Swordsmen are born, not made?

[Shane Smith]

I have come to the conclusion that Swordsmen are born,not made.My reasoning follows;

After years of studying and teaching Asian martial Arts and studying and training with many different individuals in the HES/WMA,I note that there are three basic kinds of people I have met and observed over time.

There are those that are natural fighters with a true warriors spirit that could fight before they ever walked into their first training session.They may not be Swordsmen yet due to a lack of training but they generally know how to handle themselves competently in violent situations with unfliching courage.Such men as these take well to training and quickly gain practical competence in any martial endevour.It is their nature to do so.

There are those of strong spirit that haven't yet learned that they are natural fighters due to societal or other considerations that forced them to grow up in a way that never allowed expression to their manly qualities,yet once the ember of their fighting spirit is driven by dire need or a new found desire to achieve great and worthy things,their inner spirit roars to life and a fighter is revealed.Training in the WMA may well be the worthy thing that fans the flame and allows them to discover the true extent of their strength. I am always most pleased to meet warriors of this type.These men also take well to training and gain competence over time as their warriors spirit is excercised with intent along with their minds and bodies.

Then there are those men that desperately want to be fighters because they admire that powerful and inconquerable spirit in others and while they may learn all of the neccessary techniques and even perform incredibly well in a non-confrontational setting,they simply are not endowed with a warrior spirit. These men will never achieve true martial competence in my experience no matter how much time and energy is expended in their training. Their timid spirit absolutely will not allow them to restore order out of chaos by their own hand.It's simply not in them and never will be unfortunately.

I think I am correct in my observation that Swordsmen are born,not made and I believe that my assertion is further supported by the Masters themselves who tell us in so many words that men of timid and fearful heart should not take up fencing.

A Swordsman is born with the heart and spirit of a warrior. Anything less...is... something less. That is my opinion.

Thoughts?

[Guest]

Hey whats up shane?
Well said my friend, this is Justin Ekback and I couldnt agree with you more. Trying to get into AARMA out here on the west coast and miss you and everybody tell em I said hi and maybe well cross swordds sometime.

[Gene Tausk]

Shane,

You are essentially making a "nature v. nurture" argument which is, by its very definition, is not answerable. There are too many variables in either direction.

The term "warrior spirit" is itself not defined. Do you mean someone who can go through with killing someone if necessary? Millitary forces all over the world train people to do this. I personally think, (and I think there is enough evidence to argue this) that people will kill gleefully and happily with no problems.

Do you mean by "warrior spirit" the ability to fight until a person can fight no more? This is simply physiology and training in aneorobic conditioning helps to overcome this.

Do you mean a "do or die" spirit that a person will fight until he is killed or succeeds? This can be instilled in a person.

Now, I agree with you when you state (in so many words) that a person can be technically proficient in a martial art yet worthless as a fighter. This is (unfortunately) all-too common. Performing hyung or kata is not the same as full-contact sparring, which should be (duh!) evident in the need to train people in warrior arts. People delude themselves into thinking they are great fighters because of a performance in a form, and they can be quickly disillusioned when John Q. Thug (or, if they are back in the Renaissance, Iohann Thugee <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> ) takes them out in the back alley and gives them the thrashing they have earned.

At some point in a martial art, a person has to take the plunge of sparring. There is no other alternative. Through sparring, one can develop as a warrior and develop warrior spirit, which I define (as defined through Taekwondo) as indomitible (sp?) spirit; the willingness to go forward and do your damndest with all of the power,energy and intent you have to get the job done. It is controlled aggressiveness and anger, focused to the job needed.

You seem to state in your posting, and maybe I am reading it wrong, that if a person does not have this warrior spirit, it can never be developed. I strongly disagree. In most people (and by most I mean about 99%) it can be developed. Sure, there are individuals who are unable to develop this spirit, but they are a very small minority.

Two examples, one macro, one micro. For milennia, Jews were considered the ultimate in non-warriors. They were mercilessly slaughtered in Europe throughout the MA ultimately to the Holocaust. A British officer, Captain Wingate, thought he saw the potential to develop Jews as a fighting force for their own homeland, and so he did. Today, the Israeli army is legendary and no sane nation will ever take them on in a direct confrontation. The Wingate Institute in Netanya, which is a leading physical education institute in the world, stands as a tribute to this man. Can one say that because Jews were non-warriors for millenia, that they never had the ability to become warriors? Big mistake.

