# What is a "Martial Artist"?



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

We often toss terms like "martial artist", "martial spirit" around, but what do they really mean?   Simply defined, a "Martial Art" is an art dealing with the martial, or fighting. Therefore a "Martial Artist" would possibly be defined as one who has made an art of the study of fighting.

 But is that all it is?  Beating people up, fighting and killing?

 Or, is it more?

 What attributes would a true "Martial Artist" have? 

 Can someone who is 300 pounds over weight, of poor moral and ethical character, abusive, but a kickass fighter possibly be a true "martial artist"?

 I've heard it said that they should be "honest", but what is honesty really?

 I have my own thoughts on this, but will open the floor. :asian:


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Aug 27, 2005)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> We often toss terms like "martial artist", "martial spirit" around, but what do they really mean? Simply defined, a "Martial Art" is an art dealing with the martial, or fighting. Therefore a "Martial Artist" would possibly be defined as one who has made an art of the study of fighting.
> 
> But is that all it is? Beating people up, fighting and killing?
> 
> ...


At the most superficial level, it is one who practices a martial art. However, I believe that a richer meaning is one who practices a martial art AND has SELF-DISCIPLINE, CHARACTER, and INTEGRITY and strives for excellence in all that he or she does.

I have seen a large number of highly skilled fighters and instructors that were so lacking in these attributes that I did not consider them to be real martial artists - just practioners of fighting systems.

Regarding the abusive, overweight, but formidible fighter; he lacks the character of a true martial artist and his physical conditioning demonstrates that he doesn't strive for perfection in his life. Therefore, in my book he is not a true Martial Artist.

I also think that a person who faces tragedy and difficult times with courage and fortitude, while not practicing any fighting art, can also be considered a Martial Artist - more so than the abusive character you mentioned.


----------



## Loki (Aug 27, 2005)

Wow. Huge subject. I'd say Jonathan Randall has the general description right (attempting to make a fully technical one would be semantic suicide). I'm to pull a brain-dump here:

 Does a martial artist have to be an artist? Meaning, does his style of fighting have to be aesthetically pleasing? If it does, I'm not a martial artist.

 Can a martial artist be severely lacking moral character? If he can't, does this mean a martial art must have a philosophy? I think at some basic level, it must, and a martial artist must be a moral person. Not a stoic, but not a barbarian either.

 Can a distinction be made between a martial artist who practices his art and a martial artist who lives his art? I think that's the best way to go.

 JR mentioned someone who faces tragedy with courage and fortitude but doesn't practice any MA. I wouldn't call him a martial artist since he has no connection to the arts, but I would call him a warrior, no different from the martial artist who lives his art.

 There's an excellent post I remember nothing of save for it's definition of what a warrior is (made a distinction from "soldier"). If someone could link to one of it's better replies, I think that'd be great.

 Also, I'd like to here the input of someone who read Living the Martial Way: A Manual for the Way A Modern Warrior Should Think by Forrest E. Morgan.[font=verdana,arial,helvetica][size=-1][/size][/font]


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

Here's a tough one:
- What is Character?
- What is Self-Discipline?
- What is Integrity?
- What is Honor?
- What is Honesty?

(Theres a reason I posted here and not in the Study. LOL)


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> At the most superficial level, it is one who practices a martial art. However, I believe that a richer meaning is one who practices a martial art AND has SELF-DISCIPLINE, CHARACTER, and INTEGRITY and strives for excellence in all that he or she does.
> 
> I have seen a large number of highly skilled fighters and instructors that were so lacking in these attributes that I did not consider them to be real martial artists - just practioners of fighting systems.


 Ah.  So one can be an excellent technical fighter, but lack the characteristics of a true martial artist. Can someone have those same characteristics, but lack the technical side and be a martial artist, or must one have both the characteristics and the technical?  I think you need both.



> Regarding the abusive, overweight, but formidible fighter; he lacks the character of a true martial artist and his physical conditioning demonstrates that he doesn't strive for perfection in his life. Therefore, in my book he is not a true Martial Artist.
> 
> I also think that a person who faces tragedy and difficult times with courage and fortitude, while not practicing any fighting art, can also be considered a Martial Artist - more so than the abusive character you mentioned.


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Aug 27, 2005)

i think a lot of the chubby martial "artists" on this board, myself included, would take offense to the statement that we lack character and physical conditioning. 

ive seen so-called overweight martial artists out perform and outlast other "athletes" in workouts and on the dojo floor.


----------



## Loki (Aug 27, 2005)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> - What is Character?
> - What is Self-Discipline?
> - What is Integrity?
> - What is Honor?
> - What is Honesty?


