If the video teaches basic drills. I don't see how it can't help.
How many surgeons have you met that have learned how to perform ALL of their surgical techniques by video? How many dentists? It's not about 'magical video learning ability', it's about the fact that people want to learn strictly from video from scratch, and no it is not possible.
You can learn lots of things by video. I've learned woodworking techniques, language, and more via video. I've learned lots by watching videos of traffic stops and other police encounters. And I can learn a drill or even some kata by video -- but there's a catch to that.
I'd agree with you on this point if it read: Going through the form without understanding the actual body mechanics and internal principles is not really doing Tai Chi.
Learning complex task is by video is commonplace in many different professions including the medical field where someones health often depends upon the quality of training.
If you won't do the work you wont get anywhere no matter how you got your training.
this has nothing to do with the video and every thing to do with the instruction, and it's been happening since long before video was invented
But then you go on to explain how you disagree. You cannot properly learn the actual body mechanics from video alone.
At no point did anyone claim bad live training was beneficial in any way, but this comment changes the discussion. We are not talking about bad live vs. good video, we are talking the inherent value of video learning.
They could, but again this twists the discussion out of the realm it has previously been in, seemingly in order to prove your point. We aren't talking about whether video compares to bad live training or not. What is being said is that video training doesn't compare to proper live training under any circumstances.
You said this before and then completely ignored the respones and criticism of the argument. Restating it doesn't make it any more valid.
But, again, you are assuming no one else has thought at all in depth about this. Yes, it has everything to do with instruction and video, and that you cannot get good, proper instruction through video alone.
You generally can't ask question when you're using video. You may, if lucky, find someone you can distance communicate with, but that still isn't remotely the same as live instruction. Instructors hiding answers in mysticism is a whole other issue unrelated to what we are discussing.
How? How do you check, if you have no frame of reference? Please explain to me what tests you can use through video instruction alone to teach proper leading skills or rooting?
Of course it can exist in live instruction as well, no one said it didn't. Again, it's irrellevant to the point.
No, it's the fault of those who assume those skills can be passed in any meaningfull way by video alone.
Again, how? How does someone understand proper sinking or moving from the dantien without feeling it in person from someone who can actually do it? These are things you generally can't see unless already experienced in them.
No, they are just as often about poor live training as they are about any video training.
Good training is always about finding a good teacher, but format does matter, period.
Of course, that doesn't mean they overcome the limits of the format.
Hopefully, this isn't a thinly veiled dig at the rest of us because we don't agree with you.
The assumptions and condescension in these two paragraphs are pretty high. You're entire argument is based on an assumption that video instruction can be as good as live instruction, with examples to match. Unfortunately the logic of that assumption and the examples you used has been addressed in multiple other post and you have chosen to ignore that part of this thread in order to further the argument of your assumption. The experience and logic of a number of very experienced martial artists disputes your assertion, maybe that should be taken into account and not just brushed off as a condescending assumption of 'pretending to teach'.
