A thought about philosophy in the martial arts.

[PhotonGuy]

Here is a thought and I will explain how it pertains to the martial arts, at a philosophical level. Lets say you've got the distance of a mile to cover. You can walk the mile or you can run it. Running the mile is harder work than walking it but you get to your destination quicker so you save time. Walking is easier than running so by walking the mile you don't have to work as hard, but you don't finish it as soon, so what would you do?

 

[Steve]

Here is a thought and I will explain how it pertains to the martial arts, at a philosophical level. Lets say you've got the distance of a mile to cover. You can walk the mile or you can run it. Running the mile is harder work than walking it but you get to your destination quicker so you save time. Walking is easier than running so by walking the mile you don't have to work as hard, but you don't finish it as soon, so what would you do?

What is most important, the journey or the destination?

 

[stickarts]

It would depend upon my goal. Am I trying to get into good cardio shape, am I enjoying the scenery, or am I getting chased by something.

 

[donald1]

it's It depends on the circumstances, why am I going down that mile, am I just going to the store to buy something or home to sit and relax ill walk and take my time. If it's an emergency or exercise ill run. I don't see how martial arts ties into this maybe comparison. What's the philosophy, is the moral part of philosophy perhaps the person knows he/she needs to get from a to be, (a to b being the mile) perhaps the person knows he needs to get to b but isn't concerned enough to be in a hurry as opposed to the person running because he she knows it's important

I'm not sure what you mean but this is my guess, what specifically do you mean?

 

[PhotonGuy]

OK lets say you're running a race, and its a mile long race.

 

[Xue Sheng]

OK lets say you're running a race, and its a mile long race.

Then its a running race, which in dictates it is a competition and there is no philosophical question beyond whether or not you want to win or lose and walking is not an option. This also could imply that you have been training to run prior to entering the race.

 

[donald1]

In a race people get tired and if the person got tired halfway through the race he can decide to do the easy give up which would be the wrong thing or keep going endure the pain and keep going

And some races are very competitive and some not so much. Some people are very competitive and only care about winning(nothing less is good will do whatever it takes maybe even cheat) and now if person a is racing he can decide to cheat; he gets a trophy, the honor of winning and if there's a team with that player they are happy to thus several people are happy so some might say he cheated but more people are happy so it was a good idea but others will say cheating is still wrong. If the person didn't cheat it might be the opposite outcome

 

[Dirty Dog]

There's nothing remotely philosophical about this. It's a race. That means you cover the distance in the shortest time possible. That may mean saving some energy for a final sprint, or it may mean sprinting early to get out in front of the pack. But that is tactics. Not philosophy.

 

[donald1]

For the most part not particularly

 

[PhotonGuy]

Here is how the philosophy fits in. In the martial arts, I've heard the story about the student who wanted to get really good at the art he was training in. His instructor said it would take ten years. He said he would train really hard and push himself. The instructor said it would take twenty years. The idea that running a mile as opposed to walking it would take you twice as long to finish it is absurd, obviously running it will get you done with it sooner. So, the idea that working harder at a martial art will take you twice as long to reach a certain level of expertise, that is more or less saying the same thing.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Here is how the philosophy fits in. In the martial arts, I've heard the story about the student who wanted to get really good at the art he was training in. His instructor said it would take ten years. He said he would train really hard and push himself. The instructor said it would take twenty years. The idea that running a mile as opposed to walking it would take you twice as long to finish it is absurd, obviously running it will get you done with it sooner. So, the idea that working harder at a martial art will take you twice as long to reach a certain level of expertise, that is more or less saying the same thing.

No its not, the comparison is not even remotely close. You train to run a race not walk it and if you do not train and enter a race you will lose. You seem to be saying learning martial arts is a race and it isn't. It does not matter how fast you get there or who gets there first. Also he is not telling him to not work hard, he is however saying there is more to it than hard work.


You are missing the point of the story.

The teacher is not telling him to walk, he is telling him not to rush, he is telling him to focus on the training not the result because focusing on the result you will miss what you are doing right now possibly missing some pretty important stuff along the way because you are in a hurry. and if you are not able to achieve your goal in the time you feel you should you will get discouraged and quit.Not all things can be, or should be, done in a hurry and not all things can be learned at the speed you wish to learn them. Promising someone they can master anything, especially a martial art in a year, 2 years or 10 years is a promise you cannot keep because no 2 people are alike.

Here is the story

A young man went to visit an old master, looking to train under him. When he met with the master, the man said to him "I wish to train under you and become a great master. How long must I train?". The Master replied "10 years". The man thought for a moment, then said "10 years is a long time, what if I train twice as hard as your other students. How long must I train then?". The Master then replied "20 years". The man then exclaimed "20 years!? What if I train every day and night as hard as I can?". The Master then replied "30 years". The man, dumbfounded by this, asked "Why is it every time I say I will train harder, you say it will take longer?", and with that, the Master replied "Because if you have one eye fixed on a goal, then you have only one eye left with which to seek the way".