 You do realize that this is like trying to define the word "it", right?
 Here goes nothing:

 Character - moral strength which allows us to stand up and fight for what we believe in.

 Self-Discipline - the ability to control our impulses.

 Integrity - the ability to take responsibility for our actions.

 Honor - respect for others and for the environment.

 Honesty - the courage to tell the truth by default.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> Wow. Huge subject. I'd say Jonathan Randall has the general description right (attempting to make a fully technical one would be semantic suicide). I'm to pull a brain-dump here:
> 
> Does a martial artist have to be an artist? Meaning, does his style of fighting have to be aesthetically pleasing? If it does, I'm not a martial artist.


 One definition I found for "Artist" is "[size=-1]The role of the artist is to design experiences featuring the process, techniques, history, and aesthetics of a particular art form."

 So, if we look at the style/school/system we study as an 'art'...it may be said that once one moves beyond simply echoing that which they have seen and starts putting their own 'self' into it, one has started down the road of 'artist'.

 Like alot of art, it doesn't have to be 'pretty'. 

 [/size]





> Can a martial artist be severely lacking moral character? If he can't, does this mean a martial art must have a philosophy? I think at some basic level, it must, and a martial artist must be a moral person. Not a stoic, but not a barbarian either.


 But, what is "moral character"?
  1 definition: "[size=-1]Moral character or character is an abstract evaluation of a person's moral and mental qualities. Such an evaluation is subjective  one person may evaluate someone's character on the basis of their virtue, another may consider their fortitude, courage, loyalty, honesty, or piety."

 Hmm..."Morality".

 Def: "[/size][size=-1]Morality is a complex of principles based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which an individual determines whether his or her actions are right or wrong. These concepts and beliefs are often generalized and codified by a culture or group, and thus serve to regulate the behaviour of its members. Conformity to such codification may also be called morality, and the group may depend on widespread conformity to such codes for its continued existence."

 Morals?
 Def: "[/size][size=-1]The accepted standards of right and wrong that are usually applied to personal behavior."

 So a "Moral Person" is determined by the culture from which they spring. Or
 "[/size][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Moral                  concepts, judgments and practices (how one defines right or good)                  may vary from one society to another. The moral concept of "justice"                  has one meaning in the United States that is grounded in the formation                  and application of civil law. "Justice" as it is understood                  and applied in Afghanistan is very different. Morals also change                  over time within a given society as that society changes."

[/font][size=-1]
 So, by these definitions, if the culture believes that it is acceptable, even desired that one be rude, lewd and crude, once could be seen as having good moral character...within that culture.  But we often determine based on our culture, not theirs. So, is this definition satisfactory, or is there more to it?

 Also, there are countless fighting systems, styles, etc. I think one can be a good fighter, without being an artist. It's like one can be a good painter, but not an artist. The difference between white-washing a fence and painting a landscape if you will.

 [/size]





> Can a distinction be made between a martial artist who practices his art and a martial artist who lives his art? I think that's the best way to go.


 Ah. Practices vs lives.  Good.  Many of our arts have codes of conduct. I believe Kenpo has pledges, many schools have student creeds, heck the Boy Scouts have their "motto".   Would it be safe to say that the person who takes those character building pledges to heart, and really trys to apply them is more likely to be seen as a true martial artist, compared to the person who just says them in passing twice a week at half past 7?




> JR mentioned someone who faces tragedy with courage and fortitude but doesn't practice any MA. I wouldn't call him a martial artist since he has no connection to the arts, but I would call him a warrior, no different from the martial artist who lives his art.
> 
> There's an excellent post I remember nothing of save for it's definition of what a warrior is (made a distinction from "soldier"). If someone could link to one of it's better replies, I think that'd be great.


 I think once can be a warrior without being a martial artist, or even a soldier.  I see my grandmother as a warrior for fighting against illness as she did, but she couldn't tell a wrist lock from a wrist watch.



> Also, I'd like to here the input of someone who read Living the Martial Way: A Manual for the Way A Modern Warrior Should Think by Forrest E. Morgan.


 Not familiar with it, but will check it out. :asian:


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> i think a lot of the chubby martial "artists" on this board, myself included, would take offense to the statement that we lack character and physical conditioning.
> 
> ive seen so-called overweight martial artists out perform and outlast other "athletes" in workouts and on the dojo floor.


 Very good points. 

Is a poor man, who lacks the time to excercize or the funds to eat a balanced diet a person of poor character? What about sumo's?  These are big men, yet they are seen as incredible athletes. Power lifters who have barrel bellies (big! guts), yet can move mountains.  What about injury and age?


