Which of these ethical systems best describes ethics in the martial arts?

[Makalakumu]

Which of these ethical systems best describes how you view ethics in the martial arts? Why does this ethical system inform your morality as a martial artist? If none of these fit, why don't they? Which one is closest to what you believe?​

​

​

1. ETHICAL EGOISM​

Central Theme: One ought to do whatever is in one’s own best interests, regardless of the effect on other people.​

Strengths: corresponds to "natural law", survival of the fittest.

Weaknesses: individual interests may be completely contrary to the needs/goals of society.

Example: if possible to do so without being caught, one should rob a bank at the earliest opportunity.

2. UTILITARIANISM

Central Theme: One ought to seek to produce the greatest possible balance of good over evil for all who will be affected by one’s actions.

Strengths: Attempts to lessen human suffering.

Weaknesses: Something that brings happiness to one person may not bring happiness to another person.

Example: The U.S. justified dropping atomic bombs on Japan in WWII by claiming it was worth the loss of life to end the war and stop the higher loss of life if the war continued.

3. DIVINE COMMAND THEORY

Central Theme: Moral standards have been established by God who is all-knowing. An act that conforms to the law of God is right; an act that breaks God's law is wrong.

Strengths: Standards are from a higher authority than humans.

Weaknesses: can be arbitrary depending on interpretation. Can we know the true divine authority, or the true meaning of the divine commands?

Example: Religions that point believers to rule sets like the Ten Commandments.

4. VIRTUE THEORY

Central Theme: Morals are internal. Virtues are character traits that make possible the achievement of social good. An act is ethical if it conforms to the relevant virtues.

Strengths: assigns moral responsibility to the individual.

Weaknesses: relies on universal agreement on virtues.

Example: Serving on a student council because it will benefit others is more ethical than serving on the council because it will improve one’s resume.

5. KANTIANISM

Central Theme: An individual is acting ethically if the generalization of the act would be desirable as a universal law of behaviour. Acts must respect the human dignity and worth of others. (Developed in great detail by Kant.)

Strengths: applies the same rules to everybody, and values human dignity.

Weaknesses: excessively rigid interpretation can lead to outcomes which do not satisfy anybody.

Examples: The proposition "I may kill people whenever convenient" must be rejected because as a universal law this would permit other people to kill me if they found it convenient to do so. However, Kant concludes that always telling the absolute truth is a moral obligation because lying does not respect the dignity and worth of the person to whom we lie.

6. CONTRACTUALISM

Central Theme: As members of society, we have implicit contracts with each other. Acts are ethical if they do not violate these contracts. Rules are acceptable if rational people agree that they form the basis for mutually beneficial relationships.

Strengths: supports social structure, and is based on widely shared notions of "fair play".

Weaknesses: can slide towards cultural relativism.

Example: it is unethical for a parent to fail to care for a child to the extent of their ability.

7. Provisionalism

Central Theme: Actions are assessed as right or wrong on a sliding scale, 0.0 to 1.0, dependent upon the situation.

Strengths: Does away with moral absolutes like good and evil.

Weaknesses: Individual assessment of various actions vary.

Example: Abortion becomes more unethical the closer the baby comes to being born. At conception, aborting a fetus is only .1 unethical. At three months, it is .3 unethical. At six months, it is .6 unethical. At nine months, it is .9 unethical.

​

​

​

 

[Tgace]

Why do we have to pick just one?

Most "warrior codes" stressed things such as service, duty, courage etc. as their tenants rather than an actual philosophic system.

 

[Makalakumu]

Why do we have to pick just one?

Most "warrior codes" stressed things such as service, duty, courage etc. as their tenants rather than an actual philosophic system.

Which ones would you blend in order to encompass things like service, duty and courage?

All of these systems flow from the enlightenment, which our modern society is based. It's probably a good idea that the "modern warrior" take a look at modern ethics.

 

[arnisador]

Depends on the country of origin, I'd think. Different arts have different ethics. Defending others was stressed much more in Okinawan Karate than in my experiences in the FMA, for example.

 

[Andrew Green]

My views on ethics have nothing to do with the martial arts...?

I think there is somethin inherently dangerous about thinking a persons ethical beliefs should be based on there favorite way to stay in shape.

 

[Makalakumu]

My views on ethics have nothing to do with the martial arts...?

I think there is somethin inherently dangerous about thinking a persons ethical beliefs should be based on there favorite way to stay in shape.

Oh really? I think that ethics would drive the decision whether or not to fight, would it not?

 

[The Kai]

I voted for Virtual Theory. Although there are universal beliefs among the student body and some core tenets are stressed, there is always room for personal interpretations

 

[Tgace]

All of these "systems" seem more like modes of thougt molded by a persons experience, religious beliefs, cultural influences, education etc. I dont really see them as something I could pick and "assume".

