ASD with Rigid Moral Values and the Bushido Code

Post Reply New Topic

Hey, I was wondering if any of you people with ASD hold rigid moral values, and a keen sense of Justice?
Can be an attribute of people with ASD (but no always the case).

If you are that type. i was wondering if you had heard of the Traditional Japanese Code of Honour used by their Elite Warrior Class known as the Samurai. This code is the Bushido Code, is 1000 years old, and was practised among the Japanese people but especially the Samurai class, for the past 1000 years, and is still an influence on some of the more traditionalist families of Japan today.

The Bushido Code is a type of moral code promoted to keep order, as well as promote peace and justice.
The Bushido Code includes the 8 virtues: Justice, Courage, Mercy, Politeness, Honesty, Honour and Loyalty.
The code holds many values that are similar to that used by Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism, and Judaism.
The punishment or justice system perhaps had more in common with some forms of Islam and Mosaic Law.
(i.e. capital punishment for some crimes. No longer enforced).

Anyone like the Bushido code? I feel that it is much more straight forward than most western manipulative law systems work now.

I’m not sure if I have “rigid” moral values, but I certainly have a keen sense of justice and morality that molds my behavior.

I know people who, due to their rigid beliefs, wouldn’t ever approve of someone breaking the law. While following the law almost always benefits society, I can think of instances where my personal sense of justice would advocate breaking it.

For instance, in a rural area, an acquaintance of mine hit a deer with her car. The deer wasn’t killed but it was in a great deal of pain (it was screaming ) and couldn’t have been fixed up by a vet. A hunter came along in his truck to see if my friend was okay. She asked him to shoot it because she couldn’t bear seeing its suffering, but he refused because that would’ve been breaking the law. If it would’ve been me, I would’ve shot the deer. (Somebody notify Sly! I’m talking about guns!) It’s probable that the hunter was acting on selfish motives and wanted to avoid getting into trouble (no one was around), but some people I know rigidly follow the law because they believe that’s what’s right.

I know some Aspies that have a very rigid, black and white approach to morality. I’m not necessarily saying that’s bad. I’d much rather people have that than no morality at all!

I like the idea of taking concepts like justice and empathy and molding one’s moral system around that. Of course, one could have a faulty notion of what justice is (“I need to kill all the Jews”), so that’s where I think exploring different ethical approaches to morality could be beneficial.

By adulthood, I think it’s really hard to totally reshape one’s moral code, but it can certainly be tweaked here and there.

The Bushido Code looks interesting. If I was reading correctly, it seems like the goal of following those 8 tenets is to lead a moral life so one can die honorably, leaving a legacy that others will remember.

I like that.

I am not a fan of moral codes, as I am a negative utilitarian. Essentially, this means that "utility" is defined as the reduction of unnecessary suffering as opposed to the amplification of the greatest benefit, which is a secondary consideration. I have caveats as it relates to "information known and possible variables unknown," acknowledging the Dunning-Kruger bias in one's own decision making, and also regarding reducing suffering broadly as a priority over reducing the suffering of single individuals, which is secondary (this is to evade the "utility monster" criticism).

In the absence of sufficient data, one reverts to the prevailing moral expectations in the locality one is in. I feel very strongly about justice, both social and economic. I believe any action which is "very highly probable to further utility" is desirable regardless of the nature of the action itself.

In terms of codes of conduct, I'd prefer something like a Zen life philosophy. An action is superior to another when it is done with presence of mind, intuitively, and without tension. Combined with accepting the avoidance of suffering upon others and the reduction of it if possible, one would tend to do no harm purposefully.

Yeah. That topic is pretty popular when it comes to Japanese history. It's important to keep in mind that this was not a perfect or problem-free lifestyle. The warring states era, which saw the peak of samurai function in society, was pretty much the bloodiest and most unstable part of Japanese history. Much of the codes and religious trends samurai lived by were contingent upon the high likelihood of their lives coming to a swift end by the hands of someone else's sword. -or having to kill someone at any moment.

Personally I find more ancient Japanese history / prehistory more interesting, particularly the Jomon era. One of the earliest and best preserved pottery cultures in the world, 14,000 BC. To each their own though.