----------



## Loki (Aug 27, 2005)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> One definition I found for "Artist" is "[size=-1]The role of the artist is to design experiences featuring the process, techniques, history, and aesthetics of a particular art form."
> 
> So, if we look at the style/school/system we study as an 'art'...it may be said that once one moves beyond simply echoing that which they have seen and starts putting their own 'self' into it, one has started down the road of 'artist'.
> 
> Like alot of art, it doesn't have to be 'pretty'.


 Can this mean that pornography is an art and pornstars artists? Seems to cheapen art if you ask me. Since each human is different from all the others, you'll put yourself into everything you do.

  [/size] 


> But, what is "moral character"?
> [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
> ...
> [/font][size=-1]
> So, by these definitions, if the culture believes that it is acceptable, even desired that one be rude, lewd and crude, once could be seen as having good moral character...within that culture. But we often determine based on our culture, not theirs. So, is this definition satisfactory, or is there more to it?[/size]


 This is problematic. Are their universal standards of morality? It seems there are, like not causing unnecessary pain and taking responsibility for one's actions. Who sets these standards? Beats the hell outta me, but I don't see anyone disagreeing on them. The variation comes in when people try to define things like necessary and unecessary pain, usually by cultural standards.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> You do realize that this is like trying to define the word "it", right?


  Yup. Or trying to define how "black" tastes, or "bright" smells. 



> Here goes nothing:
> 
> Character - moral strength which allows us to stand up and fight for what we believe in.


 
    Character is [size=-1]the inherent complex of attributes that determine a persons moral and ethical actions and reactions.  When we say someone is of "good character" we are saying that they meet our standards of good behavior.[/size]



> Self-Discipline - the ability to control our impulses.


 Self-discipline requires an understanding of oneself and an awareness of the ways in which one can cope with difficulties, frustrations, and disappointments. Self-discipline affords a person the inclination to concentrate on a task as long as is necessary to learn, perfect, or complete it.



> Integrity - the ability to take responsibility for our actions.


  Integrity  - [size=-1]comprises the personal inner sense of "wholeness" deriving from honesty and consistent uprightness of character.[/size]



> Honor - respect for others and for the environment.


  The courage to stand for the Truth against all odds.



> Honesty - the courage to tell the truth by default.


  A respect for the truth. To strive to be truthful.




 For the record, there are no 'wrong' answers here...just 'different' ones. :asian:


----------



## Loki (Aug 27, 2005)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> Yup. Or trying to define how "black" tastes, or "bright" smells.
> 
> ...
> 
> For the record, there are no 'wrong' answers here...just 'different' ones. :asian:


 Wow... Your dictionary is so much better than mine  :asian:


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> Can this mean that pornography is an art and pornstars artists?


 Depending on how you define "pornography", yes.  And No.



> Seems to cheapen art if you ask me.


 It can. Then again, some people view floating a drawing of Jesus in a vat of urine as art, while others view the works of Van Go as garbage.



> Since each human is different from all the others, you'll put yourself into everything you do.


 True. Some to a greater degree than others. Is the casual dabbler an 'artist', or does that require a regular dedication to the art to be considered an 'artist'?



> This is problematic. Are their universal standards of morality? It seems there are, like not causing unnecessary pain and taking responsibility for one's actions.


 But, is that truly universal? I think so too, but some may disagree.



> Who sets these standards? Beats the hell outta me, but I don't see anyone disagreeing on them. The variation comes in when people try to define things like necessary and unecessary pain, usually by cultural standards.


 I believe we do. Some will look at an individual, think of them as an artist, then discover that they fail one of the viewers 'checks', and then be deemed 'bad'.  This can be that the individual lied, had some problems with honor, honesty, or integrity.  I knew of a man once who met all the criteria I believe in, but he and his wife 'swung'. That was enough to have many see them as being of poor character, despite the fact that to them (and many others) it is perfectly ok.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> Wow... Your dictionary is so much better than mine  :asian:


 Naw.  I just google alot. LOL!

Seriously, some of these parts I've been discussing for years with some friends. It makes the head spin.

Here's an easier one - What does "wet" feel like?  How do you describe "Green" to a blind man?



Are any of these people "Martial Artists"?  We can assume all are equal in the technical skills department.
- The sexual preditor
- The "I printed it myself" master
- The "I lied about my background" guy.
- The wife beater
- The guy who steals pencils from work.
- The guy with no papers to prove time-in
- The story-teller (drops names, 'enhanses' things)
- The braggart
- The gossip

I say only 1 may be.  The rest fail at least 1 'check' on my list.


----------



## Loki (Aug 27, 2005)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> Depending on how you define "pornography", yes.  And No.


