Questions on Warrior Archetype

[Jay585]

On a serious note, I do think I get what you’re driving at. My inclination is that warrior is not the right word. It implies war, and that’s not how LE should operate, nor how self-defenders should approach self defense. I agree with you that there is a type of person who is mature, skilled, armed, calm, and ready, should the need arise, to act. I call that group “the people I want to serve warrants with”.

Prior to this post I was "loose" in my definition of warrior. I believed UFC contestants to be "warriors". Different than war fighters but warriors nonethless.

The definition, per Merriam-Webster, of warrior is defined as:

" : a person engaged or experienced in warfare
broadly : a person engaged in some struggle or conflict:"

And warfare:

"1: military operations between enemies : hostilities, war
also : an activity undertaken by a political unit (such as a nation) to weaken or destroy another
economic warfare

2: struggle between competing entities : conflict"

The responses here have made me reconsider the use of the word, but despite the fixation of the misuse of that word - I am glad to see the intent is understood.

[BWT]

I don’t know about the warrior stuff so I’ll leave it at that.

But to your point which seems largely overlooked

Those who do have some element of the warrior trait: why is it that some work at being skilled while others care only for being heard & seen and perceived as “right”?

Man… I was ironically listening to this podcast today.

https://youtu.be/u2hYwMvcvz0?si=fsMN1q7_v5yEwtR_

I think and I’ve fallen into this in my profession (not being a warrior) of living off of prior accomplishments, etc. I think a good number of folks enjoy the position and influence of being a person who’s done hard things more than keeping the skills sharp to do hard things.

I think there are people who want to be respected for what they’ve done and those who know that they must be forward focused.

Quite honestly - I was listening to Jerry Miculek in this video ( https://youtu.be/qBOPnFv7FzA?si=9SzqsoAKIMgnhL1T ) and I thought about this… he does not put much value in the past he said he focuses on the future because there is growth in that.

I don’t know much about Samurai’s, but I do believe the being “right” gang and the “keep skills sharp” gang are basically folks that argue from their position of authority and folks who believe you must constantly pursue improvement.

It’s hard to be the second, but that’s what I think it takes to be a true professional in any industry. Is this the conversation you are hoping to have or am I missing the boat?

I think it’s a dangerous mentality for people to just try to hold onto being the authority via being the “loudest in the room” versus being the authority because their skill / logic is undeniable.

I work with both in the IT world and I like the second and hope to emulate the second more.

[Joe in PNG]

In regard to the 'being right gang' vs the 'keep skills sharp' group, there's a thing I call "Cooper's Syndrome"- the unfortunate tendency for people who are honest-to-goodness pioneers in their field to dogmatically rest on their laurels. Instead of refining and growing their innovation, they declare the canon closed, and actively work against anything that goes against their proclamations.

[45dotACP]

Semantics aside, I am more concerned about the guy teaching me martial techniques being right than I am about his personal journey in martial arts.

Some of the greatest martial artists would make some of the worst coaches, and some of the greatest coaches would never be able to defeat their greatest students...think your John Danahers and Cus D'Amatos...guys who coached some of the greatest martial artists in their field, but never had the same level of achievement. Just because Musashi and Kojzilla or whoever were different doesn't necessarily mean you wanna learn swordsmanship from brilliant fighter...those guys tend to be self absorbed primadonnas anyways. They have to be if they want to be that good.

As for what makes me different than someone without a gun? Not much tbh, other than that possibility when they need a gun they'll wish they had one and if I will not. Self preservation amd thus self defense is a human universal. They'll try not to die as much as me. We will probably start the same way...try to talk it out, then trying to run. If it devolves to fighting, that's the only real difference between us.

They'll fight tooth and nail, and I'll probably do the same, but only after I'm out of the other things I can fight with before getting down to digits and dentition.

I'm given to believe fighting back is certain at some point. It just depends on the point.

[Jay585]

I don’t know much about Samurai’s, but I do believe the being “right” gang and the “keep skills sharp” gang are basically folks that argue from their position of authority and folks who believe you must constantly pursue improvement.

It’s hard to be the second, but that’s what I think it takes to be a true professional in any industry. Is this the conversation you are hoping to have or am I missing the boat?

Yes it is, and the tangents that come forth from it.

In regard to the 'being right gang' vs the 'keep skills sharp' group, there's a thing I call "Cooper's Syndrome"- the unfortunate tendency for people who are honest-to-goodness pioneers in their field to dogmatically rest on their laurels. Instead of refining and growing their innovation, they declare the canon closed, and actively work against anything that goes against their proclamations.

A more recent example of this would be the Wilson Combat Ken Hackathorn YouTube videos. I don't understand what led him to his stagnation and adherence to the "obsolete" ways. Dave Spaulding is another old-timer (I mean that with upmost respect) with much experience, but he is more willing to experiment. He comes to a different conclusion than I expected sometimes, but he tried rather than cross his arms petulantly and say "the other way is better".

