Agree with my definition of 'warrior spirit' or disagree....

[Cruentus]

We were having a bit of trouble trying to define warrior spirit in a different thread.

Here is my definition:

I believe that a "Warrior" spirit is the inner drive to preserve ourselves, our families, our morals/beliefs, and our way of life.

Agree or disagree!

:asian:

[Cruentus]

and if you disagree, please offer an alternative definition for us as a suggestion!

Thanks!

:)

[loki09789]

"will to survive, thirst for challenge, or strength to stand for a cause."

Subtle difference, but it is different.

I am not into preservation because it connotes things staying the same. I am all for survival so progress can happen.

Thirst for challenge can be educational, experiential... anything that pushes us to some limit.

strength to stand for a cause is similar to the presented definition.

Paul M.

[Cruentus]

O.K.

What is the difference between survival and "self preservation"?

Also, with your modified definition, how does "family" "morals/belief" and "way of life" fir in, if at all?

:cool:

[Black Bear]

I like PAUL's fine, except that I'd put something in there specifically about the willingness to use force or violence when these things are threatened. That seems to be a part of what we mean by warrior spirit.

I'm not sure how that definition would look like.

I kind of felt like I have no idea what ppl mean by "warrior spirit", like it's just some vague idea. But I like Paul's defn.

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by Black Bear

I'm not sure how that definition would look like.



Maybe add "by any means nessicary." at the end of the definition.

:D

[Tgace]

To me "warriorship" involves so many things I have a hard time distilling it into a definition. This article in the NCO Journal (USArmy) is a good source and is what one of the modern "warrior socities" views as the "warrior spirit".

http://www.usarc.army.mil/100thdiv/xxi/spirit1.htm

[Makalakumu]

Originally posted by PAUL
We were having a bit of trouble trying to define warrior spirit in a different thread.

Here is my definition:

I believe that a "Warrior" spirit is the inner drive to preserve ourselves, our families, our morals/beliefs, and our way of life.

Agree or disagree!

:asian:

I think the root of this statement is "the ability to reject those not of our tribe."

The heart of humanity is xenophobia and I think this is imprinted into everysingle one of our cells. Time is changing this definition as homo sapians becomes a global organism. We are evolving. Hence the disagreement and general confusion regarding this concept.

[pesilat]

I believe that a "Warrior" spirit is the inner drive to preserve ourselves, our families, our morals/beliefs, and our way of life.

I agree - but think that's only part of it.

Not only the inner drive to preserve but also the inner drive to persevere. The willingness to fight and overcome any obstacle. The inability to quit - though a tactical retreat (to gain some sort of leverage) is sometimes warranted. And wisdom to know determine what is worth fighting for and what isn't.

My dad was the embodiment of what I consider the warrior spirit after his stroke a few years ago. The doctor told him, "You'll be in the hospital for 4 weeks going through rehab. When you leave, you'll probably still be in a wheelchair but might be on a walker. Keep up the rehab on your own and you'll probably get to a cane at some point - may even eventually not need the cane."

Dad said, "Nope. I'll walk out of the hospital without aid and I'll drive home."

Doctor said, "Sorry, Mr. Casto, that's not going to happen."

Dad said, "Hide and watch."

Four weeks later, they took him to the doors in a wheelchair - hospital policy - where he stood and walked unassisted to the car. It took him a couple of days to get to the point where he could drive - but the doctor was dumbfounded. Dad made front page of the local paper. He still walks with a pretty good limp, his left hand sometimes twitches oddly, and he's partially blind in his left eye - but he's considerably more functional than the doctor thought he would be.

Mike

[Rich Parsons]

Paul,

I did not vote. I disagree just ot disagree as you know me ;)

Maybe I will change the Poll to include the other options mentioned here?

Nope then people who already voted could not revote.

:asian:

[7starmantis]

I didn't vote simply because I don't see what any of this has to do with martial arts. What does someone's definition of a word or two words have to do with anyone training?

