The Warrior Scholar Idea Blog Post 001 - Back to the Future

Resurrecting the Warrior-Scholar Ideal

On November 7, The Warrior-Scholar Ideal Revisited: New Essays on Old Vision, was released by Stairway Press.

As its subtitle clarifies, The Warrior Scholar Ideal comprise of a series of essays composed over the last few years. They are intended to acquaint readers with a vision of human excellence that had been extolled at various times and places over the centuries and millennia, but which has largely been lost to the contemporary West.

The Warrior-Scholar has historically embodied an ideal of manhood. This figure is distinguished on account of his perfection of both the intellectual and soldierly virtues: He is as well-read, as sober and curious a thinker, as he is capable and willing to prevail in mortal combat.

One will not find wanting thinkers of one sort or another who have advocated on behalf of this ideal over the centuries. It is Thucydides who has been credited with having issued the ominous warning that a “society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools.”

That Thucydides is not likely the author of this observation is irrelevant, for there can be no doubt that the man who served as a general in the Peloponnesian war and who enjoys the distinction of being our first historian would have wholeheartedly endorsed this view. Nevertheless, it is really to 17^th century Japan that we must turn to find the paradigmatic champion of the Warrior-Scholar ideal, to the renowned Samurai, Miyamoto Musashi.

From the time that he was 13 until when he was in his late 20s, Musashi had over 60 duels. Many of these were to the death. Musashi was undefeated. During this period, he also shed much blood in the wars in which he fought. But when he was nearing 30, the master swordsman decided that he should no longer travel the countryside engaging Japan’s warriors in deadly duels. He opened his own martial art school.

And he began to write, a move that couldn’t have been anything less than a foregone conclusion given that among the pearls that he would impart through the written word is Musashi’s own reminder that “the warrior’s is the twofold Way of pen and sword, and he should have a taste for both.” 

It wasn’t just the arts of war in which Musashi excelled. He was also an adept at the arts of culture, practicing calligraphy, sculpting, and painting. “Polish your wisdom; learn public justice, distinguish between good and evil, study the ways of different arts one by one.”

In another place, he was even more to the point: “Become acquainted with every art.”

That the contemporary West has long ago relegated this vision of manhood to the dustbin of history can readily be gotten from the confusion that plagues the present discourse, such as it is, on sex and gender roles. Certainly, the current situation, being complex, lends itself to a multiplicity of comparably legitimate readings. What no one considers, however, is that while the term “toxic masculinity” is indeed a rhetorical weapon wielded by ideologues to advance their political interests, it is a mistake to think, as many do think, that it is only a political talking point. “Toxic masculinity,” while inescapably, and by design, imprecise, nevertheless connotes a real phenomenon.

While a zeitgeist that has been described as “feminist” accounts in no small measure for our current state, I submit that long before something now called “feminism” emerged on the historical scene, something else occurred that set in motion a trend that culminated in the present moment:

The Warrior-Scholar ideal, as an ideal of manhood, disintegrated.

Consequently, in the popular cultural imagination, males were expected to either become “tough guys” or “wonks.”

When the Warrior spirit is separated from the scholarly spirit, the Warrior ideal succumbs to the ideal of the Tough Guy, and the Scholarly ideal resolves into the ideal of the Wonk. The Tough Guy may “fight,” but he won’t ultimately prevail, for he is, as Thucydides is said to have remarked, a “fool.” The Tough Guy lacks the virtues of the head. And because he has no share in the intellectual virtues, he lacks as well as the excellences of the heart, the character, the will, to stay the course in times of crisis. 

As Aristotle said of the courageous man: “He is courageous who endures and fears the right thing, for the right motive, in the right way and at the right times.”

The Tough Guy’s is a penchant for recklessness, which Aristotle identified as a vice that can often be confused with courage. Yet recklessness is a character deficiency precisely because the reckless person, lacking discernment, is a fool.

The Wonk may have intelligence, he may possess erudition, but he can never actualize his intellectual potential. The Wonk is too busy burying his head in his studies to be bothered by any activities requiring the development of his body. Yet, paradoxically, this physical ineptitude can’t but translate into an intellectual flaccidity, for the Wonk, being devoid as he is of the Warrior spirit, lacks the fortitude, the courage, to expand his intellectual horizons by smashing, or at least challenging, whatever the contingencies and relativities of his day have elevated into sacred cows.

Unlike Socrates, who regarded himself as a “gadfly” to the regime that would ultimately sentence him to death, the Wonk is a lapdog. At the end of the day, he is an apologist, a polemicist, a propagandist for the orthodoxies propping up the Powers-That-Be.

It is in vain that one searches for any originality, creativity, or daring in the Wonk.

The Warrior-Scholar Ideal Revisited is our attempt to initiate the process of restoring this lost ideal of manhood, of belying the mind-body dualism that had to take flight when the excellences of the Warrior were severed from those of the Scholar.

Interestingly, though, the Warrior-Scholar ideal, while remaining an ideal of manhood, is not only such an ideal, as it can be embodied by women no less than men. Nor, as some may be inclined to think, is this a concession on our part to current political dogmas: Plato himself contended for the inclusion of women among the guardian class of his ideal Republic.

To be sure, given the demonstrable, and demonstrably substantial, differences in physical strength and ability between them and their male counterparts, few females are going to defeat males in a “fight” (whether in a ring or on the streets). That being said, since being a warrior is not a matter of being a tough guy, and since being a warrior is a matter of possessing the skill and the will to achieve victory in mortal combat, a properly trained woman, like a properly trained man, can indeed neutralize, by whatever the means, the physical advantages of male attackers.

In other words, critically injuring, maiming, and killing a human predator—to a properly trained individual—is actually a less formidable task than that of beating an opponent.

Those public figures known for being “conservative” or “libertarian” repeatedly lament government paternalism and what they deem attacks on masculinity and personal agency. While they tend to advocate on behalf of the Second Amendment, the military, and the police, seldom, if ever, can they be counted upon to make the case for citizens to assume responsibility for their own protection by taking up training in a martial art, a warrior art. Indeed, it’s difficult to avoid the inference that they are as beholden to the very “Statism” that they decry as are their political opponents.

In calling for a resurrection of the Warrior-Scholar ideal, we most definitely are not calling upon citizens to join the military or law enforcement. Rather, it is our hope that individuals, today, will begin to make themselves into warriors in their everyday lives through training in a martial art (preferably the art in which we ourselves train). We return once more to Musashi, who declared that the “true science of martial arts means practicing them in such a way that they will be useful at any time, and to teach them in such a way that they will be useful in all things.” And we are most definitely not calling on citizens to enroll in college in order to become scholars. 

Psychologically, intellectually, and physically, in mind, body, and soul, we’re inviting people to transform themselves.

The Warrior-Scholar Ideal Revisited: New Essays on an Old Vision promises to supply the framework within which those who are interested in accepting the invitation can begin to reframe their own self-conceptions and can begin seeing their own lives in terms of the odyssey of self-discovery and self-creation that they will become.

As we build on this Blog, we will explore the steps toward developing the necessary traits of the Warrior Scholar in a manner where people who desire to embody these traits and skills can train in mind and body to develop the ability to be able to stand in that space between fear and courage known as confidence.

Thank you.

Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.