What do you think?
Rate this book
Steven Pressfield's "The Warrior Ethos": One Marine Officer's Critique and Counterpoint
While serving a tour in Afghanistan in 2013, I came across Steven Pressfield's 2011 monograph The Warrior Ethos, at the top of a list of books that the Commandant of the Marine Corps had made mandatory reading for all Marines. Having enjoyed several of Pressfield’s historical novels before, I was looking forward to this latest volume, but was shocked by what I discovered; a rambling mixture of Laconophiliac hero worship, Eastern mysticism, and pop psychology. As a leader and an officer, I was so concerned by the disturbingly misogynistic and backwards-looking nature of this book that I found myself obliged to write a critique to explain the book’s glaring deficiencies, but soon realized that such a critique would only be half of what was needed; just as important would be a counterpoint to illustrate the nature of a Warrior Ethos more suited for the Information Age than the Bronze Age. Pressfield wrote his book in an attempt that was as well-intentioned as its outcome was mistaken; to define and promulgate a “Warrior Ethos” meant to help guide young (presumably American) fighting men and women along the path to success. Unfortunately, his principles, if followed to the letter, would more likely result in personal and professional failure. This book has been written to accomplish Pressfield’s intended purpose; but I propose a much different moral compass than the honor-bound, shame-based relic of dead cultures that my counterpart has offered up, and this book represents my effort to suggest a useful way forward in considering what sort of ethos modern warriors of all ages, ranks, and nationalities may find beneficial in the years to come.
124 pages, Paperback
First published June 21, 2014
22 people are currently reading
181 people want to read
About the author
Edward H. Carpenter
9 books160 followersEdward H. Carpenter is an award-winning author who spent 29 years as a U.S. Marine, serving in conflict zones worldwide before being seconded to the United Nations as a peacekeeper in South Sudan. His firsthand experiences with the dysfunction of military interventions and international peacekeeping led him to question the very institutions designed to protect civilians.
After retiring, he earned a Creative Writing degree from Harvard and a Philosophy degree from the University of Melbourne, using his literary talents to challenge conventional narratives about war and peace. Now based in Australia, Carpenter is a full-time writer and activist dedicated to building a world without war.
In his non-fiction, including Blue Helmet, he critiques the failures of international diplomacy and military-led peacekeeping while offering tangible solutions for reform. His essays and analysis have appeared in The Washington Post, World Politics Review, and War on the Rocks, while his fiction delves into the human cost of conflict.
When he's not writing, he enjoys SCUBA diving, snowboarding, and developing a sustainable farm in southeastern Australia with his wife.
After retiring, he earned a Creative Writing degree from Harvard and a Philosophy degree from the University of Melbourne, using his literary talents to challenge conventional narratives about war and peace. Now based in Australia, Carpenter is a full-time writer and activist dedicated to building a world without war.
In his non-fiction, including Blue Helmet, he critiques the failures of international diplomacy and military-led peacekeeping while offering tangible solutions for reform. His essays and analysis have appeared in The Washington Post, World Politics Review, and War on the Rocks, while his fiction delves into the human cost of conflict.
When he's not writing, he enjoys SCUBA diving, snowboarding, and developing a sustainable farm in southeastern Australia with his wife.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
October 4, 2014
I received this book as a winner in the Goodreads Giveaway, and as such, feel compelled to write a review as stated in the terms and conditions. Since this book contains a critique of Pressfield’s book, which I read a couple years ago, I decided to reread it, so it would be fresh in my mind when reading Carpenter’s book. Not a big stretch as both books are only about 100 pages each. I will state up front that I am a fan of Pressfield’s historical fiction and find the study of ancient history fascinating. I will also state that, like Carpenter, I too served as a Marine Officer, with my combat experience as a young lieutenant occurring during Operation Desert Storm.
Pressfield’s book discusses the idea of the Warrior ethos with context stemming mainly from the history of ancient Greeks, and that ancient society’s idea of how their warriors should train and perform in combat. This makes sense since Pressfield’s expertise is in the study of those ancient civilizations. I respected those views in the context it was delivered. That our modern views of honor and being a warrior are rooted in history, even as far back as the ancients. But Carpenter was, in his own words, “shocked” at what he read. Because Pressfield uses examples from Spartan history, Carpenter seems to think that people are going to read Pressfield’s book and start acting like young Spartan trainees, running around stealing from neighbors, murdering Helots and drinking blood stew. Really?
Carpenter then spends 75 pages of his 100 page book being deliberately condescending by mocking and ridiculing Pressfield for his beliefs. He accuses him of picking and choosing his examples to support his thesis. Carpenter declares that, because all of the examples are from the ancient world, they are no longer relevant; that we, as a modern society should dismiss all that history as nonsense; that there is nothing to be learned from studying ancient societies. Again, I don’t think people reading Pressfield’s book are going to start acting like ancient Spartan families, throwing deformed babies off cliffs or abandoning them in the wilderness. Nor do I believe Pressfield intended that for modern families as Carpenter sarcastically implies on page 7.