I guess I'm mising the whole "bandwagon" of using the term "Warrior Spirit".

7sm

[pesilat]

Originally posted by 7starmantis
I didn't vote simply because I don't see what any of this has to do with martial arts. What does someone's definition of a word or two words have to do with anyone training?

I guess I'm mising the whole "bandwagon" of using the term "Warrior Spirit".

7sm

In my estimation, "warrior spirit" - no matter how it's phrased - is at the core of martial arts training. Without "warrior spirit" it's hard to be a "martial" anything.

Mike

[loki09789]

"What is the difference between survival and "self preservation"?"

A banker earning millions of dollars a year who starts cheating on taxes, ENRON ring a bell, is 'preserving his way of life'

survival is persistance and perseverance, putting up with sliding up and down the quality of life scale put pushing on.

"Also, with your modified definition,"

It is only a modified definition if yours is the source definition, my definition is MY definition. Different from yours, not a modification of yours.

"how does "family" "morals/belief" and "way of life" fir in, if at all?"

Those would fall under strength to stand for a cause.

The willingness to use force, in what ever form that fits, is implied to me because:

the will to survival may manifest as violence if you have to survive an attack, or hunting if you have to survive isolation/being stranded somewhere....

thirst for challenge might include entering a boxing match or getting a PhD, either case requires the willingness to use force - force of body or mind.

Strength to stand for a cause might include going to my son's school to argue on his behalf if he is wrongly treated by teacher/student. Or, enlisting in the service to defend the Constitution of the USA

Violence is a specific form of force employment, too limited for my view of warrior 'spirit'.

Paul Martin

[Yari]

Warrior spirit is to live by a code, and really live by it.
The code is something you choose, and stick to it, through thick and thin.

/Yari

[Black Bear]

Originally posted by 7starmantis
I didn't vote simply because I don't see what any of this has to do with martial arts. What does someone's definition of a word or two words have to do with anyone training?

I guess I'm mising the whole "bandwagon" of using the term "Warrior Spirit".

7sm Just the idea of Warrior Spirit is often invoked by martial artists, so the idea is, what does it really mean?

Yari, that's WAY to inclusive. ANYONE who lives by ANY code of their choosing has warrior spirit, provided they stick to it? That sounds ridiculous.

[Yari]

Originally posted by Black Bear
Just the idea of Warrior Spirit is often invoked by martial artists, so the idea is, what does it really mean?

Yari, that's WAY to inclusive. ANYONE who lives by ANY code of their choosing has warrior spirit, provided they stick to it? That sounds ridiculous.


Why?

I think it's more difficult to 100% follow rules, than make your own. But if you change your code in the same direction as the wind blows, there's no warrior code. You choose a code, and live by it.

If you choose the code to follow your leader (president, or what ever), you do it no matter what. Even if he tells you to jump in the lake or shoot your wife.

Now you can choose to say your code is only to serve yourself. And that's ok, but I dont think that's a high value code. THat's a code for only self preservation. You can give a code a higher value by following a bigger meaning, and sticking by it no matter what. And that's my point, a warrior is a person is a person who will stand by his code, even if everybody else doesn't. He'll be the last person standing for the code.

But we dont' have to agree, but calling it ridiculous, and not stating why, triggers me.

/Yari

[loki09789]

Originally posted by Yari
Warrior spirit is to live by a code, and really live by it.
The code is something you choose, and stick to it, through thick and thin.

/Yari

Yari's definitions has some validity because it is acknowledging the selflessness of warriorship/warrior spirit (WS). Standing for a cause, preserving way of life/welfare, all require an element of selfless service.


Paul M

[Makalakumu]

Originally posted by loki09789
Yari's definitions has some validity because it is acknowledging the selflessness of warriorship/warrior spirit (WS). Standing for a cause, preserving way of life/welfare, all require an element of selfless service.


Paul M

In a way, the act of using violence to protect something is selfish to the extreme. Which is why buddhists advocate giving up all worldly connections.

