Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Wilhelm von Wänkensteïn Stickied. Want to know how I did it?  Thing is, Des, aren't you a mod? |
No.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bamboo Practitioners that follow a particular religion often use that system of beliefs to justify the use of violence in thier minds as either the "right" thing to do or in some cases of monism, that in the absense of a "true opponent", there is no right or wrong in terms of physical damage and /or use of violence.
Can you explain or discuss the differences of mindset during an actual fight between someone like those mentioned above and the combatant that suffers from ethical questions? |
Well, their mindsets are different in that one has ethical questions and the other doesn't. Of course, I dodged the question there, but it illustrates a point, just about anything can be a difference of mindset.
If somebody is committed to physical violence - whether it be for religious conviction, sadism or simple amorality - they won't really think about the action, per se. Especially if you assume that both persons we're discussing here are trained martial artists, the one committed to violence will act instinctually in combat and therefore can be quite a ferocious opponent. The one who is ethically inclined to see violence as wrong, on the other hand, will be committed instead to avoiding pain, escaping the situation, or perhaps restraining his opponent so that he won't harm bystanders. Given that avoiding pain and escaping a hostile situation are both parts of the survival instinct, that should come fairly naturally and it should "work," within that sense. However, attempting to restrain somebody else who is violent and aggressive is not within our nature, does not fit within our schema for instinctual action and so requires much thought, and thus effort. It can be very difficult to do, even before you take into account the technical requirements.
So, basically, the mindsets of an ethical combatant and somebody who believes violence is all right are like the differences between a human and a tiger. The ethical fighter (human) is marked by higher thought processes, the other (tiger) is marked by a natural ferocity. The instrinsic problem is that thinking during a fight is bad, it causes hesitation, restraint in one's own techniques, etc.
What is the difference in mindset? One is committed to violence the other is committed to stopping violence, one acts naturally with the backing of billions of years worth of evolved instinct the other acts thoughtfully and with the backing of his own frontal lobe, one is ready to act and ferocious the other is hesitant and meek.