Carpenter also discounts Pressfield’s military service (page 27) because, although Pressfield is a fellow Marine, Carpenter doesn't think he has experienced the “eve of battle” enough to talk about what warriors feel. Well, Mr. Carpenter, I read your military biography (easily accessed via the internet), and although you may have completed lots of warrior training (like all Marines), sitting behind a desk ordering aircraft parts does not provide you with salty combat experience. I actually laughed out loud reading about how you felt on the “eve of battle” because of the “threat of enemy rockets” near your position in Afghanistan. Very warrior like indeed. Though, I should probably be impressed with your bio, in that you finished near the top of your class in the wide variety of schools you attended over the years. Bravo.
One of the main themes Carpenter uses to ridicule Pressfield, is how he doesn’t include women enough in his book. Considering that ancient society was male dominant, it would make sense. But more googling of Carpenter reveals that promoting women in the military is one of his pet projects; all well and good. Then why does he bash Pressfield for promoting the strength of Spartan women in ancient times? Oh, yeah, because Pressfield made that up. Whatever.
On page 31, Carpenter starts his mockery of Pressfield’s assertion that leaders should lead from the front, stating all kinds of statistics on officer casualties from previous wars. I’m not sure that most readers will understand the differences in combat over the last 3000 years, and the differences in the necessary leadership styles in those eras, but suffice it to say we have learned through those experiences and improved. One thing that hasn't changed though is that Marine officers are still taught to lead by example, take care of their Marines, avoid recklessness, and make smart decisions in battle. They can still “lead from the front” without charging willy-nilly into incoming gunfire. But, I suppose Carpenter would like to abolish the 2nd Marine Division’s motto, “Follow me”, as it adheres too much to Pressfield’s idea of warrior ethos.
I pressed on with the book and on page 39, Carpenter discusses Honor again, and is appalled that, because Pressfield refers to it as a “man’s” thing, he is excluding women. Are we so politically correct these days that we have to specifically call that out every time? He also calls “Death before Dishonor” a “silly slogan” and surmises that the 6,700 soldiers who received dishonorable, or other than honorable discharges, should just kill themselves (page 40). I rolled my eyes in exasperation.
When I eventually got to the last part, where Carpenter finally explains his idea of a warrior ethos, I actually could agree on many of the ideas he presents, as they are (and have been since I served) a part of how we want our military to conduct themselves. That is, until I reached the part on page 92 where he quotes General Mattis, “no better friend, no worse enemy” but attributes the original quote to the Roman dictator Sulla. Not true. Sulla’s quote translated from Latin is somewhat different, but I digress. Carpenter feels it necessary to “update” Mattis’ quote by changing “worse enemy” to “better enemy”, meaning that people trying to kill us would feel much better about killing us if they understood how fair and just we are. In my experience, people who want to kill us don't care how nice we are, they just want us dead.
In summation, I acknowledge that I don't have near the writing prowess to express my views as Carpenter does, and he will certainly be furious with my review, but honestly, I feel Carpenter would have had more credibility in my eyes if he would have just wrote his own book about his modern view of warrior ethos, rather than the Pressfield bash-fest this book turned out to be. But then, I suppose bashing another writer’s book makes Carpenter feel more warrior-like.
Pressfield’s book discusses the idea of the Warrior ethos with context stemming mainly from the history of ancient Greeks, and that ancient society’s idea of how their warriors should train and perform in combat. This makes sense since Pressfield’s expertise is in the study of those ancient civilizations. I respected those views in the context it was delivered. That our modern views of honor and being a warrior are rooted in history, even as far back as the ancients. But Carpenter was, in his own words, “shocked” at what he read. Because Pressfield uses examples from Spartan history, Carpenter seems to think that people are going to read Pressfield’s book and start acting like young Spartan trainees, running around stealing from neighbors, murdering Helots and drinking blood stew. Really?
Carpenter then spends 75 pages of his 100 page book being deliberately condescending by mocking and ridiculing Pressfield for his beliefs. He accuses him of picking and choosing his examples to support his thesis. Carpenter declares that, because all of the examples are from the ancient world, they are no longer relevant; that we, as a modern society should dismiss all that history as nonsense; that there is nothing to be learned from studying ancient societies. Again, I don’t think people reading Pressfield’s book are going to start acting like ancient Spartan families, throwing deformed babies off cliffs or abandoning them in the wilderness. Nor do I believe Pressfield intended that for modern families as Carpenter sarcastically implies on page 7.