[loki09789]

UpNorth,

Jump back up to my personal def. of WS and see that I agree with you about the WS not just fitting a 'violent' approach.

But even the Buddhist monks of Shaolin, when philosophy met reality, practiced/applied martial arts. They, like all philosophies, seem to have established a criteria for when it was just to use violence/force. As long as that criteria was met, the individual was physically/mentally/spiritually okay.

Now, even saying that, the selflessness for a Buddhist might be defined as one who commits violence, putting their personal path to enlightment second to the immediate needs of of their group.

I agree with your de-escalation/violence as a last approach view across the board, but there are times when violence/force is necessary, even at the expense of the individuals standing in society. I am not saying that it isn't horrible, but in the long view, look at the statistical comparisons during WWII if we had not dropped the atomic bomb. The lives taken was tragic, but 'less' in degree compared to the damage done in more conventional drawn out campaigns.

Paul M.

[Ty K. Doe]

To me, warrior spirit is simply the drive to never give up. To have the heart to go on even when things get difficult. Kinda like the old saying, "Quiters never win, and winners never quit."

It's not an overly complicated philosophy, but a simplistic attitude.

[loki09789]

UpNorth

I reread your post about Buddhists, and I don't know if this is correct on my part but I always thought the goal of Buddhism was to not attach joy to earthly things, not necessarily 'detach' themselves from the world. I am thinking of the Four Noble Truths - which I will have to look up to double check myself on.

THis doens't take any steam off of your statements, just a tangent to see if I am mis interpreting.

Paul M

[loki09789]

In a nutshell:

4 noble truths

1. Suffering is a part of life
2. Desire is the root of suffering
3. Enlightenment begins with the rejection of Desire
4. The eight fold path is the way to walk the middle road

Just found it.

Paul M.

[Makalakumu]

Originally posted by loki09789
In a nutshell:

4 noble truths

1. Suffering is a part of life
2. Desire is the root of suffering
3. Enlightenment begins with the rejection of Desire
4. The eight fold path is the way to walk the middle road

Just found it.

Paul M.

Protection of an item stems from desire. This is tangential, but I bring it up to show that definitions of WS are going to vary relatively with morals. They all have protection themes in common though. What are we protecting ourselves against? I would say anything not of our tribe. Difference has generally been stereotyped to mean danger so historically, the warrior spirit has been a reflection of xenophobia. As we build more connections as a species and we move closer to becoming one tribe, this old definition needs to change. Uyeshiba and Kano wrote much about this, yet even in their treatises, it is peppered with old predjudice.

[Black Bear]

Originally posted by Yari
Why?

I think it's more difficult to 100% follow rules, than make your own. But if you change your code in the same direction as the wind blows, there's no warrior code. You choose a code, and live by it.

If you choose the code to follow your leader (president, or what ever), you do it no matter what. Even if he tells you to jump in the lake or shoot your wife.

Now you can choose to say your code is only to serve yourself. And that's ok, but I dont think that's a high value code. THat's a code for only self preservation. You can give a code a higher value by following a bigger meaning, and sticking by it no matter what. And that's my point, a warrior is a person is a person who will stand by his code, even if everybody else doesn't. He'll be the last person standing for the code.

But we dont' have to agree, but calling it ridiculous, and not stating why, triggers me.

/Yari Sorry about "ridiculous", that was probably unfair. Easy now, I never said that I don't highly regard anyone who adheres tenaciously to a code of ethics. I have had too much difficulty adhering to my own ethics to take that for granted.

What I said was that I don't see that as equating with warrior spirit. Now, remember, I do not pretend to know for a second what the expression "warrior spirit" ought to mean, I'm just along for the ride. But it just seems ridiculous to me. I mean, there's such a diversity of codes of ethics/conduct out there. A guy could be a pathetic sheep in a cult that professes unthinking obeisance to the leader ("The leader is great, the leader is good..."), but as long as he adheres to it faithfully, this means he has warrior spirit? Even when the compound gets raided and Mr. Leader's up on charges, Mr. sheep is going through his own version of Stockholm syndrome/cognitive dissonance, asserting the claims of the faith all the more diligently, both in word and deed? This would be warrior spirit? I dunno. But he's sure sticking to a code of ethics.

