# Martial Arts and Self-Defense



## Tgace (Aug 27, 2005)

An excerpt from the larger wikipedia entry about martial arts. Much truth in what it says. Opinions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_artist#Martial_arts_and_self-defense



> In order to justify their existence and to attract students, many (if not most) martial arts schools make claims about their usefulness in "self-defense". Such claims are a matter of constant debate among beginning level students of the martial arts.
> 
> Self-defense situations happen with extreme rarity in most modern societies where such martial arts classes exist, and what situations do develop can generally be avoided by other means (e.g., not walking around drunk in bad neighbourhoods, not buying or selling illegal drugs, not getting involved with biker gangs, and so on). Therefore understanding what is needed for self-defense requires understanding the situations that are likely to arise.
> 
> ...


----------



## KenpoEMT (Aug 27, 2005)

> Since the fear is largely unfounded, self-defense classes need only reduce the feeling of fear in order to be effective


I have long believed that the elimination of the fear of physical confrontation is the most useful aspect of the martial arts. 
 Quite frankly, I knew how to fight before I started learning Kenpo. Didn't most of us know?  Fighting isn't hard...living peacefully and without fear in various difficult environments is hard.
So, the value of any martial art is found in it's effect on the psychological state of the individual.

...the push-ups don't hurt either :lol:.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Aug 27, 2005)

Theban_Legion said:
			
		

> I have long believed that the elimination of the fear of physical confrontation is the most useful aspect of the martial arts.
> Quite frankly, I knew how to fight before I started learning Kenpo. Didn't most of us know? Fighting isn't hard...living peacefully and without fear in various difficult environments is hard.
> So, the value of any martial art is found in it's effect on the psychological state of the individual.
> 
> ...the push-ups don't hurt either :lol:.


Agreed on the elimination of fear.  Fighting isn't hard...agreed.  The hard part is coming out of it with little to no personal injury.


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 27, 2005)

i never was a big fan of wikipedia as a source of useful reference.  no different than forums if you ask me...i've been known to be wrong though :idunno:


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Aug 27, 2005)

so if the martial arts were created to defend against a fully armed sword wielding samurai, i guess they wouldnt be very effective against an unarmed or club wielding moron.


----------



## arnisador (Aug 27, 2005)

Lots of truth there, but no news. Yes, carrying a cell-phone is better self-defense than having a black belt.


----------



## Simon Curran (Aug 28, 2005)

I agree that there is a lot of truth in that article, but it doesn't exactly tell the whole storyIn the event of the (admittedly rare) worst case scenario, even if it is just a psychological aid, better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.


----------



## jujutsu_indonesia (Aug 28, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> so if the martial arts were created to defend against a fully armed sword wielding samurai, i guess they wouldnt be very effective against an unarmed or club wielding moron.


Ahh!! that explains why sensei always say "This is to preserve traditions, do not use in real life" when explaining certain archaic Jujutsu techniques


----------



## KenpoEMT (Aug 28, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Lots of truth there, but no news. Yes, carrying a cell-phone is better self-defense than having a black belt.


Very true. I myself am a master of 'Cell Phone Do'. My speed-dial technique is unparelleled.


----------



## Phoenix44 (Aug 28, 2005)

Yeah.  I think run-jutsu is a good self defense art, too.


----------



## Bigshadow (Aug 28, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> so if the martial arts were created to defend against a fully armed sword wielding samurai, i guess they wouldnt be very effective against an unarmed or club wielding moron.


 I would tend to disagree with that statement. If you look at the sword training as mere techniques (tech A versus Tech B) and don't really understand and feel the principles of space, distance, and physics, then it truely would be useless. But to me, in principle, there is no difference between the sword, a baseball bat, a knife, a punch, an elbow strike, a shoulder strike. With this in mind, training to avoid and defend against sword strikes can be EXTREMELY valuable! Swords tend to exagerate the principles.


----------



## KenpoTex (Aug 29, 2005)

Bigshadow said:
			
		

> I would tend to disagree with that statement. If you look at the sword training as mere techniques (tech A versus Tech B) and don't really understand and feel the principles of space, distance, and physics, then it truely would be useless. *But to me, in principle, there is no difference between the sword, a baseball bat, a knife, a punch, an elbow strike, a shoulder strike. With this in mind, training to avoid and defend against sword strikes can be EXTREMELY valuable! Swords tend to exagerate the principles.*


Very true.  However, without an understanding of the _applications_ of the movements--how they relate to various attacks--then they _are_ just archaic techniques.  This is why it is important to understand the principles behind the technique, and how they can be applied to different scenarios, instead of merely training a series of movements.


----------



## Bigshadow (Aug 29, 2005)

kenpotex said:
			
		

> Very true.  However, without an understanding of the _applications_ of the movements--how they relate to various attacks--then they _are_ just archaic techniques. This is why it is important to understand the principles behind the technique, and how they can be applied to different scenarios, instead of merely training a series of movements.


 I think that was what I was trying to convey. :idunno:


----------



## cfr (Aug 29, 2005)

I think the article is right on. I need to learn to deal with adrenaline and stress from a physical confrontation, not so much learn techs. Of course techs have they're place as its good to know footwork and such to not get hit. Or know some combos to not just stand there looking dumb when you should be swinging. But overall, for me its about getting used to a punch coming at me that really counts.