You seem to be missing this last bit

"Because if you have one eye fixed on a goal, then you have only one eye left with which to seek the way

 

[Dirty Dog]

Here is how the philosophy fits in. In the martial arts, I've heard the story about the student who wanted to get really good at the art he was training in. His instructor said it would take ten years. He said he would train really hard and push himself. The instructor said it would take twenty years. The idea that running a mile as opposed to walking it would take you twice as long to finish it is absurd, obviously running it will get you done with it sooner. So, the idea that working harder at a martial art will take you twice as long to reach a certain level of expertise, that is more or less saying the same thing.

This story has nothing to do with the race in your original post. In a race, you have one goal: be first to finish.
A race has nothing to do with philosophy, MA training, or this story.
The point if the story is that being focused on an outcome (say...an unhealthy obsession with belt color) will detract from your training. As has been said innumerable times (and you obviously don't get the message, since you keep trying to find new ways to ask the same thing): focus on training. The rest is irrelevant.


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.

 

[Tgace]

What do I have to do when I arrive?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[PhotonGuy]

The mile distance was meant to be metaphorical. It represents a job you have to do. When you do a job, usually if not always your boss will expect you to do it within a certain time. While you shouldn't rush through it and thus possibly do a bad job, you do need to be aware of finishing it within a given time period, otherwise you might lose your job.

The same concept can apply to the student training under the master. Lets say the student has a time period in which he wants to become a great master, so he wants to achieve his goal and part of the goal is to do it within a certain time limit.

 

[drop bear]

My view is it relates exactly to the mile race. If you put more work in you will get to that mile quicker than if you don't.

Running will be faster than walking and you will be fitter at the end of it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

part of the goal is to do it within a certain time limit.

In MA training, if you have to force yourself, you will quite someday. You train MA because you enjoy of doing it. This way, when you are 80, you will still enjoy your MA training. You should not set any time limit for yourself.

When I was young, I committed myself to spend 10 years to develop my "head lock". Everyday I forced myself to hang on the pole for at least 1 hour everyday (break it apart in many sessions). Oneday I stopped watching the time. I just did it until I no longer enjoined of doing it. Today, I have spent more than 35 years on my "head lock" development and I'm still working on it everyday.

The most important thing is "will you still enjoy of doing it again tomorrow, day after tomorrow, the next day, and ...?"

 

[Xue Sheng]

The mile distance was meant to be metaphorical. It represents a job you have to do. When you do a job, usually if not always your boss will expect you to do it within a certain time. While you shouldn't rush through it and thus possibly do a bad job, you do need to be aware of finishing it within a given time period, otherwise you might lose your job.

The same concept can apply to the student training under the master. Lets say the student has a time period in which he wants to become a great master, so he wants to achieve his goal and part of the goal is to do it within a certain time limit.

The problem with that is you are switching perspectives first and for that to make sense you would have to say

It represents a job you have to do. When you do a job, usually if not always you expect you to do it within a certain time. While you shouldn't rush through it and thus possibly do a bad job, you do need to be aware of finishing it within a given time period.

The same concept can apply to the student training under the master. Lets say the student has a time period in which he wants to become a great master, so he wants to achieve his goal and part of the goal is to do it within a certain time limit

the way you worded it, in the first example you are saying the time is set by your boss and you have to follow. In your second example you are saying the student sets the time limit, not the master who would equate to the boss

Another way to make your analogy work

It represents a job you have to do. When you do a job, usually if not always your boss will expect you to do it within a certain time. While you shouldn't rush through it and thus possibly do a bad job, you do need to be aware of finishing it within a given time period, otherwise you might lose your job.

The same concept can apply to the student training under the master. Lets say the master has a time period in which he wants for you to become a great master, so he wants you to achieve his goal and part of the goal is to do it within a certain time limit and if you fail he kicks you out

Basically you are now looking for ways to be right when you are missing the point and do not understand what the story is saying.

 

[Dirty Dog]

The mile distance was meant to be metaphorical. It represents a job you have to do. When you do a job, usually if not always your boss will expect you to do it within a certain time. While you shouldn't rush through it and thus possibly do a bad job, you do need to be aware of finishing it within a given time period, otherwise you might lose your job.

The same concept can apply to the student training under the master. Lets say the student has a time period in which he wants to become a great master, so he wants to achieve his goal and part of the goal is to do it within a certain time limit.

As with every other time you've approached this exact same issue (albeit with different wording each time -belt ranks, Boy Scouts and foot races) you're focused on the belt rather than the training.
Get over it. Frankly, I wouldn't promote a student who (like you) was focused on the belt instead of the training.
We have one who has made it to 3rd geup. She won't be promoting again until she grows enough to realize that it's the training, not the belt, that matters.


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.

 

[Tgace]

I think the whole race metaphor is flawed...races have a finish line.

If a belt/title is seen as a goal you are in for a let down once you get them.

The only finish line any of us really has is death....

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[donald1]

I don't think I like that kind of finish line but true though, dirty dog does have a point though. The belt isn't important, it's the experience and skill through training. That's the only part that matters if you are at a certain level of training that is what matters and some styles give belts to show other people that you have been recognized as that skill level. A belt only serves two purposes; to show someone has earned an amount of skill through training(but you don't need a belt to know you are skilled) and to hold up your pants.