That would be an example of what I had in mind when "ridiculous" came out of my mouth.

[Yari]

Originally posted by Black Bear
Sorry about "ridiculous", that was probably unfair. Easy now, I never said that I don't highly regard anyone who adheres tenaciously to a code of ethics. I have had too much difficulty adhering to my own ethics to take that for granted.

What I said was that I don't see that as equating with warrior spirit. Now, remember, I do not pretend to know for a second what the expression "warrior spirit" ought to mean, I'm just along for the ride. But it just seems ridiculous to me. I mean, there's such a diversity of codes of ethics/conduct out there. A guy could be a pathetic sheep in a cult that professes unthinking obeisance to the leader ("The leader is great, the leader is good..."), but as long as he adheres to it faithfully, this means he has warrior spirit? Even when the compound gets raided and Mr. Leader's up on charges, Mr. sheep is going through his own version of Stockholm syndrome/cognitive dissonance, asserting the claims of the faith all the more diligently, both in word and deed? This would be warrior spirit? I dunno. But he's sure sticking to a code of ethics.

That would be an example of what I had in mind when "ridiculous" came out of my mouth.


Yes I do see that. Specially if the sheep just follows along, he doesn't choose anything. But I believe the difference to be that the warrior chooses his "path". As a sheep really doesn't choose. He's just picking something that fits his needs now. The warrior bases his choices on something external, like a code of ethics, and follows them, not a choice of a sheep.

But there's no question about that this is a grey area, and the exterms are easily accounted for. In the grey area some people may act as warriors, and some not. It's when the goings get tough that the warriors get going. You could say they follow through.

/Yari

[Makalakumu]

Originally posted by Black Bear
That would be an example of what I had in mind when "ridiculous" came out of my mouth.

Is sanity statistical? Stockholm sydrome or not, a guy who sticks to his guns when all his buddies are dead or locked up is a little impressive.

[Cruentus]

Wow good discussion so far!

I'd like to refer you guys to this thread:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12992

I find that we have a major definition problem in martial arts in general.

But hey, if we can't agree on definitions, at least by the poll, we are all in agreement that Paul Janulis is a frickin' Genius!

:rofl:

[Black Bear]

Okay Yari. Explain to me the basic, essential difference between a warrior's choice and a sheep's choice (when he "picks" something, provided he sticks to it).

Perhaps whatever that difference is should be explicitly added into the definition.

upnorthkyosa, I agree it's "impressive", but if someone were to say it were warrior spirit, that would not click with me. Someone can be "impressive" in the degree to which they suck. "Warrior spirit" in my mind is supposed to connote a positive valence.

[Makalakumu]

Originally posted by Black Bear
Okay Yari. Explain to me the basic, essential difference between a warrior's choice and a sheep's choice (when he "picks" something, provided he sticks to it).

Perhaps whatever that difference is should be explicitly added into the definition.

upnorthkyosa, I agree it's "impressive", but if someone were to say it were warrior spirit, that would not click with me. Someone can be "impressive" in the degree to which they suck. "Warrior spirit" in my mind is supposed to connote a positive valence.

What is positive and what is negative? It all depends on which side of the fence you grew up. I think when we are talking about warrior spirit, we need to slash away the mysticism and take a look at what it means to be a human animal. That is tribalism and fear of difference. All of our vaunted warrior archtypes are wrapped up in different cultural trappings, yet they all contain that nugget of xenophobia. The fear of difference because it is dangerous. The instinctual warrior spirit is a symbol of this fight.

[Yari]

Okay Yari. Explain to me the basic, essential difference between a warrior's choice and a sheep's choice (when he "picks" something, provided he sticks to it).

Perhaps whatever that difference is should be explicitly added into the definition.




The difference can be a grey area.

