On virtue and swords
Good knives cut. What about good swords?
When you go through life and talk to a lot of different people you sometimes get the opportunity to see things from multiple perspectives.
Quite some time ago I came across the concept of virtue as described by Socrates (470-399 BC). Virtue itself is defined as a moral excellence or good quality [1]. While virtue is often ascribed to the positive aspects of people, it can also be ascribed to objects.
Sharp knives are knives of virtue
What is the purpose of a knife? The purpose of most knives is to cut things well. As such, sharp knives are good knives.
If a knife is dull, the person using the knife might need to use extra power or even need sawing motions in order to get the job done. If a knife is dull it can lead to injury, especially when you are putting extra force into a cut the knife isn’t capable of making (due to its lack of virtue as a knife) and you end up slipping and either cutting or stabbing yourself as a result.
A sharp knife is a virtuous knife. But both good and evil can be done with a sharp knife. A sushi chef that uses a knife to expertly cut thinly sliced pieces of fish is using the knife in one way, but that same person might use that knife to stab one of his colleagues in a fit of rage. The virtue of the knife itself is unchanged (sharp knives cut), but the result of how the virtuous knife is used changes depending on the virtue of the person holding it. In the hands of a chef it can create virtuous work, but in the hands of a killer it can create work that lacks virtue.
It’s not the fault of the knife.
A tale of two blades
There are several different versions of this story so I will put together a version that covers most bases. Two legendary sword-smiths in Japanese history forged blades that were said to reflect their personalities. 千子村正 (Sengo Muramasa), who was born during the Muromachi period (14th to 16th century) was a sword-smith with a reputation for violence and bloodshed. 五郎入道正宗 (Gorō Nyūdō Masamune) (1264–1343), was a sword-smith active during the Kamakura period and was known to be a man of great virtue and peace.
.jpg){kind=link}
A legend was told of these two sword-smiths where Masamune, the master of Muramasa, both forged swords to see who could make the better weapon. They tested the weapons by placing them into a stream. The Muramasa blade (made by the smith with the reputation for bloodshed) cut everything it touched. Fish, leaves, and even the wind. When the sword made by the peaceful Masamune was lowered into the river the only thing that was cut by the sword were leaves. Fish swam near it but avoided touching the blade. Even flower petals avoided touching the blade and the wind did not howl as it blew by.
A monk who observed the testing of the blades had this to say [2]:
The first of the swords was by all accounts a fine sword, however, it is a blood-thirsty, evil blade, as it does not discriminate as to who or what it will cut. It may just as well be cutting down butterflies as severing heads. The second was by far the finer of the two, as it does not needlessly cut that which is innocent and undeserving.
Based on the the time that both Muramasa and Masamune lived, this story could not possibly have taken place. It is more of a legend based on some of the greatest sword-smiths in Japanese history who were each representative masters of their time.
But this whole story is interesting because it adds an additional dimension to the kind of virtue that Socrates spoke of. These blades had virtues of their own: One with the virtue of being able to cut anything without discrimination, the other with the virtue of being merciful and not cutting things indiscriminately.
Application
A regular knife of virtue is a sharp knife. If it cuts well, it’s a virtuous knife. But a sword made by a legendary sword-smith has virtue above and beyond what an ordinary knife has.
A Muramasa blade is so good at cutting that it’s ability to cut is way beyond what some people might consider necessary. Its virtue is to be good at cutting to the point that even things that do not deserve to be cut will be cut by the sword.
A Masamune blade has virtue beyond the intended purpose of a sword. It cuts very well, but also only cuts what deserves to be cut.
Whether these legendary swords exist or not is not really my concern, but I have sometimes seen these kinds of character traits in people.
There are some martial artists out there that are avatars of destruction. They will mercilessly crush opponents and are absolute forces to be reckoned with. If the virtue of a martial artist is to be proficient at taking out opponents using their bodies as weapons, then you cannot deny that these people are martial artists of great virtue. But they are virtuous in a way that a Muramasa blade is good at cutting.
There are other martial artists out there that are incredibly skilled fighters that might be approaching the level or be at the same level as the avatars of destruction I just mentioned. But these martial artists may not enter tournaments, will avoid hurting their training partners as much as possible, and will also not hurt people unless it’s absolutely necessary. These martial artists are virtuous in the way that a Masamune blade is virtuous.
A Muramasa type is much easier to see/test than a Masamune. Mike Tyson for example is what I would consider a Muramasa type. Mike Tyson in his prime was a force of nature and did not care who he hurt and how he hurt them to be the best. Masamune type people are much more difficult to come by, because they would need to be incredibly dangerous but also not really express how dangerous they are.
Take home messages
Virtue relates to moral excellence or good quality. Moral people are people of virtue. Objects that fulfill their intended purpose are objects of virtue.
There can sometimes be an additional layer to consider when thinking of virtue. Both Muramasa and Masamune swords are swords of great virtue. But while one will cut without discrimination, the other will only cut what should be cut.
A Muramasa type person might be the kind of person that will simply do the job they are suited for. For example, training to be a good martial artist and then obliterating an opponent in the ring without any concern for how much damage you do to them.
But a Masamune type person, while they may be capable of overcoming anyone/anything, might choose not to do so. For example, if a very good runner could win a race, but instead of doing so they choose hold back coach another runner over the finish line then they are showing both their ability and virtue at the same time, but without needing to directly demonstrate their prowess.
References
[1] https://www.philoschools.com/socratic-philosophy/socrates/ethics-and-virtue
[2] Masamune - His Work, his Fame and his Legacy
Thank you very much for reading. If you enjoy my work please share it with someone you think would also enjoy it.
If you aren’t subscribed, please sign up to keep up to date.
If social media is more your thing I’m active on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
And if you are looking for ways you can support my work please check out the page below:
Osu!
Anthony
The analogy of the swords reminds me of Aristotle's idea of virtue ethics; how too much or too little of any given virtue is undesirable. Good read 👍