Is chivilery dead

[draconix]

1. To reply to the war part of it, I find it illogical to be "nice" in war. If your trying to win a war, do the best things to win a war, even if it violates a honor code. (I don't think this topic is about that though)

I might take issue with this point. Do you count the Geneva Convention as an honor code? It's much larger in scale, but in principal it's still an honor system for war, right? Edited October 5, 2011 by draconix

[marharth]

1. To reply to the war part of it, I find it illogical to be "nice" in war. If your trying to win a war, do the best things to win a war, even if it violates a honor code. (I don't think this topic is about that though)

I might take issue with this point. Do you count the Geneva Convention as an honor code? It's much larger in scale, but in principal it's still an honor system for war, right?

Not entirely, it is for more reason then honor I would say.

 

Maybe I should retract my statement, you are correct. A honor code is a good thing if it makes sense.

Edited October 5, 2011 by marharth

[draconix]

Maybe I should retract my statement, you are correct. A honor code is a good thing if it makes sense.

 

I'd agree with that. I think that you may have been correct in the spirit of what you meant though, in that in a war like the ones seen in the medieval period, chivalry may have been impractical for most. In a crazy situation where there are hundreds of people hacking each other away limb by limb, you look out for yourself first. The Geneva convention differs from the idea of chivalry in that it defends the defenseless, rather than defending your actual opponent. I'd actually like to talk more about that, but it doesn't actually sounds like there's a debate to be had on that subject, rather, a philosophical discussion... and I'd hate to derail this thread further. Sorry guys! :ninja:

Edited October 5, 2011 by draconix