Another well written and thought out podcast from Iain, kudos. He touched subjects that I have been trying to organize into coherent post/article, but have been unable to. So I'm going to ramble a little bit and hope that the feedback will give me the push needed.
First, lets consider two castes, european knight and japanese samurai. They develped separately but are both remarkably similar solutions to the same problem:
How to train, equip and maintain mounted fighter?
Solution: select a hereditary group of people, train them from early childhood and have a dedicated set of farmers and craftsmen to supply them.
Heydays of european knights continued until the high middle ages until longbows made them obsolete, Samurai class continued to dominate battle fields in japan until Meiji restoration, but Togukawa shogunate effectively removed the need for large stanging armies. In both cases there were an entire caste of people trained mainly fight but no wars you could send them to.
It seems that while the knight and samurai were busy fulfilling their original function their main virtue was loyalty and obedience. Chivalric code and Bushido (and their virtues) make their entrance only after that function is made obsolete.
Cynic might view code just as a form of social control.
Hmm, what am I trying to say here? I'm not exactly sure, maybe that warrior virtue and ethics don't exist as a separate set, but ethics and virtue in martial arts is just a representation of ethics and virtue in society as a whole?