about how humans realized specific objectives in everyday practice”[17]. Seiryō expressed his sentiments when he stated that “[Someone who has got enough food while aimlessly enjoying himself from morning to evening eats without any reason for him to be able to do so”[18]. A human did not have value simply because he was a human. Ansart observed that “Seiryō has clearly no notion of a human dignity that would be attached to all biological humans by virtue of their physical constitution and independently of the practical skills they could display”[19]. Humans were judged solely based on their contribution to social relationships. The amount of virtue that one possessed, which could be translated into actual achievement, would determine the value of a person’s work in the marketplace.
This only held true, however, when the configuration of society and government was correct and allowed for freedom in choosing one’s work based on inner virtue. If this were true, a person’s value could be measured based on their contribution to society as a whole. Seiryō had determined that the value of a human was the measure of his inner virtue, which could become manifest through action in a properly configured society. This contradicts Ansart, who stated that “for Seiryō, being able to become a merchandise—and preferably a pricy one—could well be, the Son of Heaven excepted, the hallmark of humanity”[20]. This would only hold true for Seiryō in a perfectly managed society, yet it was a relatively accurate conclusion as society generally operated under just principles.
The Mutability of Position and Status
Yet Sorai and Seiryō were both interested in making government completely just and benevolent, which involved assigning work based on inner nature. To achieve this, both believed in the flexibility of status constraints in hiring talented people, as one’s skill in a task was based on one’s inner virtue. Sorai stated that “A court’s lacking talented individuals willing to serve…results from the court’s not employing them. It is understandable that in ages wanting in good people, the worthy and talented sink into the lower ranks or are lost among the general population”[21]. Sorai acknowledged that even a commoner’s talent should be utilized if his work potential was unmatched among the samurai. Sorai believed that “the able must be promoted and the inept demoted”[22] to keep the talent within the government, which would legitimize government rule. As “the prince extends downward his virtue to the vast populace”[23], getting the right people to work for the government would be beneficial to the people as they would adopt the leaders’ virtuous examples.
Seiryō also expressed the idea that position and status should be based on performance, stating “That someone has distinguished himself in a certain office means that this office suited his personality and wisdom well. To rob him of this place where he fitted in well and move him to a place he is not at all used to, is a bungling [way of doing things]”[24]. Seiryō took this even further in his idea of assigning rank based on one’s wealth, which would force the rich to use their resources in service to the government. While Seiryō may have radicalized Sorai’s idea of assigning position based on talent, it was wrong to conclude that “he ends up rejecting two millenniums [sic] of Confucian tradition that viewed social relationships as an immutable given, in which humans were inserted at birth and where they found all the actions, goods and practices they had to do, own and perform”[25]. Ansart failed to recognize that competing philosophies had already shaken many Confucianists’ belief in the rigidity of status even by the time of Sorai, and in Sorai’s practical advice for government he encouraged the promotion of talent for the sake of efficiency.
Rational Government Reform
In this way, Sorai began the pervasive trend of disregarding status considerations in hiring talent and reforming government, which would create a strong and benevolent government that utilized its people according to their inner virtue through accountability and competition. Sorai and Seiryō both recognized that the government had to adapt its laws and regulations to changing circumstances, but they disagreed on the extent of the reforms that were necessary. While Sorai thought that government should make slight adjustments to its rule, such as hiring talent outside of status, he emphasized that the short-sightedness of contemporary rulers meant that reform should be pursued slowly if at all. Sorai also discouraged radical change or reform because he understood that the people’s sense of security in their place in society was paramount to social harmony and prosperity. “People are comfortable with what they are used to”[26]. Sorai understood that new policies would be feared by the people, and he believed this fear would prevent the people from focusing completely on their work. Ultimately, Sorai believed that extensive reform was never necessary because institutions of the past had been upheld due to the wisdom of previous rulers, stating that “Your changing the old laws and creating new ones in this province passed on to you by your ancestors would be an abuse of your freedom. You would not be revering your ancestors”[27].
Sorai and Seiryō both agreed that the government had to be proactive in order to bring out the people’s inner virtue. Seiryō emphasized the importance of putting all members of society to work when he stated that “If it ever eventuates that a territory’s people all put their hands and feet to work [in order to] earn their clothing and food, a country cannot but prosper considerably”[28]. As the samurai class produced the least, consumed the most, and put the biggest strain on domain finances, Seiryō’s first goal was to transform the samurai into “entrepreneurs actively involved in mobilizing the resources of their territories to raise the welfare of all”[29]. Seiryō believed that the government could operate as a large investment company that used its wealth to buy cheap abundant commodities and sell expensive scarce commodities, which would not only reinforce material fulfillment but would also prevent the merchants from overly profiting due to unjust business practices, such as monopoly and price-fixing. This was an outgrowth of one of Sorai’s recommendations, which “urged the bakufu to requisition all goods…directly from producers”[30]. Instead of encouraging government monopsony due to an extreme hatred of the merchant class, Seiryō merely wanted government to provide an alternative to manipulative merchant relationships if it could be profitable. Seiryō gives another practical example of putting the samurai to work in his proposal to create the “Privy Council Award,” which would force the samurai to craft weapons and would reward them based on their performance[31].
Seiryō believed that the ruling class would never become productive unless it was required of them. He expressed this when he observed that the samurai believed that “they are called forth since it is their due to be called forth…one has to cultivate [the retainers] in such a way that they have lively hearts”[32]. Sorai generally trusted the higher authorities to act in the people’s best interests, and emphasized that the people should have faith that the government was acting in their best interests for the sake of social order. Seiryō recognized that an exploitative relationship would inevitably result unless there was a pressing need for government officials to work in the long-term interests of the people. Seiryō proposed that “It would be better if…one received [something] after knowing the reason [why it was given]”[33] in order to cultivate the belief that rewards and privileges were not given for hereditary reasons regardless of one’s performance. Otherwise, “Heaven will afflict [this person] with atrophy”[34]. Seiryō believed that it was human nature to be lazy and unproductive unless acquiring merit and skill was necessary to guarantee their comfort[35].
In addition, Seiryō also emphasized the effectiveness of channeling humans’ naturally self-interested biases in order to stimulate production, which could be achieved by allowing them to keep their products and profit from them. Seiryō believed that “If the people do not reap profit, their interests will not be aroused…if the people are not interested, not many things will be produced”[36]. Seiryō, addressing himself to merchants and commoners, believed that the foundations of government rested on channeling the incredible power of profit motivation for the benefit of society. He believed that “leaving the people what they had produced and [still] amassing enough money, was a skilful [method] of raising profit”[37]. If everyone acted in their own self-interest and learned strategies through observation and active reason, there would be a leveling of wealth between states and among the social classes because manipulative relationships which unjustly distribute wealth would be avoided.
To bring out the most inner strength, Seiryō believed that the government had to create institutions which would allow the commoners to work for their own just profit. As he believed that “An association [of mutual trust] is a method of saving and earning money”[38], he encouraged the government to set up these institutions for the people. These cooperatives would allow the commoners to constructively take an interest in their profit by “calling on merchant leaders to mobilize and manage them”[39]. Originally, the ko’s primary function was to be security for the members, but Seiryō believed that it could also be a profit-making institution and a source of credit for its members. The ko was to be an alliance of commoner capital with the merchants’ savvy in investing and profit-raising. Organizing these would allow the commoners to work for their own profit while still focusing on their jobs. If the commoners could be organized correctly, far-sighted plans for their long-term profit could be formulated by merchant leaders, which would lead to an increased motivation to work among the commoners if they could see the effects of increased effort on their wealth and material comfort.
While the government had to give the people a certain amount of freedom of choice in determining their actions, neither Sorai nor Seiryō believed that getting rid of government would be in the interest of society. Sorai stated that “because the general population is stupid…the people will not realize that an order or regulation is ‘for their benefit’ until much later”[40]. Sorai emphasized that the people’s lack of wisdom prevented them from seeing beyond immediate desire and comfort. Seiryō also doubted that the majority of people would make decisions in the interest of their long-term profit, so government had to be there to force them to in some cases. As “What is praised by the people often are laws that will cause them trouble eventually”[41], a self-regulating society would not take long term concerns into account. For the government, “allowing them [the people] to do as they please…is lesser benevolence only…it is good that the people work”[42]. Government was necessary to ensure that the people maintained a good work ethic, or else luxurious habits would increase and prosperity could not be sustained.
Order could be maintained regardless of selfish profit motivation if a society’s laws and institutions tied self-profit and material comfort directly to one’s contribution to the social good, which could usually be determined based on an individual’s contribution of new products and wealth. Seiryō reasoned that if the state punished crime correctly and consistently, it would no longer be profitable to commit crime, so crime would disappear; otherwise, “the realm would turn into willfulness and lose its [harmonious] order”[43]. Seiryō disdained the samurai’s disrespect of the law because it engendered disrespect for the law among the commoners, stating that “to borrow money from a merchant house and not to return it is very shameful”[44]. If a government did not punish according to the law, it showed that the laws were fundamentally unjust. Taking from Legalism, if the punishments were overly harsh, it would discourage crime even more. This is an essential difference with Sorai, who believed in a government that would deal with criminals through compromise based on the specific circumstances. Sorai believed that “if laws are merely examined and never enforced and if those who enforce them are bad, laws will not be of any use whatsoever”[45]. Sorai believed that law could not be formulated perfectly, and as a result he tied the effectiveness of law directly to the benevolence of the ministers. He believed that if laws were overly harsh and rigid, the people would be fearful, and “If you encourage the people to be fearful, the laws will stand no chance of being implemented”[46]. He also believed that “people do not become very involved with their work and worry chiefly about hiding things from their superiors. And it is precisely because people are so cautious that their talent does not appear”[47]. With too harsh of laws, the fear of the people would stifle their inner talent and virtue. Nevertheless, they both agreed that the laws had to allow for the free pursuit of the people’s inner motivations and virtue.
Kokueki Thought
While it could be said that Seiryō “stood the Confucian verities on their heads and turned the proper management of profit into a public activity of the highest order”[48], when examining the sphere of government administration, his idea that a primary goal of government should be the bolstering of material wealth echoed the practical teachings of Sorai. Sorai expressed his utmost concern with economics when he stated that “The fundamental policy in governing the state and the world should first of all be to increase the wealth”[49]. Ultimately, Sorai encouraged material prosperity in the interest of social order and peace, observing that “It is clear in every case in history that the transition from a state of peaceful rule to one of civil war has come about because of the impoverishment of society, and for this reason the basis of all government consists in ensuring before all else that the country shall have ample wealth”[50]. Another idea that reinforced Sorai’s ultimate praise of profit was the observation that “The most vigorous denunciations of the pursuit of profit were invariably accompanied by the perception that virtue would, ultimately, be rewarded”[51]. Yet, because the people could not see objective truth or measure the effects of their actions on actual profit, “Making profit a priority” would not lead to “profound and far-sighted conceptions”[52], and would ultimately harm the material prosperity of the realm. In his utmost concern for material and economic issues, Sorai was a progenitor of kokueki morality, which held the maximization of net wealth as the primary pursuit of all members of society.
This maximization of wealth, which partly relied on the development of practical work skills, primarily relied on social order and cooperation, as Sorai had believed. Seiryō expressed his complete belief in kokueki when he stated that “It does not make any difference if those below profit [from it] or those above. One should be aware that to [make] the ground yield a lot of products is the strategy of bringing prosperity to the state”[53]. Yet this material wealth was closely tied to social harmony, and “many emphasized that without the guiding force of morality all the wealth in the world would not rule a country”[54]. Seiryō agreed, as the luxurious habits of well-off people took away from their work ethic, making them less valuable. For kokueki thinkers, however, morality was tied only to its actual effects on productivity. Seiryō justified this ultimate goal of material profit by stating that “this is an age, in which [people] in other countries immediately will start [making a profit] and [thus] cause a loss for one’s own country”[55]. He believed that losses should be avoided if it was possible. As “Real profit leads the world, says Seiryō”[56], having an interest in profit would be the only way for states to ensure the contentment of the populace, as the people would be envious if there were others who had more wealth and an easier way of life.
While Sorai may not have agreed with kokueki morality’s ultimate goal of the maximization of wealth within the domain, he believed that consistent wealth could only be acquired through social harmony, cooperation, and the discouragement of selfish profit motivation, which would guarantee the smooth and efficient operation of established techniques and procedures. Seiryō, on the other hand, believed that profit motivation should be encouraged because it engendered an ambitious spirit that allowed for creative problem solving and the development of new techniques that increased wealth and efficiency in an original way.
Seiryō recognized that if people always pursued what was in their self-interest in creating and maintaining relationships, there would be an increased accountability on both sides of the relationship and both parties would recognize the obligations that they needed to fulfill. For Seiryō, “profit will not come as the happy by-product of virtuous, non-profit seeking, attitude. Profit will only come from careful, self-interested calculations”[57]. Only through calculation and freedom to act in one’s self interest could mutually beneficial relationships be maintained in business as well as in politics. Seiryō believed that this unqualified selflessness was immoral because it led to a lack of accountability which ultimately led to “parasitic” relationships or “fruitless effort”[58] that lowered productivity.
Self-Cultivation in Viewing Objective Principles
Seiryō, however, believing in the accurate calculation and measurability of the objective world, endorsed the Buddhist concept that one could achieve correct judgment through self-cultivation and could therefore calculate real, long-term profit. Seiryō inherited this idea from “the Chu Hsi [Neo-Confucian] concept of ‘investigating the principles of particulars to comprehend the principles of the universe’”[59]. One could understand cosmic principle through observation and experimentation within the actual world, but first a person had to transcend the biases of his position in society and history. For one “To gain objectivity, Seiryō reasoned, one first must leave one’s place of birth and upbringing, then also one’s status, and finally one’s very self”[60]. He emphasized the importance of eclectic experience and understanding others’ perspectives in attaining this objective perspective.
This emphasis on cultivating oneself as a way to see truth allowed Seiryō to claim that cosmic principle could be understood through actual practice and active reasoning, but this method of examining the real world to practically solve problems had already been endorsed by Sorai. In the 1700s, as “Ethics were seen increasingly in terms of their function in the present”[61], both samurai and commoners began looking for practical methods to solve their own specific problems. This movement had begun with Sorai, who emphasized practice and the examination of the real world due to his disdain for the concept of trying to comprehend heavenly principles that were outside of the material world. In light of this, Sorai emphasized the importance of studying “what is [sein]” before one could study “what ought to be [sollen]”[62]. Sorai and Seiryō both believed in examining the institutions of the past and the present to have a reasonable basis in predicting and altering the future for the benefit of society, yet Seiryō emphasized the importance of positive change in altering society’s course.
All Relationships, Even in Politics, should be Voluntary
Due to their beliefs that people should be utilized according to their talent, it was only natural that neither of them believed in the continual legitimacy of a political regime based simply on its historical existence, instead believing that only benevolent governments would be continually stable and ordered. Seiryō believed that “political systems were not sacrosanct, but were made and could therefore be unmade. This pragmatic perception of politics was derived from the ideas of Ogyū Sorai”[63]. Seiryō expressed this when he stated that “the [relationship between] lord and retainer [is based on] the ways of the market from ancient times”[64]. Even though Seiryō did not undermine Tokugawa authority explicitly, he advanced this way of thinking because “From contending that [the relation of] lord and retainer is not [based on] selling and buying a lot of parasitism and fruitless efforts have resulted”[65]. Seiryō believed that if humans could rationally select all of their relationships, unjust profits could never be extracted. Radicalizing the idea that the government had to respect the people’s inner motivations to rule benevolently, Seiryō believed that under benevolent government all relationships would be voluntary contracts that were free of forceful coercion, even between leader and subject.