But let me try.

What is a sheep, has to be defined. A sheep is a person who blindly takes on the rules, and follows a leader, but deosn't take on any responsability. For example, they would say, "Our leader says do this or that, then do it". Everthing they do, they do basing there belief on the leader, and always following up what a great leader they have. Come to think of it, a sheep would almost always think that a leader is 100 % perfect. A sheep would never confront a leader if he felt he was wrong. Typicaly a sheeps "loves " the complicated rules.


While the warrior also chooses hos leader, it isn't as blind as the sheep. He would take the leaders rules and addopt them to what he does. Ever action he would stand his own ground, based on the leaders rules, but never taking away the responsability of the aciton , by saying" IT's because the leader says so and so". Also the warrior knows that the leader isn't 100% perfect, but also ack. that the leader has a higher view of things. A warrior would confront a leader if things didn't fit the "code" that the warrior felt he followed. A warrior loves the simple rules.....

Well, you had me thinking, but I think I got my words right.

/Yari

[Black Bear]

upnorth and yari, interesting posts. I'm digesting. yari, I have a FUZZY sense of what you mean, but I think I have SOME sense nonetheless.

[loki09789]

"All of our vaunted warrior archtypes are wrapped up in different cultural trappings, yet they all contain that nugget of xenophobia."

I don't know what message or statement you are trying to make with this line of thought on this thread. What I think you are saying is that WS is at least partly 'anti - human/humane' and therefore bad? I get what you are saying and definitely like the logic, source based discussion, and the point. It makes you really think about personal responsibility.

From what I have read, it seems that you are against the romanticising of the 'warrior' as the ideal man/woman because it is validating violence against a percieved 'them' But, is the violence and the WS the problem or the mental constructs that allow us to view a 'them' as less worthy to live than a percieve 'us?' Either way, I can see where WS/xenophobia could lead to things like KKK groups, Black Panthers, Nazism... and other anti-somebody groups - all the way up to nations.
I agree partly, which is why my definition:

Will to survive, thirst for challenge, stand for a cause.

would include those who have had the courage to stand in the face of violence and refuse to get sucked in - anti bullying techniques come to mind. Or those who fought for equality with intelligence/peace, such as Martin Luther King Jr. and others. They were attempting to remove the xenophobic restrictions.

My problem with a violence mandetory/only type of WS definition is because it doesn't acknowledge those who risk their reputations, credibility and livelyhood as well as their lives. WS is about determination and perseverance IMO, sometimes it has NOTHING about applying violence and everything about refusing to succumb to violent solutions.

I do think that we are justified in defending ourselves, family and others if the appropriate conditions are there. But even there the appropriate level of force/violence is also a necessity.

Check out the 'martial arts of everything' thread on the Modern Arnis page, some of this is presented there too.

Paul M.

[Makalakumu]

I seriously believe that humanity is in a state of punctuated equilibria. We are evolving as we speak. The old tribalism model is in direct competition with a collective global model - a humans as one species model, one tribe model. I don't know which one will win out, but I believe I know which one will remove us from this planet. Perhaps the new WS is survival, not just of the individual, but of the whole.

[loki09789]

Based on this global type of view, would you philosophically agree with Catholic/Buddhist/Muslim criteria for justified self defense -sanctioned violence, or do you feel it is still too selfish in motivation? I ask with an implied/understood agreement of appropriate levels of force fitting the context and goal of stopping the threat and escaping - not a stomping him/them into a bloody pulp to show them how much of a bad A** I am level.

Paul M

[Adept]

I think we need to define warrior before we become concerned with the warrior spirit.

To me, a warrior is someone who specifically uses violence to ensure an ethical code of his choosing is enforced. That code is up to them to choose.

A 'fighter' to me, is anyone who struggles, or is prepared to struggle (in any way) to attain a goal. A fighter could be someone working 60 hours a week to make ends meet, or studying for 16 hours a day to pass their exams, or anything else that is a struggle. But I would not call them warriors.