 The explicit depiction of sexual acts.



> But, is that [moral standards] truly universal? I think so too, but some may disagree.


 I'd like to hear there arguments.



> Some will look at an individual, think of them as an artist, then discover that they fail one of the viewers 'checks', and then be deemed 'bad'. This can be that the individual lied, had some problems with honor, honesty, or integrity. I knew of a man once who met all the criteria I believe in, but he and his wife 'swung'. That was enough to have many see them as being of poor character, despite the fact that to them (and many others) it is perfectly ok.


 I'm against that. I think credit should be given where credit is due. And if we take the time to dig out these basic moral truths, I think we'd see that they're in the right.


----------



## Loki (Aug 27, 2005)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> Naw.  I just google alot. LOL!
> 
> Seriously, some of these parts I've been discussing for years with some friends. It makes the head spin.
> 
> Here's an easier one - What does "wet" feel like?  How do you describe "Green" to a blind man?


 Wow, that is easier. 
 I'd tell him "think of a wavelength equalling 532 nanometers ". He'd go "oh, should have said so earlier" (my blind man is a physicist :supcool.

 You'll have to be a bit more specific on the wetness question.



> Are any of these people "Martial Artists"?  We can assume all are equal in the technical skills department.


 - The sexual preditor (NO)
 - The "I printed it myself" master (NO)
 - The "I lied about my background" guy. (NO)
 - The wife beater (NO)
 - The guy who steals pencils from work. (YES)
 - The guy with no papers to prove time-in (YES)
 - The story-teller (drops names, 'enhanses' things) (NO)
 - The braggart (NO)
 - The gossip (YES)

No, I wasn't serious, but damn, that felt good (I didn't even understand what you meant with half of those). If only life were so easy...

 But seriously, there are greater character flaws and lesser character flaws. Like I said, I don't think a person has to be a stoic to be called a martial artist.


----------



## Tgace (Aug 27, 2005)

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25246&highlight=warrior
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24479&highlight=warrior
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12959&highlight=warrior

The "Warrior/Soldier" topic is one I have chimed in on numerous times around here. These threads had some good discussions on the issue.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> Wow, that is easier.
> I'd tell him "think of a wavelength equalling 532 nanometers ". He'd go "oh, should have said so earlier" (my blind man is a physicist :supcool.


 :rofl:


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 27, 2005)

The examples I gave were just a few 'top of the head' bits.

My personal definition is that to truely be a 'Martial Artist' one must meet certain checks.
- Does the person know what they are doing technically?  By this I mean that they have moved beyond the point of 'learning the motions' and have moved into the 'personal vision' stage.  

'learning the motions' means trying to learn things, while "personal vision' is that adding ones own thoughts to it, polishing and working towards mastery.

Does the person meet my person character checks?
- Are they Truthful?
- Are they Honest?
- Do they temper things with Compassion?
- Do they respect the safety and well being of their training partners? 
- etc.

If they meet those, I see them as a true Martial Artist.  Those who fall short are often seen as aspiring martial artists.

I do not consider myself to be one yet, but I aspire to that goal.  My view though of what that 'goal' is, is constantly changing as I learn more and grow.  It used to be "black belt", now, it's alot more complex.


----------



## Tgace (Aug 27, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> i think a lot of the chubby martial "artists" on this board, myself included, would take offense to the statement that we lack character and physical conditioning.
> 
> ive seen so-called overweight martial artists out perform and outlast other "athletes" in workouts and on the dojo floor.


I believe that physical fitness is a form of "self defense" all in its own. The "effectiveness" of a fit person with no martial training meets that of an out of shape martial artist somewhere along the continuum IMO.


----------



## arnisador (Aug 27, 2005)

A martial artist is one who studies a martial art, that is, a system of techniques designed for close-quarters combat. This excludes barrom brawlers.

The honor aspect is important to me, but it isn't part of the basic definition in my mind.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Aug 28, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> i think a lot of the chubby martial "artists" on this board, myself included, would take offense to the statement that we lack character and physical conditioning.
> 
> ive seen so-called overweight martial artists out perform and outlast other "athletes" in workouts and on the dojo floor.


My apologies, no offense was intended. I was speaking to a lack of character evidenced by his bullying behavior, not his physical weight. Chubby doesn't imply out of shape either, as doctors are now saying. I think Bob was trying to characterize this guy as someone who was a bully, morally deficient and didn't work out regularly - yet knew how to fight. I don't think any of this applies to you.


- quick edit: I mean any of the morally deficient, out of shape stuff, not the knows how to fight. Foot goes in mouth, again. LOL.


----------