Carpenter also discounts Pressfield’s military service (page 27) because, although Pressfield is a fellow Marine, Carpenter doesn't think he has experienced the “eve of battle” enough to talk about what warriors feel. Well, Mr. Carpenter, I read your military biography (easily accessed via the internet), and although you may have completed lots of warrior training (like all Marines), sitting behind a desk ordering aircraft parts does not provide you with salty combat experience. I actually laughed out loud reading about how you felt on the “eve of battle” because of the “threat of enemy rockets” near your position in Afghanistan. Very warrior like indeed. Though, I should probably be impressed with your bio, in that you finished near the top of your class in the wide variety of schools you attended over the years. Bravo.
One of the main themes Carpenter uses to ridicule Pressfield, is how he doesn’t include women enough in his book. Considering that ancient society was male dominant, it would make sense. But more googling of Carpenter reveals that promoting women in the military is one of his pet projects; all well and good. Then why does he bash Pressfield for promoting the strength of Spartan women in ancient times? Oh, yeah, because Pressfield made that up. Whatever.
On page 31, Carpenter starts his mockery of Pressfield’s assertion that leaders should lead from the front, stating all kinds of statistics on officer casualties from previous wars. I’m not sure that most readers will understand the differences in combat over the last 3000 years, and the differences in the necessary leadership styles in those eras, but suffice it to say we have learned through those experiences and improved. One thing that hasn't changed though is that Marine officers are still taught to lead by example, take care of their Marines, avoid recklessness, and make smart decisions in battle. They can still “lead from the front” without charging willy-nilly into incoming gunfire. But, I suppose Carpenter would like to abolish the 2nd Marine Division’s motto, “Follow me”, as it adheres too much to Pressfield’s idea of warrior ethos.
I pressed on with the book and on page 39, Carpenter discusses Honor again, and is appalled that, because Pressfield refers to it as a “man’s” thing, he is excluding women. Are we so politically correct these days that we have to specifically call that out every time? He also calls “Death before Dishonor” a “silly slogan” and surmises that the 6,700 soldiers who received dishonorable, or other than honorable discharges, should just kill themselves (page 40). I rolled my eyes in exasperation.
When I eventually got to the last part, where Carpenter finally explains his idea of a warrior ethos, I actually could agree on many of the ideas he presents, as they are (and have been since I served) a part of how we want our military to conduct themselves. That is, until I reached the part on page 92 where he quotes General Mattis, “no better friend, no worse enemy” but attributes the original quote to the Roman dictator Sulla. Not true. Sulla’s quote translated from Latin is somewhat different, but I digress. Carpenter feels it necessary to “update” Mattis’ quote by changing “worse enemy” to “better enemy”, meaning that people trying to kill us would feel much better about killing us if they understood how fair and just we are. In my experience, people who want to kill us don't care how nice we are, they just want us dead.
In summation, I acknowledge that I don't have near the writing prowess to express my views as Carpenter does, and he will certainly be furious with my review, but honestly, I feel Carpenter would have had more credibility in my eyes if he would have just wrote his own book about his modern view of warrior ethos, rather than the Pressfield bash-fest this book turned out to be. But then, I suppose bashing another writer’s book makes Carpenter feel more warrior-like.
September 8, 2018
Why this book: I lead a volunteer reading group for young men early in the pipeline to become SEALs or SWCCs (Special Warfare Combatant-craft Crewmen). We pick relatively short books related to the profession they are entering, and we meet and discuss them. I had read several of Steven Pressfield’s books, and followed a couple of his blogs and assumed correctly that this short book would fit well in the “curriculum” I am creating for these young men. Carpenter's book is a critique of Pressfield's book.
Summary of Pressfield's Warrior Ethos in 3 Sentences: Pressfield uses the extensive research he had done for his historical novels set in ancient Greece as a source for much of the wisdom in this book – especially the culture and values of ancient Sparta. It is less an examination of the Warrior Ethos, and more of an unstructured discussion broken up into 30 short chapters (in a 90 page book!) in which he addresses a variety of aspects of what he considers to be perennial and universal warrior values. He concludes by making the point in the final chapter that warrior virtues should be internalized into the warrior’s heart to serve the warrior not just in battle, but in a broad range of contexts where virtues such as courage, patience, loyalty, perseverance, and love also define the great and successful.
About Carpenter's book: It is a similar length to Pressfield's book. The Warrior Ethos: One Marine Officer’s Critique and Counterpoint, by Edward Carpenter roundly criticizes Pressfield’s book as superficial and not accounting for significant differences between the needs of warriors in today’s world and those of earlier times. He pulls the string on the implications of many of Pressfield’s claims and argues that some are based on an overly romantic understanding of history, and many of his values are not completely valid in today’s world, or are completely invalid. He argues against using Sparta as a model, that Alexander is no hero by today’s standards, that there are misogynistic overtones in his book, and that the tribal ethic Pressfield seems to advocate is inappropriate to today’s warriors. He concludes with a rough outline for a warrior ethos for the 21st century.