 

[Eldritch Knight]

I think Arnisador hit it on the head. A traditional JMA (like the koryu, or karate) might stress the value of defending the community, while a more modern JMA (like kendo or aikido), would stress self-cultivation and betterment. On the other extreme, Western MA might not care for either, jumping between any or all of the above ethical systems based on the will of the practitioner. When I first saw this thread, I thought I might vote for something, but after considering just how huge MA is, I realized that we can't just blanket it that easily.

 

[Cruentus]

I would say that Arnisadors right as well.

However...

if I had to pin down an ethical system that is followed here in america, I would say that it is none of the available choices.

I would say that it is closer to a monarchical system of ethics; which is basically where the ethics and beliefs of the group boil down to one person ("Grandmaster" or head instructor of a school) who rules the group undividedly. This can be as small as a local school where the head instructor runs the group, or as large as a world-wide organization.

btw...I don't agree with the structure really, but that is what I commonly observe.

Paul

 

[Floating Egg]

I wouldn't choose any of the available options and I'm not clear on what I would choose.

 

[arnisador]

My views on ethics have nothing to do with the martial arts...?

Early on, the ethics taught in Okinawan Karate significantly influenced my thoughts on ethics. (This was when I was 14 years old.) The influence has waned as I've matured, though.

 

[Makalakumu]

The ethical systems I've researched are the major ethical systems talk about. I suggest that one just stop and think about the implications of each ethical system before one snaps a judgement. The ethical consequences of picking ANY of these systems are immense...

 

[Tgace]

I still dont quite buy the belief that one can "pick" one of those and start living by it. To me its more a categorization of what people have been taught to believe.

 

[Makalakumu]

I still dont quite buy the belief that one can "pick" one of those and start living by it. To me its more a categorization of what people have been taught to believe.

I tend to agree. I don't think that one can just pick up one of these ethical systems and assume it...at least not easily. However, I think it is possible to choose one that best fits what one believes. All of these systems are incredibly deep. Kantianism, for one, is extremely well thought out and explained. It probably would have been better to link searches for each system so that voters could read a little more then the little blurb I posted.

 

[BaktoBasics]

It can also be said that "worrior codes" are cloaked in admirable qualities because, ultimatley, they result with murder, killing and hurting others. Society has tried to give war and fighting a noble dimension. By doing so, this encourages efficiency, loyalty, "courage", etc.

Bushido, Chivalry and the like are tainted with blood - innocent and guilty. Martial arts offers no ethical standards whatsoever - theya re a learning experience of culture, history and provide a means of physical activity. The history exemplifies the indoctrination of the public in relation to the nobility and honour of Knights, Samurai, Shaolin monks etc.

For example, Chivalry was mainly introduced by the Church. However, the main ethical standard of that institution is to love one another etc. Same goes with most other religions, which, were very influential in most martial system and worrior codes.

Anyway, although I enjoy martial arts, history and culture, I also realise that people fought, they did what they had to do in wars. All these ethics were devised to appease public opinion and increase the respectability of the worrior class.

So, what ethical system is relevant to martial arts? NONE! Unless, of course, it is purely defensive. Then, that would give rise to ethics such as the rules in the Geneva convention.

This is a hard issue. I respect all your views. It is my opinion however that MA's are designed to hurt others. There can be a degree of ethics however where MA's are used for reasons of defending yourself or another who is vulnerable.

 

[WC_lun]

Ethics are a part of serious martial arts, as it is dealing with violence of one human being to another. However, there are all sorts of people that make up the term martial artist, and thier ethical leanings will run the spectrum, up to and including no ethics. I don't believe any martial arts program will make an ethical man out of one that is not ethical. People will be drawn to what they feel comfortable with, so you'll have a core group in a school that shares the same ethical standards, but it isn't the martial art itself dictating those beliefs.

 

[Black Belt Jedi]

I'm more of a virtue theorists because I am a selfless person, willing to help others in any way possible. I live by the saying, "I am teaching you this not for my own benefit, but for your benefit."

 

[Xue Sheng]

Which of these ethical systems best describes how you view ethics in the martial arts? Why does this ethical system inform your morality as a martial artist? If none of these fit, why don't they? Which one is closest to what you believe?​

My view

These ethical systems are just unnecessary constraints placed on eastern MA system by a western mindset and the need for compartmentalization and/or understanding within the western view of things. Why not look at it form its origin instead, to me that is the better way to go.

Much like those looking for spirituality within a martial art when it is not really there at all because all that comes from the individual not the art, same with ethical systems. It is not up to the teacher of any art to teach you ethics IMO.

And I did not vote because there was no choice for "none of the above"