Micro. When I was teaching TKD, the instructor of our dojang made us teach self-defense to battered women at a shelter. The first thing we did was try to instill the type of controlled aggressiveness needed by the women. We were successful in many case.

------------&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;gene

[Shane Smith]

Excellent post Gene! Let me clarify my points that you have trouble with and I think you will find we are in agreement for the most part perhaps(or not <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> ).

I define "warrior spirit" as that intangible sense of urgency that wells up in us that drives us on to dare great things in spite of our fears. It allows us to master our fears and our bodies in the presense of a violent situation and steel ourselves to pull out all of the stops while dealing with the problem at hand and keeps us from quailing in the face of danger. A natural fighter will perform in spite of his fear,a man without will be mastered by his fear.

In my own experience(which may differ from yours),the folks you mention that have had the warrior spirit "trained into them" were category two individuals to begin with as defined generally by me above.They always possessed the warrior spirit, it just took them a while to realize it was a part of them.

A true type-three is a man or woman that will literally ball up in times of danger and refuse to face the reality of the situation and deal with it.These people are beyond help in my opinion and will never attain martial competency due to their innate timidity and lack of a true warriors spirit.These are the people that will NOT willingly engage in spirited free-sparring or any other violently realistic excercise.I think this type is relatively rare with type two's being most common. I have known and trained with and taught at least a handful of type-three's over the years and in my experience,while they may be encouraged to actually face someone in sparring if given enough time,they have NEVER become competent fighters even though some developed impressive technical skill.I have literally seen people take a light hit and drop their hands in surrender,and that in the controlled environment of a school.I fear for their safety on the street. The few of this type I have seen in an altercation on the street were definitely worsted not because they could not physically fight,but because they would not engage mentally in the fight.They just don't pack the software to run the program in real time. <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/frown.gif" alt="" />

[Shane Smith]

Thoughtful post Stu. I see where you are coming from on the "anyone can kill" line of reasoning and I will concede that is true. However,I submit that the ability to murder another in a fit of irrational and unreasoned madness(which is the only violent act that type three's would engage in perhaps) is not a manifestation of the elusive "warrior spirit",but rather a temporary loss of reason that occurs when people reach their emotional breaking point(I do believe that we all have such a point by the way). It seems to me that a fighter with a warriors spirit is more given to controlled and directed aggression in the face of danger whereas the folks that emotionally "snap" into violent outbursts are simply along for the ride so to speak when their reason flees them and their animal instincts take over.At that point,until the fit passes,they are become animals ,not martial artists though they may be effective killers none the less.I think that folks unaccustomed to mastering their fear are likewise more likely to exhibit this kind of murderous emotional breakdown at a lower threshold than "normal" folks and martial artists.

What is it the neighbors always say on the evening news after the crazyman guns down half the people on his block and then makes a coat out of their skins?They almost inevitably say;"He was a quiet guy.He kept to himself .He wouldn't have hurt a fly.He was picked on alot"...This guy wasn't a warrior in my opinion,he just got picked on one time too many by someone(or whatever) and since he didn't pack the gear to handle it like a man by confronting it head on before he reached his emotional breaking point,he became a beast and gave his reason over for madness.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the ability to instill a true warriors spirit in everyone.I think some are beyond help as their emotional fortitude will not allow it.I"ve just seen too many of these folks on the mat and on the street completely freeze in the face of a violent assault to believe otherwise.I do however reserve the right to reconsider my position at some point in the future if new observations give rise to other theories <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> (How's THAT for a disclaimer?) <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Casper Bradak]

Heh, I agree with your first post Shane. I think it's quite motivating, I haven't heard words like that outside the manuals.
I think that the true warrior spirit could very well lack definition, and be better for it.
I hope all those that lack the warrior spirit in any fashion will take this as a challenge to strive for.

[TimSheetz]

Hi Shane,

I am going to quote what Matt Larsen said at the Gathering this summer..." The defining characteristic of a warrior is the WILLINGNESS to close with the enemy." (Emphasis is mine)

So, you can be a born awkward un athletic individual with little or no skill, but if you willingly close withthe enemy, you have the defining characteristic of a warrior. That willingness can be TRAINED to be enhanced.