While I agreed with most of the specific points of Col Carpenter’s criticisms, I disagreed with his overall point – that Pressfield’s ideal is not valid today. The Colonel it seems to me, doth protest too much. In his critique, Carpenter actively seeks possible negative implications of Pressfield’s points, rather than considering broader and possible positive interpretations. For example he argues that Pressfield’s claim that warriors seek adversity is not true – they prefer comfort like everyone else, and indeed most military personnel deployed overseas are indeed living in what in previous eras would be considered the lap of luxury. He also points out that Pressfield does not explore the meaning of the word or concept “warrior” noting that the vast majority of our military forces are not engaged in combat, nor in any real danger.
That said, I think he misses a point – the warrior “ideal” is of men and women who harden themselves by seeking demanding and adverse conditions and are not undone by difficulty. And perhaps “warrior” doesn’t refer to a profession or a title, but rather to a mindset – that clerks and mess-stewards might have a greater warrior ethos (mindset) than a-less-than-committed infantry soldier. I didn’t like the self-righteous tone of his critique – though again, he made points that in their specificity, were accurate. In his rejection of Pressfield’s book, I believe he throws the baby out with the bathwater – but it is worthwhile to read his counterpoints. I would recommend reading the two books together – and then reading Shannon French’s Code of the Warrior.
To read the rest of my review, go to: https://bobsbeenreading.wordpress.com...
Summary of Pressfield's Warrior Ethos in 3 Sentences: Pressfield uses the extensive research he had done for his historical novels set in ancient Greece as a source for much of the wisdom in this book – especially the culture and values of ancient Sparta. It is less an examination of the Warrior Ethos, and more of an unstructured discussion broken up into 30 short chapters (in a 90 page book!) in which he addresses a variety of aspects of what he considers to be perennial and universal warrior values. He concludes by making the point in the final chapter that warrior virtues should be internalized into the warrior’s heart to serve the warrior not just in battle, but in a broad range of contexts where virtues such as courage, patience, loyalty, perseverance, and love also define the great and successful.
About Carpenter's book: It is a similar length to Pressfield's book. The Warrior Ethos: One Marine Officer’s Critique and Counterpoint, by Edward Carpenter roundly criticizes Pressfield’s book as superficial and not accounting for significant differences between the needs of warriors in today’s world and those of earlier times. He pulls the string on the implications of many of Pressfield’s claims and argues that some are based on an overly romantic understanding of history, and many of his values are not completely valid in today’s world, or are completely invalid. He argues against using Sparta as a model, that Alexander is no hero by today’s standards, that there are misogynistic overtones in his book, and that the tribal ethic Pressfield seems to advocate is inappropriate to today’s warriors. He concludes with a rough outline for a warrior ethos for the 21st century.
While I agreed with most of the specific points of Col Carpenter’s criticisms, I disagreed with his overall point – that Pressfield’s ideal is not valid today. The Colonel it seems to me, doth protest too much. In his critique, Carpenter actively seeks possible negative implications of Pressfield’s points, rather than considering broader and possible positive interpretations. For example he argues that Pressfield’s claim that warriors seek adversity is not true – they prefer comfort like everyone else, and indeed most military personnel deployed overseas are indeed living in what in previous eras would be considered the lap of luxury. He also points out that Pressfield does not explore the meaning of the word or concept “warrior” noting that the vast majority of our military forces are not engaged in combat, nor in any real danger.
That said, I think he misses a point – the warrior “ideal” is of men and women who harden themselves by seeking demanding and adverse conditions and are not undone by difficulty. And perhaps “warrior” doesn’t refer to a profession or a title, but rather to a mindset – that clerks and mess-stewards might have a greater warrior ethos (mindset) than a-less-than-committed infantry soldier. I didn’t like the self-righteous tone of his critique – though again, he made points that in their specificity, were accurate. In his rejection of Pressfield’s book, I believe he throws the baby out with the bathwater – but it is worthwhile to read his counterpoints. I would recommend reading the two books together – and then reading Shannon French’s Code of the Warrior.
To read the rest of my review, go to: https://bobsbeenreading.wordpress.com...
July 30, 2019
Don’t bother
Really not worth the read. At the end of the book Carpenter decides the problem is not enforcing the code of ethics the marine corps, or any other warrior organization has; but that he has the solution for the ultimate code of ethics.
Really not worth the read. At the end of the book Carpenter decides the problem is not enforcing the code of ethics the marine corps, or any other warrior organization has; but that he has the solution for the ultimate code of ethics.
November 15, 2020
interesting
October 1, 2025
Clarity
Well thought out and presented. Definitely recommend to see what being military really means. If you served you'll see what I mean.
Well thought out and presented. Definitely recommend to see what being military really means. If you served you'll see what I mean.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews