Worthy Adversary

[bushidomartialarts]

So the thread on Falwell's death got me thinking along these lines.

Is there such a thing as a worthy adversary? Falwell, for instance, stood for a lot of things I deplore. But he was pretty honorable in his dealings (especially compared to many of his colleagues) and was clearly fighting what he considered the good fight. Though I hate much of what he wrought and most of what he stood for, I can't help but admire him for what we have in common.

A similar example would be the soldier on the other side of the battle. He's probably very much like his enemy -- motivated to fight by many of the same emotions and loyalties, just as willing to risk himself to help or save his buddies, equally unwilling to harm innocents.

So, here's the question. Is there such a thing as a 'worthy adversary': someone you can respect, but still have to do your utmost to counter and defeat? Or is the whole idea just so much intellectual conceit that has no place in the real world?

What do we think?

 

[WMKS Shogun]

Back when I was a wrestler in High School, I often had to go up against the same people from the other High Schools in the county. Some of the guys I went up against I learned to respect both on and off the mat. So the short of it is yes I think it is possible.

 

[mrhnau]

So, here's the question. Is there such a thing as a 'worthy adversary': someone you can respect, but still have to do your utmost to counter and defeat? Or is the whole idea just so much intellectual conceit that has no place in the real world?

What do we think?

Yes, you can have a "worth adversary". WMKS mentioned athletics, there are games (chess for example). In war, often the individual can respect the other soldied, and those in control should respect their enemies, lest they underestimate them. You might not and probably will not agree with your enemies principles, but that should not stop respect. I've known people who have died for causes I strongly oppose, but I respect their devotion to their cause.

 

[CoryKS]

So the thread on Falwell's death got me thinking along these lines.

Is there such a thing as a worthy adversary? Falwell, for instance, stood for a lot of things I deplore. But he was pretty honorable in his dealings (especially compared to many of his colleagues) and was clearly fighting what he considered the good fight. Though I hate much of what he wrought and most of what he stood for, I can't help but admire him for what we have in common.

A similar example would be the soldier on the other side of the battle. He's probably very much like his enemy -- motivated to fight by many of the same emotions and loyalties, just as willing to risk himself to help or save his buddies, equally unwilling to harm innocents.

So, here's the question. Is there such a thing as a 'worthy adversary': someone you can respect, but still have to do your utmost to counter and defeat? Or is the whole idea just so much intellectual conceit that has no place in the real world?

What do we think?

I think what makes an adversary 'worthy' is your estimation of his tactics. Of course you hate his viewpoint - by definition, or he wouldn't be an adversary. But how does he go about it? Does he work within the law, or outside it? A worthy adversary, IMO, is one who furthers his cause in the same manner and in accordance with the same rules that I would use for mine.

As an example (though I really have no dog in this fight), contrast a person who wants to make abortion illegal vs. another who bombs clinics.
One works within the system, one doesn't.

 

[CuongNhuka]

On the one hand, it is an oxymoron(sp) to have a worthy adversary. And adversary is one who you dislike, who has differnit view points, or who you cannot see eye-to-eye with. Being worthy would mean you have a great deal of respect for that person. The two don't seem to go together.
On the other hand it does make sense. A worthy adversary would be one who is doing what you are doing, but takeing a differnit route. Allow me to explian. I'll use Falwell as an example. I ditest(sp) his political views. However he has those views because he beleives they are what's best. I have my views because they are what I beleive is best. Anouther example is soldiers. While they are both trying to kill each other (ultimately), they have the same reason for being on the battle feild. Patiritism. With both of these groups if you get politics out of the way, Falwell and leftist (like me) would probably get along very well, and soldiers on opposing sides of the battle feild would as well.
A worthy adversary is possible. It just requires that both you and your adversary must respect each other and have the same goal mind, but differinit ways of getting there.

 

[Nomad]

IMO, a worthy adversary is one who causes his opponent to grow and forces him to get better in order to "triumph". This certainly happens in sporting and other types of competition, and I believe this can be translated to other arenas such as politics, philosophy and even to combat.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

I am reminded of the German general who was told by Berlin in the last days of WW2 to burn Paris. He told them it was done, but did not do it; Paris was too beautiful to be burned, he wrote.

I had a friend who escaped the Auschwitz death march, thanks in part to a soldier who looked away while they ran for the trees; the soldier knowing the days of the war were done, and further tragedy was futile. This same soldier probably responsible for the horrific deaths of many others before this day.

I had a student sent to fight in Afghanistan who spared the lives of combatants penned in a ditch. One of them invited his squad back to his home when he was released, where he made fast friends with his enemies family and village, and learned they were ultimately fighting for the same thing...a safe place for their families to gather in peace and celebrate life. His intelligence gathering mission as an advisor changed his beliefs about his enemy.

The worthy adversary concept intrigues me, as in war we are all sinners and saints alike, killing people who are also fathers, sons, and brothers to family that waits for them at home. The hero to one side os the villian to another. Acts of nobility and compassion can be cause for hanging for treason, depending on who views them. Interesting idea.

 

[Em MacIntosh]

For me a worthy adversary is a challenge to defeat and a milestone to have fought. Win or lose, something about the struggle was worth it. A good fight in the old fifties style ending with a handshake perhaps.