I would say we are all born with differing levels of potential, but that is not what makes us successful. I would say that there are many world class athletes that are not born withthe most talent in their chosen endeavours, but they had the most commitmment and drive to overcome the obstacles to succeed.

The folks who seemed 'naturals' could easily have had a variety of experiences that reinforced their abilities.. .like a bunch of older brothers who beat them up all the time...

Interesting.

TIm

[Erich Wagner]

"So, you can be a born awkward un athletic individual with little or no skill, but if you willingly close withthe enemy, you have the defining characteristic of a warrior. That willingness can be TRAINED to be enhanced."

I think that there must first be a wiilingness to BE trained. How many of you have had students that attended class more to socialize than to learn? These people, regardless of athletic competence, can not be trained because that is not what they want. Conversely, how many have had the student who made you ask what the hell they were doing there only to stick it out and become a competent fighter? Perhaps just an example of Shane's type two person?

[John_Clements]

Whew...wow, Shane, entering that whole nature/nurture debate are you? Not sure we're qualified to gather enough data to suppose either way, since none of us use these skills for real and who knows how anyone of us would react for real under earnest conditions of actual life threatening violence.

I think your observations have some merrit in terms of the competence of modern practitioners and students, and I understand myself where they come from, but I personally would not extend it into a larger thesis.

JC

Edit: I read now Gene's reply, well said. I agree, a good teacher can change any student given the right conditions...and enough time. Meanwhile, we all definately want to avoid being technically proficient yet ineffectual as a fighter. We want to avoid deluding ourselves that we are tactically competent merely because we perform well with route movement patterns. The problem is....some students don't recognize this or when they do, they continue to delude themselves anyway.

[Shane Smith]

Tim, you said "So, you can be a born awkward un athletic individual with little or no skill, but if you willingly close withthe enemy, you have the defining characteristic of a warrior. That willingness can be TRAINED to be enhanced."

I agree with you when you say that a warrior is willing to close with and destroy an enemy and the threat they represent.I further concede that that martial willingness CAN be enhanced by training as I stated in my position on the type-two individual,but to my mind,the crux of the matter is this;where is the beginning and wellspring of that willingness to take decisive action in spite of our own fear to be found? Is it from within or without? Does it come from the heart or the head?

These are truly tough issues to get one's arm around but that's why I enjoy our forum whether we all agree or disagree on an issue. When we are forced to defend our positions and theories in the presence of other thoughtful men, we are likewise forced to consider and reconsider our positions in order to reason through the particulars to arrive at a reasonable argument.That's all to the good! <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

To digress a moment,I consider the value of the ARMA Forum as two-fold;It gives us a great place to share information and insights in an environment safe from flaming and other foolishness,yet just as importantly,it allows us a form of mental free-play that keeps our minds as sharp as our steel. <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Randall Pleasant]

Shane wrote:
...where is the beginning and wellspring of that willingness...?

When drafted by country, king, or chief, men were not asked if they were willing fight. Trained or not, they were sent forward to close with the enemy. Throughout most of history I would think that the main motivation was that there was a chance to live if they did fight but none of they refussed to fight.

[Shane Smith]

So you're saying that the very willingness to confront and control one's fear in the face of danger arises from one's fear of that danger? That IS an intriguing concept. I think you have raised a very interesting point here Ran.

[david welch]

"When drafted by country, king, or chief, men were not asked if they were willing fight. Trained or not, they were sent forward to close with the enemy. Throughout most of history I would think that the main motivation was that there was a chance to live if they did fight but none of they refussed to fight."

Check out the killology site.

http://www.killology.org

There are some good studies there on behavioral modification to induce soldiers to more readily kill their enemies. Among the research are unsettling statistics on how even during WWII, posibly only 25% of the Allied soldiers took actual AIMED shots at the axis soldiers, the majority seems to have just pointed down range and pulled the trigger, and perhaps as high as another 10-15% shot INTO THE AIR! The peak of American combat seems to have been DS I when as many as +75% of out soldiers were ACTIVELY trying to kill the Iraqis.

My favorite part was where they said the military needs to test and identify the people that were the most likely to pull the trigger. Then put them on crew served weapons or battle field locations where they be used most effectivly. The downside to them is that they can not be held in reserve because if not kept busy in combat they tend to take over, make plans, and kill on their own. <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Food for thought.