Ehh... I actually don't think the analogy holds up... cooking without producing food is obviously not cooking. But it sounds like some are making the argument that if your sole goal is to only make better food, that it's not really cooking.
I don't think that's quite got it. The point is that if you are cooking but not producing any food, that whether or not any other goals unrelated to food can be achieved is questionable. Because cooking intrinsically involves preparing food. Just as martial arts intrinsically involves fighting. And, as with tai chi, when you remove the fighting you are no longer doing martial arts.
You do cook to cook better (or become a better cook), but perhaps the sole end for you is not that (yet is of course still the process. Getting better is integral). Perhaps you're bettering your cooking as an expression of love to a dear one and wanting to take care of them, you're still producing food, and you're still aiming at getting better, but the "being a better cook" is not really what it's ALL about.
Once again, it's not what the primary goal is, because for some cooks, the primary goal may not have anything to do with food. In fact, some cooks don't enjoy cooking and do it only because they don't want to starve, and are tired of microwave fare.
But here's the thing. They may never be really good at it. In fact, they may not care at all about being good at cooking. They may hate the idea of cooking. But through the act of cooking, they are achieving alternative goals (whatever they may be)... and they are also getting better at preparing food, because food is intrinsic to the activity.
In the same way, a person who studies in a martial art should, even if they have no interest in fighting, be gaining functional skill as a fighter. And I would say that, if they are not gaining skill as a fighter, they aren't ACTUALLY doing a martial art, even if they are enjoying themselves and gaining some other benefits. And to be clear, I have no problems with other goals. But if you aren't learning to fight, you are basically doing Tae Bo, and if you're good with Tae Bo, more power to you.
Where I start to get really irritated isn't with people just doing what they want. Even if you're a little misguided, I don't care about that. It's when people start selling that bunk to others. I think that's sneaky and deceitful at best, and dangerous at worst.
And it gets too tricky here because we all seem to have different definitions of what "fighting" means, and some equate that with ability to defend oneself on "dah streetz", some would say you're improving your fighting ability within the context of your martial art (its ruleset, skillset, strengths etc)... there are so many things I feel like we're confusing and overlapping. But ah well hopefully we can still share respectfully and in a civil way.
Shoot, I am willing to be about as flexible in this regard as possible. If you're learning to physically impose your will on someone else reliably and in an objectively measurable way, I'd say fine. And I would also say that while being well rounded is a goal for some, I'm even okay if folks embrace gaps in their training, though I recommend people be self aware. So, if you're a TKD competitive and you know your punching skills stink because you keep your hands down in competition, fine. If you're a butt scooting BJJ competitor who doesn't like training takedowns, fine. Those are still martial arts, because the skills these folks ARE learning are related to physically imposing their will against an opponent in a way that is reliable and objectively measurable.
And further, if you are in a style that teaches actual martial arts, the learning curve is going to be relatively predictable.
.