I do hold a fundamental rigid moral value. The Golden Rule. More specifically, I strongly believe that every human being has a RIGHT to be able to live their own life free from fear of harm at the hand of another. In my world, every person should be able to:

Walk down a street anywhere and not be harmed by anyone for any reason.
Live without fear in their home and feel safe wherever they go.
A person shouldn't be touched, any kind of touch, unless they give consent.
Live in a world where everyone should be able to be completely comfortable and at ease knowing that no one else will hurt them or steal from them.

Obviously that's not the world we live in. It's the greatest shame and tragedy of humanity in my opinion. It's the saddest thing about life for me.

I also don't justify away people's actions for perpetrating violence on others like many people seem to do. There's no excuse, period. End of story.

I have rigid moral codes. I don't cheat, ever. If I cheated, I would question whether I would have succeeded if I hadn't cheated, and then my mind will get caught in an endless loop thinking about whether the cheating really helped me, and/or hurt others. I wonder how people who achieve success through cheating and/or lying can not feel terribly guilty and disappointed in themselves.

I do have a few fairly rigid moral principles I follow, though I wouldn't use Chivalry or Bushido as a model for such a rthing beyond the general idea. They're both wildly inconsistent, and what's written down and codified as included in either "code" was so long after the fact and contain more than a few distasteful elements.

prefer facets of confucian thought, though living as if already dead has its uses in persevering.

"Morality"? What a concept!

Confucius was a bit too keen on caste-systems for my tastes.

Yes. I believe that is what is generally meant in the Bushido code, although in Feudal Warring Japan, the Bushido Code not only taught the moral constructs of Japanese society as influenced by the many common but most usually Asian Religious ideals as found in Buddhism, Shinto, Confucianism, and Taoism but also served as a way to regulate and police society. In fact the pressure on society to conform to the code is so extreme that society essentially police's itself.

Its a really interesting phenomena from a sociological perspective.
I think that also one religious belief that also affects why the Japanese people feel the pressure so much more, is that there is a Taoist / Shinto practice of ancestor worship. As they imagine that their ancestors, once passed, live in a heaven or void like place, and essentially can see them as they walk through their lives.

So, to commit a crime by breaking the Bushido code or by acting in a criminal way intentionally, is to not only
bring shame on themselves, but on their living family, as well as every ancestor from the beginning of time.

There is part of the ancient Bushido code that i feel a bit too much, is that there is pressure to commit suicide if you break certain conditions. I think that this type of code, when in a war, perhaps is the most logical and best strategy for security of your family and the side you are fighting for. As if you are captured by your enemies and you do not commit suicide, then the secrets that you know may be tortured out of you and then used to take over your entire clan's city.
Which may also involve other horrific events from happening such as your family being murdered and your wife/daughters attacked etc.

You would think that in peace time however that the Japanese people would have stopped this practice of ritual suicide, however it is still used in Japan under some circumstances. Some that really shocked me.

For example, i heard a story once of a famous Japanese World Judo Champion, who was also a super wealthy businessman. He was also supposed to be a really nice guy, however his luck changed during the economic crisis in the 80s, which hit Japan, which caused his multi million dollar business to fold.

When his business folded, in Japanese society he lost face, so he commit ritual suicide so as to not shame his ancestors or be a burden to his family. This, from a buddhist perspective, i find difficult to comprehend. But it is part of their culture.

Personally i think that ritual suicide is ok for some situations, for example, is a person is a habitual, obsessive and incurable child molester or something similar. If a person can not be cured, and there are no hospitals that can keep them in forever, it would be for the best for them to voluntary leave life. However, i think that there may be some circumstances where some of these people can be treated with therapy or perm medication so that they are no longer
a threat to anyone and can be of use to society in some way.

But again, i could be wrong on that debate, all i know is leaving people who are dangerous due to illness or compulsion or who are simply driven by dark motives are better away from good decent honest people.

Interesting answer.

Although personally if what you mean (and i am not saying that you do mean this) by reduction of unnecessary suffering actually means killing off any inferior races that have defects (such as the disabled, the mentally ill, those deemed of inferior races) so that their sheer existence does not cause suffering to those who are not materially inferior,
then i can't say i agree.

