In the past week we discussed many things, but one question that stood out at me was one of the big ones we reached. The question was, ‘What are the right and wrong ways for a warrior to act?’ This question stood out at me not only because it brings up how warriors are supposed to conduct themselves in and outside of battle, but how the question is still relevant in modern times.
Our class reached this question through the actions of a few characters in The Iliad. One character that exemplifies the question being brought up through his actions is Achilles. Achilles, in trying to defy Agamemnon’s authority, can be seen as a disobedient and untrustworthy warrior. While his participation will vastly affect the outcome of the war, he is too self-concerned with his own matters to care or concern himself with the rest of his army’s struggles. Achilles even permits Patroclus to wear his armor (it took much persuading) and enter the battle allowing others to falsely think that it was Achilles. While Achilles allowing Patroclus to enter the war under disguise and disillusion to the Trojan army can be seen as a better alternative than Achilles doing nothing, it can also be seen as a lapse in his judgment and a poor decision made by a warrior.
This problem of determining what the right and wrong ways a soldier should act is still evident in modern day society. We have soldiers being discharged for varying reasons more often than you would like to think (whether they are discharged because of good or bad decisions). I saw a movie a while ago called Stop-Loss and it directly questioned the way a soldier should act if they were being forced back into military action and it ties directly in with this question.
One of the problems I see in questioning the decisions and actions made by warriors is that many people can justify (or see reason in) why the decision was made. While there might be more people arguing that the decision was wrong or right, there will always be people who defend the decisions made. Another problem I have with the question is that in a certain circumstance one decision seems like the best one to make, while looking back on it one can say that it was a poor decision.
12 comments:
How a warrior conducts himself or herself is a tricky question because in our world today, there are no "warriors" in the sense that Achilles was a warrior. I think your point about how a warrior should act should really be phrased as how a person should act. The point you made about making decisions does not only apply to a fighter but rather people overall. In your last paragraph, you ultimately say that the way a person handles a situation can be great or terrible in the long run. The question is, how can you know the right answer to make the brightest future? I think that a person has to follow his/her intuition and hope that all goes well.
I believe that you can make an argument in comparing how a warrior acted in The Iliad to the modern world. However, I do agree that it is a very tricky concept. While we do not have the same kind of "warriors" that were shown in The Iliad, we do have soldiers in our military. These soldiers can make the same kind of mistakes that warriors did, such as making poor decisions outside of their authority. This comparison can be seen with Achilles defying Agamemnon; it can also be seen as a soldier defying their leader/commander.
I agree with you on the point that at the time of the decision it could look great but looking back on it, it could be an awful decision. But twenty-twenty hindsight right? Regarding Achilles, obviously he makes good and bad decisions. But in the end, his good outweighs the bad. He is ultimately able to reconcile with himself and Agamemnon in the necessity of his participation. While this reconciliation came at a bad time, I think it epitomizes the personality of Achilles and how he is able to stay level headed and make good decisions while in battle.
I agree with what mikey said about people following their instinct to try and make the best possible decisions. Especially on a battlefield where many critical decisions are made everyday, one's instinct almost always prevails. Its not possible to take five minutes to think about a decision when you are in the middle of war. I think this is the best and simplest way to view a warrior; look at the decisions made while under severe pressure.
Maybe I misunderstood your last sentence, but hindsight is always 20-20. Its unfair to sit back and criticize a decision made by someone who does not have the liberty of contemplating their decision for more than a minute.
Sam is right; combat is not about making deep, well-thought-out decisions. Maybe war is (i.e., whether to GO to war or not), but once you get in a combat situation, you have to do what seems right at the time.
On a separate note that occurred to me as i sat here staring at the title of this post trying to figure out what else to say, i think it's important to recognize the relativity of the words "right" and "wrong". These two words can and do mean COMPLETELY different things to different people, and that's an important fact.
War is kill or be killed and like everyone has said you do not have a lot of time to think on the battle field. You may not make the right decision, but as long as you are still breathing at the end of the day you did alright. Now different roles have different responsibilities. Since Achilles was not in charge of the Achaeans, he was able consider himself and stay on the sidelines.
I don't think a warrior/soldier needs to follow certain rules or has to act a certain way. When a person is out on the battlefield, they put their life on the line. They can be killed at any moment and are fighting for survival. At this moment, instinct takes over a person's mind and he will do anything it takes to survive.
Good decisions is a generic term and can represent different ideals for different people. Some warriors might place survival as a top priority and classify all actions that keep them alive as good decisions. On the other hand, warriors in the Iliad believe that dieing in battle is honorable and therefore fighting is a good decision.
In response to Sean's comment about the comment, "as long as you are still breathing at the end of the day you did alright," I argue that that is no longer the case. In an idealistic world, yes, but today e have rules and regulation for our army. I don't know if any of of you (besides Brad) have read the book The Lone Survivor by Marcus Luttrell, but it provides a perfect example of this. He is in the hills of Afghanistan with his squad when they run across a group of oat herders. They know that the herders will give away their location to the Taliban if the SEALS let them live, but they also know that they will probably be convicted of a war crime in the United States if they commit what in this case qualifies as murder. They end up releasing the farmers and all, but Marcus get killed by the Taliban as a result. In today's world, there are circumstances where soldiers will go against their natural instinct to save their own lives. This is a phenomenon that is probably not understood or taken into account during the time of the Iliad.
I agree with Captain Kirk that actions on the battle field are instinctive kill or be killed decisions. But I think that soldiers' training should embed a sense of honor and duty so the soldier's instinct is more refined and honorable as opposed to wild and primal. Survival is all well and good, but survival at any cost leads to a lot of really bad stuff which would take a while to explain.
Well... What defines a warrior?
That's what we first need to establish but anyways I believe sll humans are going to make right or wrong decisions but one bad decision that causes them to be dischaged doesn't make them not a warrior.
Jack - I disagree, you cannot really compare how a warrior acted in the Iliad and in the modern world. WAY too much has changed since then. I wonder how people in the Iliad would view us if they read about us
I think it's pretty difficult to say that the best way to judge a warrior is by the actions he makes under extreme pressure. I certainly think it's a good indication to a certain extent but remember, you'll do anything you can to stay alive. They might do something that we would find unbecoming of a warrior but if that's what he has to do to stay alive then so be it.
I think that your closing line is a stretch. You have to keep in mind that hindsight is always 20/20. As for how a warrior should act, I agree that they should think before they act, but it's not that simple. Each wrrior has different qualities that those in charge need to take into account. Because Achilles is such an ego-maniac and a great warrior, Agamemnon must prioritize what he wants out of Achilles. He needs to choose whether he wants Achilles and his fighting skills along with the distractions, or to get rid of Achilles and his ego. So how a warrior can act, to me, depends on how those in charge will let them act.
Post a Comment