The Deacon wrote:Sorry Tonie, you can call me every **** name in the book, think as poorly of me as your wish, I dont' give a rat's ***. My opinion has not changed. While I applaud Spyderco's making specialized tools for "good guy" organizations I still question the wisdom of openly advertising something which, by your own words, was designed primarily as an offensive weapon for military use. Especially on a medium like Facebook, which attracts more than its share of the immature and irresponsible.
I respect your point of view, Deacon; here's mine. The two H1 knives I will definitely buy (none at present) are the Spyderhawk and the Warrior. I hope to buy a boat in the next year and will be exclusively on salt water, so I want H1. I wouldn't buy the Warrior if it wasn't a useful knife, but it probably isn't "that" much more useful than the Spyderhawk or one of the less expensive models.
I buy many things for partially impractical reasons. I have dozens of Spyderco knives for no reason other than the enjoyment of having them. I want to buy the Warrior because I think it's a marvelous design, aside from it's "sentry elimination" function, but one reason I will buy it is it's mystique. Like most kids in the sixties I played army and military equipment still plugs in to remembered joy. Also, I'm Jewish; and the Israeli "Seal" angle adds to the allure of this knife. So I'll be buying a useful tool and paying extra for it's symbolic meaning to me.
Spyderco, like all manufacturers, is selling image as well as function. Monty Python satirized the buying of image beautifully in a Terry Gilliam animation about buying pieces of other people's lives so that you could pretend you were them. Is it immoral to prey on emotional dependency by having celebrity endorsements? Is it immoral to advertise and sell based on a psychological understanding of people's emotional desires that is probably superior to their own? It's worth asking what the moral implications are of selling a product designed to kill. Obviously, there are vast numbers of guns sold of a type which has no other purpose than to kill others. I don't think any of this is immoral, but I also don't think this moral question is simple or obvious. I worry much more about the glorification of killing in the media; the pretense that taking another's life can be simple and satisfying as opposed to the emotional hell that it is for any sane person.
When I get my Warrior I will resist the urge to crawl through the grass and pretend to "take out" a sentry as I did in my childhood, but the connection will be there and it will not trouble me at all.
Our reason is quite satisfied, in 999 cases out of every 1000 of us, if we can find a few arguments that will do to recite in case our credulity is criticized by someone else. Our faith is faith in someone else's faith, and in the greatest matters this is most the case.
- William James, from The Will to Believe, a guest lecture at Yale University in 1897