儒學墨學論戰與非孝論、鄉土文學是日治時期反傳統思維的一環，各文化層面都可發現新舊紛陳的現象，衝擊既有的文化體制，儒學、墨學論戰可視為傳統文人對新文化挑戰的一種回應。日治時期儒墨論述的調和論者認為在東洋文化衝擊的紛爭時代，當打破「獨尊儒學」的窠臼才能截長補短，提昇社會的思想文化；墨學批判者主張「西學東漸之今日」宜固守儒學，二派對學問優先次序的主張不同。墨學「兼愛」與儒學「仁學」的差異更是造成儒墨論戰的問題核心。反對派力主傳統儒學，並痛斥墨學，而支持派則主張「儒墨並尊」才足以因應時代的需要。日治時期墨辯雙方對時局都充滿使命感，但因所持「問題意識」的差異，故對墨學思想的接受度出現截然不同的學術態度。藉此詮釋可釐清台灣傳統思想的不同面向，建構更為多元的台灣文化研究。

The debates on Mohism and Confucianism were part of the anti-traditional thoughts during the Japanese occupation, which can be seen as the reflection of the traditional academics’ challenge against the new culture. During the Japanese occupation, the blending-theory-pros suggested that in a troubled era under the Japanese impact, we should break the traditional restrain of “To-Honor-Confucianism-Solely,” thus the social culture could be elevated; whereas, the Mohism critics insisted on defending Confucianism. The two different mindsets on academic priority had two debate cores: the Mohist idea of “CHIEN AI (generosity)” and the Confucian idea of “JEN HSIAO (study of benevolence).” This paper is intended to interpret the different dimensions and directions of the traditional Taiwanese thoughts and to constitute a multi-dimensional Taiwanese culture study.