Moral Philosophy

[unknown warrior]

Karate-do cannot exist without a body of moral philosophy to govern the the behaviour of those who embrace it's empowering practice. Learning Karate-do without it's corresponding philosophy creates a terrible imbalance which is usually reflected in attitude, character and behaviour.

[Crouchtig]

on the contrary. karate-do can indeed exist without a crappy moral philosophy

it is up to the individual as to how they use their knowledge

besides, if i wanted to kill someone using martial arts i wouldn't stop because of some stupid moral philosophy

you see my poor deluded friend, those who follow a moral philosophy will be more restricted than those who do not

any intelligent being does not limit themselves with what i can only describe as religeous mumbo-jumbo

i dont hate karate anymore but i still hate religeon!

[ryanhall]

you see my poor deluded friend, those who follow a moral philosophy will be more restricted than those who do not

any intelligent being does not limit themselves with what i can only describe as religeous mumbo-jumbo

i dont hate karate anymore but i still hate religeon!

I'm so glad I didn't ban such an intelligent and insightful member. Morals are for pu**ies? What would we do without you?

[ryanhall]

i dont hate karate anymore but i still hate religeon!

It wasn't two days ago that you were yelling about how much karate sucked and how you hated it. By next week you'll probably be in the seiminary.

[swan104]

I think Wong Sheun Leung (I can't remember how you spell his name), the Wing Chun guy, described martial arts as just a sophisticated weapon. What we do with it is up to us. It's the same with everything. You can take anything around you and use it for good or bad. A knife can be used for cutting things up in the kitchen, or used to hurt/kill someone.

Speaking of knives, I remember describing Kali to a friend. I don't think she was too impressed with it because she believed it would breed an army of knife-wielding thugs. Again, its what you do with the knowledge that makes you a menace to society.

I think that a person can learn martial arts and not take in the philosophy.

[ryanhall]

I quote once again:

you see my poor deluded friend, those who follow a moral philosophy will be more restricted than those who do not

This has nothing to do with martial arts moral philosophy, just morals in general. Evidently, people who possess them are deluded imbeciles.

I think that a person can learn martial arts and not take in the philosophy.

Sure they can, and they do. I don't believe in ancient oriental masters who I am never allowed to question or living out the words of a long dead warrior. Morality in and of itself, however, is a foundation of both life and society.

[Crouchtig]

Originally posted by ryanhall
Evidently, people who possess them are deluded imbeciles.

now you are beggining to understand

i think that my ability to change my mind is a good thing

i have an opinion and feel strongly about it. if someone gives a good enough argument i may be persuaded to their point of view

whats so wrong with that?

[ryanhall]

Or you could actually think out a position before taking it, reducing the number of times you need to change you mind about your ideas. It's better than saying this and that sucks in one post and after reading someone else's idea, flip-flopping to the complete opposite end of the discussion.

[Crouchtig]

its all very well to say that my learned amigo but people are constantly putting forward new views and ideas, new facts are uncovered

i cant start off knowing everything, i have to adapt my views as i learn more

what happend to my crazy apes-martial arts poll?

[eXcessiveForce]

okay crochrocket.

Give me a break. You cannot be as stupid as you are leading us to believe.


The philosphy you are spouting is anarchy. Which is a paralysing force not a liberating force.

With out morals you would not exist simply because i'm sure enough of us here would be happy to extinguish your life for the sheer sport of it except that it conflicts with our moral bearings.


Big words do not make an intellect.

Try understanding what you say before you say it.


it is better to say nothing and appear a fool that to speak and remove all doubt.

[eXcessiveForce]

He remindes me of a kid and his friend who stole something out of my car.

I caught the friend and explained to him that when I caught the kid who stole the stuff i was going to hurt him very badly.

to which the little kid told me that I couldn't do that.

when I asked him why he thought that he told me because it was against the law.

I then explained to him that the law did not prevent me for hurting the underage theif merely created a set of consequences if I chose to hurt him.

I then informed him that those consequences did not help the future health of the theif.

I had my stuff back within 30 minutes.



Morals tell you what is right and what is wrong. the only people who do not have morals are psychotics. Those people are very dangerous to everyone they come in contact with since they have no moral grounding they feel they can do what ever they wish often without looking out for the consequences.

This proves not to be benficial for the ability of the psychotic person to exist.

