'Seamanship'

[Pelagic]

“Seamanship” is a word that we as sailors use frequently to reinforce or criticise nautical practises.

But I have noticed that the word seems to mean different things to different sailors.

A cruiser might consider “racing” as inherently bad seamanship whereas a racer might believe that never testing the boat and yourself is poor seamanship.

Given that we all aspire to practice good seamanship, what is the best philosophical definition or description that you have heard?

[lannen]

Seamanship equates to being SAFE.

I'm responsible for my crew and vessel. Therefore I should, in all manner of good seamanship, conduct myself accordingly.

[GordMay]

I think that the question is much too broad to be answered in any meaningful way.
“Seamanship” has little significant meaning on it’s own, unless applied to a specific purpose, role, or function.

The term Seamanship generally describes all of the arts and skills utilized in handling, working, and navigating a ship or boat.

Adjectives and/or adverbs such as “good”, “safe”, & “effective” are usually understood to be included in the general term, and therefor add little meaning to the base term.

[GordMay]

Since seamanship is a technical term (with a definition), it doesn’t really admit to a philosophical examination. It is what it is - “the arts and skills utilized in handling, working, and navigating a ship or boat.”

How about a simpler discussion, such as art, beauty, morality, or "why didn't God make pi a simpler number?"

Trying to decide what constitutes "Seamanship" appears to be a search for rules.
The logical way to address the philosophical question, is to pose some hypotheses (rules) and see how they stand up.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by GordMay

.... Trying to decide what constitutes "Seamanship" appears to be a search for rules.
The logical way to address the philosophical question, is to pose some hypotheses (rules) and see how they stand up.

Seapersonship ?

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Seapersonship ?

I refuse to recognize personholes and personhole covers.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Since seamanship is a technical term (with a definition), it doesn’t really admit to a philosophical examination. It is what it is - “the arts and skills utilized in handling, working, and navigating a ship or boat.”


Trying to decide what constitutes "Seamanship" appears to be a search for rules.
The logical way to address the philosophical question, is to pose some hypotheses (rules) and see how they stand up.

Interesting direction that some of you have gone with my original question. (That thread drift into pornography must only have come about with the miss-spelling/reading of the topic word.)

Gord, it was never my intent to define rules as ironically I think seamanship goes far beyond rules (that idea is also reinforced in Rule 2 Colregs).

Also Paul, the process of seamanship is very much practised mentally before you ever give the order to cast off lines.

What I am interested in is discussing that mental process with which we arrive at a decision relating to seamanship.

My own philosophical buzz phrase is “proactive pessimism” where I tend to look at the “worst case scenario” for any given nautical situation and then take positive proactive steps to either minimize the chances of that ever happening or at least be mentally prepared if it ever did happen… to minimize the damage.

I think the danger when you equate seamanship with rules is that you become blinded to the exceptions that exist in this fluid state when fate conspires to make you think outside the box.

[RunningFish]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

My own philosophical buzz phrase is “proactive pessimism” where I tend to look at the “worst case scenario” for any given nautical situation and then take positive proactive steps to either minimize the chances of that ever happening or at least be mentally prepared if it ever did happen… to minimize the damage.

I agree. Building on that, to me seamanship is the practice of "proactive pessimism" you describe, along with looking back in self-evaluation, a sort of continous process improvement.

I think pursuits like diving and flying involve the same thing.

[Pelagic]

Welcome RunningFish! …. Most of our threads aren’t as esoteric as this one, but while waiting for some parts to finish the house bank rewiring….the mind wanders.

I agree that any endeavour like flying or diving begs self examination as well as proactive measures the same as cruising.


The big difference when it comes to cruising is that it is not just a means of travel or sport, as in your examples, but it is a Lifestyle.

That lifestyle is not highly regulated (thank god) but it is full of strong opinions and philosophies that range from being super prepared in one extreme to being more fatalistic and accepting of conditions with the theory that you are more able to go with the flow and actually accomplish more.

Just as design philosophies can be radically different (as between mono and multihull) so is the personal approach the individual takes to managing his time on the water.

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer, just different ones

[GordMay]

Pelagic:
First let me apologize for driving the thread off topic.

I thought* that the original question was too open-ended to engender a comprehensible discussion.

* As implied by my proposed definition (ALL things to do with operating a boat).

A formal debate usually begins with a specific proposition or hypothesis, usually affirmative, which the participants can support or oppose. This encourages debaters (like me) to stay focused “on topic”.

I was not using the word “rules” in the sense of “regulations”; but as an (awkward) synonym for the above-mentioned proposition or hypothesis.

Your “Proactive Pessimism” (Risk management* - What could go wrong, and what are we going to do about it?) might have formed the basis of a debatable topic:
- How does one identify risk (assessment)?
Or better yet:
- How does one quantify & prioritize risk (establish a hierarchy)?

These questions would have naturally led to the logical follow-up
- How do we deal with (mitigation) the highest risk potentialities?

* Risk management is a prioritization process, whereby the risks with the greatest loss and/or the greatest probability of occurring are handled first, and risks with lower probability of occurrence and/or lower loss are handled in descending order.
In it’s simplest form: Risk = Loss x Likelihood

[Pelagic]

That is where the “philosophical” part comes in Gord.

[Pblais]

That is where the “philosophical” part comes in Gord.

Seamanship is more about getting back to work and less about philosophy.

[Pblais]

Armchair sailing would be more about philosophical seamanship since no real boats are sailed so the question of skill is all philosophical.

In that context there would be the debate about if you are only as good as you think you are or is being better really important. Racing becomes timeless and cruising destinations become everywhere.

[cooper]

Seamanship is more about getting back to work and less about philosophy.

...............

[LtBrett]

How do you define pornography? The classic answer is "I don't know, but I know it when I see it." To borrow a phrase uttered frequently in the Navy, conduct yourself in a seaman-like manner. I can't think of a better definition of seamanship. I think about the interpretation of "prudent mariner" in colregs to help create an image of the ideal seaman.

Brett