By emphasizing the importance of the individual and their inner transformation, Ikeda does not imply an extreme sense of individualism focused on one’s own self-interest. In fact, Ikeda (in Garrison, et al., 2014) argues that:
Individualism has the negative aspect of overstressing individual rights to the point of weakening communal bodies, in which people should cooperate and collaborate. This tendency is becoming increasingly conspicuous in society today. And this is what makes education so important – when it fosters an open mind and thus enables us to humbly learn from one another’s differences and create new value. (p. 216)
He further explains that the Eastern notion of individualism is different from the Western concept of individualism. Whereas the Western thought promotes a separate and independent entity as the idea of the individual, the Eastern perception portrays an interdependent view. As such, Ikeda makes this point by demonstrating how the Chinese character “person” (人、ren) is written. This character is formed from two lines, or sticks, that lean against each other. It illustrates “two people leaning on each other…two people facing one another, two people communicating with each other, two people who love each other. The implication is that there is no such thing as an isolated individual” (2010a, p. 211). Elsewhere, Ikeda (2015) further explains that the Chinese character “human” ( 人 間 、 ningen) is composed of two characters which literally reads “in between people,” implying that humans exist and develop into richer individuals with and by others.
If human revolution is a process that makes us fully human, than, it is human interaction and communication that also makes us fully human. Ikeda (in Marinoff & Ikeda, 2012) explains that an absence of human interaction, “can only lead to breakdown on both the individual and the larger social level.” (Marinoff & Ikeda, p. 49). He further makes his argument using
Rabindranath Tagore that, “the human being loses sight of the self when existing in isolation; that is, the human being finds a larger and truer self in the context of many human relationships” (Marinoff & Ikeda, 2012, p. 50).
American philosopher John Dewey (1916/1944) also spoke against isolated individualism and argued that the individual cannot be separated from society:
Given feelings, ideas, desires, which have nothing to do with one another, how can actions proceeding from them be controlled in a social or public interest? Given an egoistic consciousness, how can action which has regard for others take place? (p. 297) Highlighting Dewey’s (1925-1953) position on the individual, Garrison (2010) describes the difference between individuals who are self-actualized in relation with others and those who are self-actualized in isolation from others. Garrison argues, “The problem with selfish self- actualization is that it tends to cut emergent individuals off from the connections with others necessary to growth” (p. 46). Referring to both Ikeda and Dewey, Garrison concludes, “Individuals are contingent social constructions. Hence, self-actualization and creative self- expression are social functions requiring otherness and difference in a pluralistic democratic community” (p. 46). If there’s too much emphasis on the individual, then the notion of individualism can fall short and become egoism.
Thus, Ikeda offers Dewey’s suggestion that the, “development of a wholesome society must rest on the formation of a new individualism [that] is constantly aware of the existence of others, faces the challenge of social reform, and strives to create oneself anew” (Garrison, et al., 2014, pp. 224-225). Much like Dewey, Ikeda envisions a social self-actualization, or the full realization of the individual through engagement with others. He argues that individuals “can only become fully realized through interaction with others” (p. 68). For Ikeda, human beings are
dependent social beings and in order for each one of us to undergo our human revolution, or inner transformation, he believes interacting and engaging with others is a prerequisite.
Ikeda also sees the powerful change an individual can bring forth to society through this practice. He argues that human revolution can lead to a societal and planetary revolution; and, the inner transformation of the spirit becomes the catalyst for peaceful society (Ikeda & Zgurovsky, 2011). He believes a human revolution in each person can lead to overcoming the challenges to global civilization, but, he sees both the personal and social transformation equally important. Even if humankind did not face global challenges, Ikeda would still argue the need for human revolution in each individual because his focus is on each person and their happiness. The human being is the aim and the development of the human being is also the aim. For Ikeda, each focus is not a tool or the negotiable means to attain something. On the contrary, he treats each focus as the aim.
Ikeda’s emphasis on the dignity of life and the importance of harmonious coexistence with one another stems from his non-dualistic Buddhist view of life. Because we coexist, Ikeda suggests that we can mutually benefit from and live enriching lives by valuing the dignity of life, working on our self-development, and fostering the three essential qualities of wisdom, courage, and compassion. His focus on inner transformation and global citizenship informs his belief in the penultimate value of education and specifically human education. Accordingly, Ikeda (2007) argues that, “the focus of Soka education is in actualizing human revolution in oneself and others” (p.105).
This human education environment that Soka education seeks to continuously foster describes what Dewey would imagine as “democratic faith in human equality” (Dewey, LW 14, p. 226, in Garrison, 2010). Garrison carefully distinguishes Dewey’s notion of human equality
from other notions of equality that promotes sameness. He argues that Dewey’s concept of human equality refers to moral equality and equal opportunity for each individual to bring out their innate and creative possibilities and, furthermore, so that they can make their own unique contribution to society. This mirrors Ikeda’s notion of human education. In sharp contrast, Garrison states that our modern education system is a mis-education that focuses heavily on standardization, quantitative results, and rigid curriculum that take away from the human equality that Dewey feels is lost. Garrison further argues that in contrast to modern feudalism which “fails to recognize genuine, value-creating individuality and individual human revolution, Soka education challenges such forms of feudalism whether found in the West or the East” and seeks to create an educative environment for genuine human education and character development (p. 46).