[Toudiyama]

Morals are nice but what if different people use a different set of morals
What if the bussines morals for a clerk are different than those for a CEO of a major company what if the latter are not more strick as they should be but loose as can be
Morals change over time
But then why have morals, because otherwise we would be no more than an animal and people could not live together, society would colapse

Morals when fighting for your life naaaaah but how othen do you fight for your life?

[ceasarx]

I think morales are an individual thing and we each have our own. I do not live by what others say is morale but I do believe that the morale guidlines are a good thing when someone learns any form of martial arts
It is like haveing a gun. you first take a few classes in gun safety and that is mostley common sense and good morale lectureing. anybody can learn to kill without morale values but most teachers try to include them in there lessons

[Ryu (JKD?)]

Ethical philosophy is indeed an important aspect in our society.
Kudos to those of you who had insightful posts about it. Ryan Hall and Excessive Force had great posts.
Morals are not an individual thing at all. The only thing individual and relative about them is the definitions of them people use.

I posted quite a bit about ethical philosophy on another board. I'll try to find it and post it.

Ryu

[Ryu (JKD?)]

From another board.

(me)
"Teaching" ethics should be conducted in the same manner as other types of teaching. Discussion and questioning should be encouraged, and whoever asks of anyone to be virtuous should be striving for that road him/herself.

Ethical theory is central to my degree in philosophy, and makes up a great deal of my thinking and everyday life. Ethical practice and thought do not necessarily belong to Religion in the way many are using the word here. If you want to learn virtue and ethics you should be able to find them almost everywhere......not just in a building dedicated to a religion. (If it is, one runs the risk of understanding ethics as simply "opinions" and not a basis for human need, human society, and cultural richness.)

Take care.

And.....

There's not too big a difference between ethics and "Morality" with a capital M. It's become somewhat a game of semmantics.
I at times use the terms "ethics" and "morality" and "virtue" interchangebly. For the most part I use the word ethics because for some reason people tend to be less defensive of that word. Even though to me it really means the same thing.

I believe in norm relativity, not moral relativity.

If objective ethical standards exist for the world's people, that ethical standard doesn't change because a few do not wish to follow those standards.

Take the idea of friendship. In order to be a good "friend" in the definition of the word, one must put effort into the relationship by being trustworthy, kind, helpful, etc.
Say Sam and I are "friends." Sam, however, stabs me in the back numerous times, lies to me, is cruel, etc. Our "friendship" then will dissolve. This doesn't mean that friendship is relative, it simply means that "Sam" for what ever reason chose NOT to follow the necessary aspects of being a friend.

Where most of the confusion takes place in ethical/moral complexities is usually within surface level differences between people, cultures, etc.

Case in point. Say we have a culture that eats the remains of its dead. We will call it Culture A.

We also have a culture that does not eat its dead. But buries them in the ground instead. We will call it Culture B.

Culture B is horrified at Culture A, and claims that culture A is "immoral" because they eat the dead (something culture B thinks is wrong.)

Culture A thinks burying the dead in the dirty ground is immoral, and claims that Culture B is immoral!

Now it looks like we have a problem that only "moral relativity" can solve. But it's not the case.

If we look past surface level differences in cultural practice, and look at the MOTIVATION behind said practices we find that....

Both Culture A and Culture B do what they do to HONOR THE DEAD. Both think that it is moral to respect the dead of their society.

This is the same moral. The same Ethic. It is only showing itself in different cultural ways.

When Culture A and B can see this. Harmony will be made.


So when someone chooses not to follow the definition of ethical or moral codes, it does not mean morality is relative or non-existent. It simply means that person chooses not to follow it.

That's about all I'll say on the issue.

"Ethics serve society and culture, enhance existence..

(From another poster)
It is all too easy to dismiss our social and humane responsibilities in favor of some macho "dark art" BS.. much more difficult to teach by example.. We make choices, we can choose to contribute to social harmony or to incite social chaos.. As teachers we should accept the responsibility of our actions. We exist as a collective interdependent society, no man is an island (note to self, that sounds familiar).. In the now infamous quote "better to be a warrior in the garden than a gardener in the war".. implies that the garden is the better place to be regardless of martial prowess.. Cultivate peace, be prepared for war..

We can teach neither morals nor ethics.. we can only live the example and offer guidance.. "

(me)
I agree with this 110% I couldn't have put it better myself.
Fortunately, the idea of Universal Ethics is gaining popularity around the globe. My thesis and graduate studies revolve around this.

Take care,
Ryu