How did World War II lead Japanese philosophers to reconsider nationalism and militarism?

The end of World War II provided Japanese philosophers with newfound freedom of thought, allowing them to critically reflect on the role their discipline played in the rise of wartime ultranationalism and militarism. During the war, some philosophers had endorsed these ideologies, while others had opposed or ignored them.1

A prominent example of this postwar reckoning is found in the work of Tanabe Hajime of the Kyoto school. In the 1930s, Tanabe’s "logic of the specific" had been used to support Japanese nationalism by prioritizing the interests of the nation over the individual. Following the war, Tanabe rejected this interpretation and developed the theory of "metanoia" (zange), or repentance. He argued that because no intellectual system can be absolute, responsible philosophy must contain a "metanoetic" dynamic to prevent any ideology from being treated as an absolute or universal truth.1

This period of reflection was essential for moving beyond the wartime context, as philosophers sought to develop insights suitable for a global perspective rather than a monocultural one.1