I am very Buddhism in mind, in that i would like to help all people free themselves from suffering. However, i personally think that the nazi's perceived the meaning of suffering very simplistically.
From a very materialistic perspective, in the same way that the nazi's interpreted Nietzsche was different to how others interpreted the same writings by the same man.

For example. Around the same time or even before the Nazi's started tuning into Nietzsche and came out with their ideals of the super man, the super human being from a genetic materialistic perspective, there were other writings by others around the world that gave a different perspective or response from reading the same philosophy.

For example, Sri Aurobindo, an Indian intellectual, freedom fighter, poet, religious scholar and visionary also
had a vision of what he thought would be the ultimate super man, but his super man was not a man full of muscle and genetic superiority through the practice of eugenics, but his super man was superior through following a path of spiritual discipline which he used to train his mind to alleviate his own and others suffering through his own words, thoughts and actions.

Following Hindu, Buddhist philosophy, essentially speaking, the very nature of the spiritual path is to spiritually refine oneself into the Superman that Sri Aurobindo envisions. Also, their line of thought is their opinion on the nature of suffering, the cause of suffering and the way to stop suffering.

Again, their solution is completely different and does not involved genocide or race heighrachy. as in such circumstances. genocide does in deed cause a great deal of suffering, perhaps not so much to the people committing these "crimes against humanity" but certainly to the humans (and they are humans) who are being culled so that their murderers can benefit from their deaths in what ever way.

Race Heighrachy of course also causes suffering, again perhaps not the Master race, but to all the races below.
This is clear in any caste system. Even the ones still alive today.

Yes I understand. I do not cheat either. I am rigid in many ways.
The reason why i do not cheat, is because i follow the logic that if i am playing a game for example.
Then if i cheat to win, i have not in truthfulness actually won, all i have won is the person who cheated to win
rather than winning in truthfulness.

I am the same with relationships, if i am in a romantic relationship with someone who i have agreed with on a particular set of terms. for example. we go out with each other and do not cheat. Then i simply do not cheat.
This is because doing so would not only mean that i betrayed my partner and are thus not worthy of trust.
But also from a martial artists perspective. if i cave into temptation, this means i am spiritually weak
and not a strong fighter.

In many ways, the fights that happen in the mind determine how tough a fighter or person is.
it is funny, as people often judge how tough a person is from looking at their appearance
for example, if you put a black belt at jiu jitsu or judo next to a guy who is naturally big but dont tell anyone
that the martial art guy does martial arts and you ask people who is the toughest

almost all people will automatically vote for the guy who is big with big muscles who may have just been born unusually big however in many cases, if you were to push each of the limits or you were to match one against the other in a cage fight

the guy who may look like a regular guy often would win hands down against the guy who simply had "superior genetics"

So in my opinion, "superior self mind control" beats "superior genetics" allways

right on. with you on all the above. i personally see myself as a globalist humanitarian that promotes no discrimination.
I do however also promote the right to defend oneself. Such things may be taken for granted in the US.
I live in the UK, where the law is much more ambiguous and the police advise never to defend yourself
which leaves the innocent party to be preyed upon by the less savoury members of society.

in an ideal world, self defence would not need to exist. but as you say, we do not live in an ideal world.
so while loads of people in society are preying upon the rest which includes using violence, i will defend myself
and help others defend themselves.

Is there a more basic, a more inalienable right than for a life-form to defend itself from a predator or transgressor? I seriously can't think of one. And the notion of any authoritative body to suppress or try to eliminate that right is tyrannical.

No I do not mean "eliminating those who suffer or cause burden to others," although I will not make an absolute moral stance regarding inflicting death for utility. For instance, my response to the "would you kill Baby Hitler question" is unquestioningly to kill the baby. When considering the reduction of suffering, one will not fail to count all people as qualified recipients of utility (all people should suffer less unnecessarily).

Therefore, instead of exterminating all mentally ill individuals, society should alleviate their unnecessary suffering by providing adequate care to all by need and promoting understanding and tolerance in society. The inconvenience of an individual or group sacrificing for the benefit of these individuals is less than the suffering inflicted by non-support and ignorance upon the mentally ill individuals.