Conclusion
Seiryō believed in the pursuit of self interest because he believed that this was the most effective means of increasing the wealth of the realm. He had adopted the kokueki thought of the merchants which posited that the government’s primary pursuit should be the maximization of products in the realm, as material comfort was the first requirement in maintaining social harmony. This was the foundation of the morality of such thinkers as Ninomiya Sontoku, although Seiryō’s advice was almost exclusively directed toward government in his Keiko-dan. Writing from the perspective of his samurai upbringing and his Sorai School learning, he emphasized the critical role of government in providing the examples and institutions which would influence the dispositions of the lower populace. While Sorai emphasized the destructive and parasitic effects of self-profit mentality, Seiryō emphasized the creative and productive power of profit motivation. Seiryō believed that the government could channel this energy properly for the benefit of society through far-sighted investment and regulation which would not allow self-profit to be had at the expense of others and the community. However, he still recognized that self-profit was not tied directly to the benefit of others and the community without the existence of accountability and trust within relationships and the society. As a result, Seiryō thought that government could be beneficial if it prevented parasitic relationships from developing. Believing that parasitic relationships usually resulted from the inability of one of the parties to freely enter an agreement based on his own rational thought, Seiryō believed that a benevolent government had to decrease the number of forcefully coerced relationships within society. By stating that the movements of the natural marketplace operated under Confucian moral laws, the highest and lowest classes of society could strive for the same personal goal of self-gain without fear that their own profit would be at the expense of the collective.[1] Ogyū Sorai, Benmei 2, in Tokugawa Political Writings, ed. Tetsuo Najita (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 133.
[2] Kaiho Seiryō, “Talks about Teachings of the Past. Translation of the First Part of Kaiho Seiryō’s Keiko dan with a Short Introduction,” in Japonica Humboldtiana Band 1, trans. Michael Kinski (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1997), 162.
[3] Tetsuo Najita and Irwin Scheiner, ed, Japanese Thought in the Tokugawa Period, 1600-1868 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), 24.
[4] Ogyū Sorai, Benmei 2, 22.
[5] Ogyū Sorai, Benmei 2, 132.
[6] Ogyū Sorai, Benmei 2, 132.
[7] Ogyū Sorai, Seidan, in Early Modern Japan, Conrad Totman (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), 285.
[8] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 76.
[9] Tetsuo Najita, Tokugawa Political Writings, xxii
[10] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 76.
[11] Tetsuo Najita, Tokugawa Political Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), xxv.
[12] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 166.
[13] Ogyū Sorai, Benmei 1, 110.
[14] Tetsuo Najita, Tokugawa Political Writings, xxxv.
[15] Ogyū Sorai, Bendo, xxiii.
[16] Tetsuo Najita, Ordinary Economies in Japan: A Historical Perspective, 1750-1950 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009), 55.
[17] Tetsuo Najita, Ordinary Economies, 53.
[18] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 164.
[19] Olivier Ansart, “Human Being,” 82.
[20] Olivier Ansart, “Human Being,” 79.
[21] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 57.
[22] Conrad Totman, Early Modern Japan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), 289.
[23] Ogyū Sorai, Benmei 1, 112.
[24] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 3, 136.
[25] Olivier Ansart, “Human Being,” 79-80.
[26] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 70.
[27] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 69.
[28] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 2, 98-9.
[29] Michael Kinski, Introduction to Keiko dan 2, 65.
[30] Conrad Totman, Early Modern Japan, 289.
[31] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 3, 116-8.
[32] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 3, 127.
[33] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 3, 106.
[34] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 3, 124.
[35] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 3, 129.
[36] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 2, 87.
[37] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 2, 74.
[38] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 2, 89.
[39] Tetsuo Najita, Ordinary Economies, 78.
[40] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 74.
[41] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 169.
[42] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 167.
[43] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 165.
[44] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 191.
[45] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 55.
[46] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 72.
[47] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 58.
[48] Luke Roberts, Mercantilism in a Japanese Domain (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 200.
[49] Ogyū, Sorai, Seidan, in Studies in the Intellectual History of Tokugawa Japan, by Masao Maruyama (Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1974), 131.
[50] Ogyū, Sorai, Seidan, in Early Modern Japan, by Conrad Totman (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), 287.
[51] Olivier Ansart, “Human Being,” 76.
[52] Ogyū Sorai, Responsals, 68.
[53] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 168.
[54] Luke Roberts, Mercantilism, 148.
[55] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 2, 114.
[56] Olivier Ansart, “Human Being,” 78.
[57] Olivier Ansart, “Human Being,” 77.
[58] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 160.
[59] Masao Maruyama, Intellectual History, 13.
[60] Tetsuo Najita, Ordinary Economies, 51.
[61] Tetsuo Najita, Japanese Thought, 21.
[62] Masao Maruyama, Intellectual History, 76.
[63] Tetsuo Najita, Japanese Thought, 17.
[64] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 160.
[65] Kaiho Seiryō, Keiko dan 1, 160.