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Aug 29, 2005)

Bigshadow said:
			
		

> I would tend to disagree with that statement. If you look at the sword training as mere techniques (tech A versus Tech B) and don't really understand and feel the principles of space, distance, and physics, then it truely would be useless. But to me, in principle, there is no difference between the sword, a baseball bat, a knife, a punch, an elbow strike, a shoulder strike. With this in mind, training to avoid and defend against sword strikes can be EXTREMELY valuable! Swords tend to exagerate the principles.


i was being facetious.

i made that statement with the implication that the exact opposite is true.
i too often hear about modernization of martial arts to deal with a bigger stronger attacker.......which i think is a load of bull. principles are principles, even if your 10 feet tall.


----------



## KenpoTex (Aug 30, 2005)

Bigshadow said:
			
		

> I think that was what I was trying to convey. :idunno:


I think so too...I was agreeing with you


----------



## Bigshadow (Aug 30, 2005)

kenpotex said:
			
		

> I think so too...I was agreeing with you


  OOHhhh... OK.  I didn't catch that....  My apologies.


----------



## Bigshadow (Aug 30, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> i was being facetious.
> 
> i made that statement with the implication that the exact opposite is true.
> i too often hear about modernization of martial arts to deal with a bigger stronger attacker.......which i think is a load of bull. principles are principles, even if your 10 feet tall.


 Cool!   Darn, looks like I didn't catch that one either.


----------



## Drac (Sep 1, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Lots of truth there, but no news. Yes, carrying a cell-phone is better self-defense than having a black belt.


I agree 100%..


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 5, 2005)

can i just say this about that.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO INSULTED IN MY LIFE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
AND THAT IS SAYING SOMETHING!

evil monkeys.

Sweet Brighit Bless your blade, and wake up those dumb -blank- that make that stupid website, or punish that's just as good, right???

John


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 5, 2005)

sorry i'm overly pashionete about coung nhu and the art of love. mostly since the art is mostly about living WITHOUT fighting, i mean hay cougn nhu was made seriously popular by -pause for dramitic effect- HIPPIES, yes pacifics are probly the main reason coung nhu is at all


----------



## Sapper6 (Sep 5, 2005)

coungnhuka said:
			
		

> can i just say this about that.
> 
> I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO INSULTED IN MY LIFE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> AND THAT IS SAYING SOMETHING!
> ...



wtf?


----------



## cfr (Sep 5, 2005)

coungnhuka said:
			
		

> can i just say this about that.
> 
> I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO INSULTED IN MY LIFE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> AND THAT IS SAYING SOMETHING!
> ...




What, in the name of Zues' butthole,  (name that actor and movie, its an easy one) are you talking about?


----------



## Adept (Sep 5, 2005)

cfr said:
			
		

> What, in the name of Zues' butthole,  (name that actor and movie, its an easy one)


 Nick Cage, The Rock.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 5, 2005)

coungnhuka said:
			
		

> cougn nhu was made seriously popular by -pause for dramitic effect- HIPPIES, yes pacifics are probly the main reason coung nhu is at all


Coung Nhu is popular? I need to get out more. (jking by the way)


----------



## cfr (Sep 5, 2005)

Adept said:
			
		

> Nick Cage, The Rock.




Cool. I did the same thing once before and it went unanswered.  artyon:


----------



## KenpoTex (Sep 6, 2005)

coungnhuka said:
			
		

> can i just say this about that.
> 
> I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO INSULTED IN MY LIFE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> AND THAT IS SAYING SOMETHING!
> ...


So, was there something specific that you didn't like about the article?   


			
				coungnhuka said:
			
		

> sorry i'm overly pashionete about coung nhu and the art of love. mostly since the art is mostly about living WITHOUT fighting, i mean hay cougn nhu was made seriously popular by -pause for dramitic effect- HIPPIES, yes pacifics are probly the main reason coung nhu is at all


  A _Martial_-art popularized by pacifists?...never mind  .  Just out of curiosity, what did this post have to do with your original post, or with the article in question?


----------



## arnisador (Sep 6, 2005)

Well, you could say that aikido is a martial art from a pacifist.


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Sep 7, 2005)

i would hardly call ueshiba a pacifist in his younger days......he was known as somewhat of a dojo buster.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 11, 2005)

I'm ticked because martial arts apparently need to "justify" themselves by making up stuff. And yes coung nhu was very popular, in like the 1960s - 1970s, in the university of Florida. The dojo actually got so big that for a good long while they were training in the football field. Although now Coung Nhu is very unpopular. I think it has something to do with all the stuff about martial art must equal self-defense, or be sport, or around for a while. And my second post is really just a rant, sorry about that mates.



Sweet Brighit Bless your Blade,



John


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 11, 2005)

coungnhuka said:
			
		

> I'm ticked because martial arts apparently need to "justify" themselves by making up stuff. And yes coung nhu was very popular, in like the 1960s - 1970s, in the university of Florida. The dojo actually got so big that for a good long while they were training in the football field. Although now Coung Nhu is very unpopular. I think it has something to do with all the stuff about martial art must equal self-defense, or be sport, or around for a while. And my second post is really just a rant, sorry about that mates.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Popular for only 10 years at ONE university on the face of the earth? Yep that's popularity alright.  Now I'm even more certain I need to get out more


----------



## arnisador (Sep 11, 2005)

I do remember it briefly getting lots of attention in Black Belt etc. Then it seemed to fade away.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 16, 2005)

KempoJitsu, that was rather rude. i need a hug now (and thats a joke by the way). And thank you Arnisador. Hay were could I find some of those articles? 

Sweet Brighit Bless your Blade,

John


----------



## arnisador (Sep 17, 2005)

Sorry, this is a vague memory from when I was a kid in the 70s or maybe early 80s. I do think they have a search facility though:
www.blackbeltmag.com


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 18, 2005)

well, thanks anyways.


----------