Semantics aside, I am more concerned about the guy teaching me martial techniques being right than I am about his personal journey in martial arts.

Some of the greatest martial artists would make some of the worst coaches, and some of the greatest coaches would never be able to defeat their greatest students...think your John Danahers and Cus D'Amatos...guys who coached some of the greatest martial artists in their field, but never had the same level of achievement. Just because Musashi and Kojzilla or whoever were different doesn't necessarily mean you wanna learn swordsmanship from brilliant fighter...those guys tend to be self absorbed primadonnas anyways. They have to be if they want to be that good.

As for what makes me different than someone without a gun? Not much tbh, other than that possibility when they need a gun they'll wish they had one and if I will not. Self preservation amd thus self defense is a human universal. They'll try not to die as much as me. We will probably start the same way...try to talk it out, then trying to run. If it devolves to fighting, that's the only real difference between us.

They'll fight tooth and nail, and I'll probably do the same, but only after I'm out of the other things I can fight with before getting down to digits and dentition.

I'm given to believe fighting back is certain at some point. It just depends on the point.

The bolded text is an interesting point. In order to be "experts" does one have to become (so to speak) self absorbed primadonnas in order to create the time/space to become experts, or is it a personality trait among top level performers? Do they become preformers to fill the space they created from being primadonnas?

[FNFAN]

You guys got wrapped up in choice of words and not the meaning behind it.

Might've missed "all the different types of people out there and the levels they (and I) am at."

I chose the words I did because I simply did not know of a alternative word that fit. To elaborate: if one chooses to carry defensive tools and a willingness to fight if needed, what word should be used whose meaning is understood by most?

If you're going to pare it down to "what word" my pick of words would be "aware." If you look in the dictionary, the modern definition is, "having or showing realization, perception, or knowledge" and the 'archaic' definition is "WATCHFUL, WARY." I have been guilty of using archaic terms personally. A term for folks that I had some faith in working the street with used to be, "heads up" or "a good hand" and in my last shop, which was a mixture of moderately to highly educated people with social service backgrounds who wore guns and badges or prior law enforcement who had completed some education, using either term could elicit look of befuddlement or the simple head nod acknowledgement that the vernacular was understood. There's a reason that both the Bible and a favorite philosopher (good old George Gurdjieff) references people being "asleep" and neither have to do with getting some good 'shut-eye."

One statement I've heard from folks that would actually be considered 'warriors' on the 'tip-of-the-spear' is "Every Day is Selection Day." I try to keep that in mind as I wend my way into retirement and seek ongoing development in, "Body, Mind & Spirit."

Can't rest on laurels and none of us is "the man (or woman) we were yesterday."

[okie john]

What is it about us that makes us fighters? Why do some people not have that trait?

Those who do have some element of the warrior trait: why is it that some work at being skilled while others care only for being heard & seen and perceived as “right”?

I think you’re mixing up some things.

I believe that a “mean gene” governs our willingness to use violence. Some is innate, some comes from what we value: religion, family, country, etc. Upbringing, being bullied in school, etc., also matter. If we exclude mental illness on each end, then conscientious objectors and certain religious orders fall to the left of the bell curve, while the military and the intelligence services fall to the right.

Private citizens who own weapons fall in the middle of that bell curve, and their intentions form another bell curve within it. Where we fall depends on tolerance for risk and bias for action, which are probably subject to the same factors as the mean gene. The talisman crowd on the left hopes to survive a hypothetical fight but refuses to prepare beyond acquiring a weapon. On the right are people proficient with multiple types of weapons, the empty hand, etc. Their intent is to not just survive one hypothetical fight but to dominate any fight they encounter.

I see similarities between clout-chasing Instagram shooters and the ones more interested in an exchange of information/application of skill/skill on demand.

To earn a living on social media, you need a group of followers that expands constantly. The best way to get that is not to put out solid information, but to stir up controversy. I believe that this is also a bell curve. On the left you have people who put out information that’s factually incorrect, unsafe, or so slanted that it’s useless. Their names are unimportant. On the right you have people who put out nutrient-dense information. Former Tier I guys leap to mind. These people refuse to create the controversy they need to live off of their social media earnings; they use social media to drive class enrollment and sell things. In the middle you have people who call the 6.5 Creedmoor superior to the 308 Winchester this week, then reverse their position based on some irrelevant detail next week.

FWIW, I’ve done some research on social media influencers for a large consumer brand. We found that the type of influencers who worked with that brand tended to move between parenting, cooking, travel, and photography in search of audiences that could support them. If they didn't make numbers in one field, then they'd move to the next. Expertise and passion never entered the equation. I think that many outdoor influencers also rotate between fields until they find one that's just right. We just don't become aware of them until they hit pay dirt.

These people are merchants and jesters, not warriors.


Okie John