Chivalry: A Pleasant Idea

[Kinson]

This post was originally published as an article in a dedicated KarateForums.com Articles section, which is no longer online. After the section was closed, this article was most to the most appropriate forum in our community.

I'd like to present an analytical opinion on the concept of chivalry. Chivalry may sound like a grand idea at first, but when you consider it realistically it falls apart.

Stories of chivalry in days of yore are most likely just that in 95% of cases - stories. Samurai? They killed who they wanted when they wanted as long as the offender was on the lower end of the social structure. These are men who brutally ended their own lives when they felt they had "failed" in some way. Is that chivalrous? Or is it a mixture of extreme pride and a disregard for life?

Know what I call waiting for an enemy to be ready and gathered, facing me, before I attack (especially when my cause is a truly just one)? Reckless, stupid, absolutely arrogant and a betrayal if the cause is worth fighting for. It's almost as plain a question as: "What is more important, your life and cause or your sense of pride?" If it's pride, then, good for you, but I sure don't want you fighting on my side.

Do you know what Musashi himself says in his Book of Five Rings? That he felt all the duels he had won before retiring to write the book were not won with a true understanding of the way of strategy, but rather natural talent and luck. You can learn something from this. He didn't start his art with preconceived morals and notions. His art was death, so he simply danced the dance of death. And from that dance he began to see something more.

Let's not get caught up in abstract ideas. Morality is completely subjective. Chivalry as a concept doesn't have much weight to it when you break it down to metaphysics. There is no such thing as honor - an honorable act in one culture could seem completely disgraceful in the next. Murder in different cultures can be deemed as right or wrong. So why latch yourself onto such faulty conceptual structure as chivalry? Because it's old and therefor it's right? Chivalry as we tend to think of it didn't even exist back then. And even if it did, take a look around. In an age of bombs, guns and missiles, a warrior's job is NOT to be chivalrous - it's to win for the cause and live to tell the tale. There are individual underlying principles in chivalry that have worth, but as a complete idea it is lacking. Much of what we are conditioned to think of as "good" and "bad" has no legs to stand on when we actually question the meaning of good and bad and the reasons why we are raised to conform to a certain view. Morals are only "good" or "bad" in so far as they accomplish our subjective wants or needs. The valid use of generalizing things as being universally "good" or "bad" is so people in a community can function together peacefully, having been raised into similar modes of thought and conditioned "rules." Take it farther than that into the game of combat and you not only is your wisdom at risk, your life is.

Make no mistake - the heart of the martial arts lies in death - or rather, a knowledge of both life and death and the flow therein. But we ain't learning how to bandage knees, folks.

Chivalry does have it's place among warriors - among the dead and the soon to die, the ineffective and the overzealous.

My advice? Figure out what's important to YOU. Not what is important to society, pop culture, religious institutions or fairytale idealogical structures. Preservation of life? Loyalty? Ok. Then ask "why?" Don't adopt fairytale ideas to reality, don't even automatically adopt the ideas you see in common society. Question, live. See what works and then question why it works.

And progress, not only physically, but mentally, philosophically. Our best weapons as humans, let alone MAs, are a keen wit, clear thinking and a critical eye.

[Patrick]

Thank you for the submission.

[UseoForce]

I think you're wrong on many levels. You said "Morals are only "good" or "bad" in so far as they accomplish our subjective wants or needs." That is wrong. We should only do the right thing when it serves our self-interest? There is more to life to feeding our own personal desires. That is the height of selfishness. I don't consider martial arts some kind of pursuit of self perfection, but striving to be unselfish is just a basic part of human decency.

[Smitty]

I know where you're coming from, But I have a different take. We're all selfish. Even being unselfish has its selfish motives. If a woman sees an unselfish man, she'll be more inclined to be with him (at least if she's family oriented) because he can provide. Provide the neccesities of life. For what? To reproduce.

I really hate to think of it that way, but everything we do can be taken back to reproduction. To continue the species. I know religious people will disagree, but at least to me, we're simply the smartest animal on the planet.

[bushido_man96]

Chivalry has to do with all different kinds of things, and not as much to do with battle. When you help people and society, and protect your own from attack, whether your family or country, you could call it chivalrous. Chivalry is a code of conduct. Plain and simple. Just like Bushido, which is often referred to as the Japanese chivalric code. Samurai were not the only chivalrous ones out there. Peasants could be as well. When you do your duty to your family, employer, country, then it is done according to your code of conduct.

If I claim to be chivalrous when you confront me, it does not mean I am going to let you take the first shot, nor does it mean I am going to fight on even grounds according to rules. I will cheap shot, kick dirt in your eyes, and get the sun to my back to try to blind you. Does this make me unchivalrous or dishonorable? No.

No matter what the society is, there are certain things that are considered wrong. When you do what is right to combat what is wrong, it is chivalrous.

[UseoForce]

Bottom line to me:

There is a universal moral right and an immoral wrong and we should all do everything in our power to do the right thing.

[bushido_man96]

Bottom line to me:

There is a universal moral right and an immoral wrong and we should all do everything in our power to do the right thing.

I agree completely.

[patusai]

Bottom line to me:

There is a universal moral right and an immoral wrong and we should all do everything in our power to do the right thing.

I agree completely.

Me too

[Ace2021]

I think chivarly was only a Knight concept, and only existed to Samurai when fighting another sword wielder.

Besides, without bad there cannot be good, so maybe sometimes being bad is, well, good.

[Maxma]

I like your idea, but I disagree with some of your points.

"Or is it a mixture of extreme pride and a disregard for life?"

Bushido has a strong sense of honor. Seppuku was a demonstration of their integrity, honor, courage, etc. You also have to think of the predominance of Buddhism and the belief that this life is only one of many.

"Samurai? They killed who they wanted when they wanted as long as the offender was on the lower end of the social structure."

Not all of them, and not all of the time.

"Chivalry does have it's place among warriors - among the dead and the soon to die, the ineffective and the overzealous."

Perhaps that says something about human society, when a man who stands up and will not break his morals is immediately chastized, beaten, and possibly killed.

"The valid use of generalizing things as being universally "good" or "bad" is so people in a community can function together peacefully, having been raised into similar modes of thought and conditioned "rules." Take it farther than that into the game of combat and you not only is your wisdom at risk, your life is."

Not quite sure what you're trying to say in the first sentence. Using the terms "generalizing" and "universally," however, is usually a bad thing, as most everything in life is subjective. (I believe you were trying to make a point along those lines, I just didn't get it.)

I love your last two paragraphs, but (in my eyes) you left out a part: Spiritual. You must forever progress spiritually as well.

Respectfully,

Max