Some scholars criticised Sorai's work and found his teaching was impractical. Goi Ranshū believed that Sorai was motivated to surpass Itō Jinsai, another leading Confucianist. Goi thought that Sorai had used Itō's arguments to the level of absurdity. Goi felt that Sorai's teachings would cause a lot of damage to moral philosophy if they were followed. Another scholar critical of Sorai's teachings was Nakai Chikuzan, who was also familiar with Goi's opposition to Ogyū Sorai. Goi wrote his opposition to Sorai in his essay "Hi-Butsu hen". This essay was written in the 1730s, but not published until 1766. The published essay had been edited by Chikuzan and his brother. Nakai later wrote his own, highly emotional, response to Sorai's beliefs in his work "Hi-Chō" (1785). In this work he rejected the idea that individuals could not improve themselves through moral choices. He also claimed individuals were able judge if external ideas and actions were true or just. Denial of these morals, he felt, would leave only "rites and rules" to be followed.