Yiliquan1,
It is also interesting how you condescend to their (and my) aggravation that such an idea really needs any kind of debate to determine whether such an act is feasible or reasonable.
Why would it aggrivate you? The purpose of this board has been the exchange of information/ideas amoung varied individuals. I think it folly to assume that everyone thinks the same way, thus it is interesting to put forth questions and learn from intelligent responses.
It is also a character test of sorts. Being new to this particular site I want to get the feel of the thoughts and ideas of 'regulars'. Never know when you might pick up some new information or a twist that you had not considered before.
Perhaps you could enlighten us with your idea of what constitutes real "dan" ranking, and who has the authority to issue such rank...
I would be happy to give my thoughts as to this. Basically 'belts' are, if I'm not mistaken, a Judo invention of sorts. The idea spread from there and seems to be quite popular around the world. We still have sashes and the like, but belts have taken off quite a bit. A belt is basically a measure of skill, at least ideally. Since most martial arts systems did not start off with them they have been 'borrowed'.
You mentioned somewhere recently your Dan rank I believe, and I apologies that I do not remember it. But it is a measure of your skill in the eyes of your instructors. I'm sure it is also a measure of your character, commitment and contrubutions to your style. Boiled down, is that not the bottom line? A student's overall ability in the eyes of their instructor?
The words 'real' or 'legitimate' could be considered subjective terms with no real meaning when applied to 'rank' be it belt, sash or other. Who granted you your present rank? Answer is more than likely your instructor. Who gave him/her that right? Answer, their instructor. So on and so forth all the way back in the lineage to either the beginning of the present rank structure of the system founder. In either case, who gave them rank or the authority to issue rank in the style they created? Nobody did because they were the first one so to speak with no 'head'. Or, someone from another system 'allowed' them to start their own off-shoot and recognized them as the head...but of a different style than their own.
Do you see the point? In general terms you have your rank ultimately from someone who did not have rank, they 'ivented' it so to speak for themselves for the purposes of testing others skill. OR, you have your present rank ultimately from someone who had no rank but was given permission and recognized from someone outside your present style to do so. So at some point along the line your 'founder' either was granted rank from another GM or 'founder' or he gave the rank to himself.
Does this invalidate your rank? Or mine? Or everyone here? Well, ultimately from a purely technical perspective the arguement could be made that yes we don't have 'real' rank because nobody else did up the pyramid. Because that same GM that granted someone else permission and recognition himself is in the same boat.
But I don't think there will be an enmass voluntary turn in of belts any time soon,do you?
Of course not. Rank may have been 'earned' along the line but it was created out of thin air at the top.
But since 'rank' is now the accepted norm I would suggest that if a GM/founder/whatever wishes to grant rank to another in his particular discipline he is not doing anything that was not done at some point originally by those that came before him. I would clarify that if it is done purely for $ gain and not based on more noble qualities then it is wrong. However, if that system head deems someone truly worthy because of reputation, qualifications, contributions etc then it is entirely up to them and completely within their 'authority' to do so.
Ryushikan,
I'm beginning to wonder if you are truly that angry with me or if this is some sort of baptism by fire ritual some newbies go through? Either way. You continually are interested in my qualifications, history etc al. I am curious about this, and you. Up until today I was simply going to ignore you as just antagonistic, but I am curious if there is more than meets the eye?
One of the reasons I have not given you my lineage is because on a different thread, to a different poster you trashed his lineage. I don't know if you are/were correct in your assestment or not, and it's none of my business. But by and large you seem prepared and determined to respond negatively to quite a bit. First, if his lineage was questionable, why say so? Truth be told, we ALL have questionable lineage in one way or another, you, me, everyone here. There are skeletons in all of our 'lineage' closets. And just based on the short time I've been exposed to you, you'll try to find something to bash or go with the 'never heard of em'. I could be wrong, but I base this on my evaluation of you so far. I have confidence in those that have taught me and evaluated me. My background has been scrutinized extensively by those who have more years than you and I put together. By those that have impecable reputations in the MA community. They were satisfied enough to put their very names on the line to vouch for my background, my 'lineage'. That is enough for me. If this is not enough for you then thats a shame.
Either way, I would love to fellowship with you if you are willing to put aside the antagonism. Perhaps we could even learn from one another. The ball is in your court. Either way, as I have said to Yiliquan1 I wish you a long, happy, healthy life with much joy.
Peace
