Effectiveness of Empty Hand Arnis

[loki09789]

Well, based on the volume of posts and time spent here on this topic, I think it is clear that I will stand behind my opinion.

If you READ the replies to your posts, the general tone is not the promotion of violence and fighting, but the value of experience for development. I have not read a single reply that said otherwise.

Besides which, based on your attempts to define warrior spirit in other threads, you do condone the use of violence under certain conditions. That I can hang my hat on as well.

By the way, no one "swept you up" and made you become an investment banker, you made a choice not to go to corrections - and probably a better choice for family stability if your getting married - to say anything else denies your free will and ability to exercise choice which you refer to in the Philosophy and Spirituality area.


Paul M.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by loki09789
Well, based on the volume of posts and time spent here on this topic, I think it is clear that I will stand behind my opinion.

If you READ the replies to your posts, the general tone is not the promotion of violence and fighting, but the value of experience for development. I have not read a single reply that said otherwise.

If you don't understand, or if you simply refuse to realize the logical inconsistancy of "I don't promote violence, but I think experience is nessecary to truely understand "fighting" " In an activity (martial art) where the focus is trying to better understand "fighting," then I can't help you.

Don't worry, I don't fault you too badly for it, as I am sure that you won't be alone in your opinion.

Besides which, based on your attempts to define warrior spirit in other threads, you do condone the use of violence under certain conditions. That I can hang my hat on as well.

There is a big difference between condoning violence under the proper circumstance, and promoting it or seeking it.

By the way, no one "swept you up" and made you become an investment banker, you made a choice not to go to corrections - and probably a better choice for family stability if your getting married - to say anything else denies your free will and ability to exercise choice which you refer to in the Philosophy and Spirituality area.

Gee, thanks. I thought I had gotten sucked into something against my free will there for a second. I am glad you l cleared it up for me! :rofl: Seriously, I think I fully understand that I was presented with opportunity, and choices, and I made them, and I am proud of the choices I made. When I say "swept me up" I mean that I was given an opportunity.

So, you can disagree with me all you want. Like I said "I don't give a flying F**k if the whole world disagrees with me on this one. I will stand behind my opinion on this, because I will learn/teach survival, I will learn/teach martial arts, but I will not promote violence."

 

[loki09789]

If you are teaching someone to swing a stick at another person, what are you promoting?

Paul M

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by loki09789
If you are teaching someone to swing a stick at another person, what are you promoting?

Paul M

Its not the action, its the thought behind it.

You could be promoting violence, or survival, or something else.

I promote survival. I promote improving the quality of your life through combative studies and physical expression. I don't promote violence.

PAUL

 

[loki09789]

Read the posts carefully, at least from me, and show me where I am saying 'get into fights to get experience' as opposed to 'those with experience have a deeper understanding than those who don't'

And, I don't EVER remember reading a post where ANYONE was inferring that you were working an agenda, or had no experience.

Come on, Paul, this has been topical and fun, can we keep it that way?

Paul M.

 

[loki09789]

"I am not threatening, I am just being frank. If one of my friends gets hurt over some B.S., there is going to be hell to pay. Most likely charges will be pressed, and nothing will have to happened from my end. If someone is severely hurt or injured beyond what is acceptable for training, and charges aren't able to be pressed, I am voluntering to return the favor."

This doesn't sound like the promotion of violence?

Paul M.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by loki09789
Read the posts carefully, at least from me, and show me where I am saying 'get into fights to get experience' as opposed to 'those with experience have a deeper understanding than those who don't'

And, I don't EVER remember reading a post where ANYONE was inferring that you were working an agenda, or had no experience.

Come on, Paul, this has been topical and fun, can we keep it that way?

Paul M.

Hey man...I'm still having fun! artyon:

No one inferred I had an agenda; I was just disclaiming is all.

And, I am not suggesting that you or anyone else INTENDS to promote violence. You, as well as others have said many times that you don't.

I am pointing out a major logical falicy that exists in combative arts. Namely that there is a major logical inconsistancy in the idea of, "I don't promote violence, but I think experience is nessecary to truely understand "fighting" with regards to an activity (martial art) where the focus is trying to better understand "fighting."

It's logically inconsistant no matter what way you cut it. And in my opinion, if you think experience is nessecary to understand "fighting" in a field where the goal of the student is to understand "fighting," then you are promoting "Fighting" or violence.

You can believe what you want, say what you want, and do what you want. I choose to take a different route then what is conventional right now. I choose to promote survival rather then violence.

I am not pissed off or anything, I am just telling it like it is.

You can disagree, as I am sure you and many others will. However, this happends to be an opinion that I not only stand behind, but that I intend to actively promote.

PAUL

 

[loki09789]

"And, I am not suggesting that you or anyone else INTENDS to promote violence. You, as well as others have said many times that you don't."

okay, but you said"

"If you don't understand, or if you simply refuse to realize the logical inconsistancy of "I don't promote violence, but I think experience is nessecary to truely understand "fighting" " In an activity (martial art) where the focus is trying to better understand "fighting," then I can't help you.

Don't worry, I don't fault you too badly for it, as I am sure that you won't be alone in your opinion."

Sounds suggestive to me.

Paul M.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by loki09789
"I am not threatening, I am just being frank. If one of my friends gets hurt over some B.S., there is going to be hell to pay. Most likely charges will be pressed, and nothing will have to happened from my end. If someone is severely hurt or injured beyond what is acceptable for training, and charges aren't able to be pressed, I am voluntering to return the favor."

This doesn't sound like the promotion of violence?

Paul M.

Yes it does.

And I will say that we all make mistakes, and that I have done things or said things in my life that go against what I believe. We all have.

Having said that, given the context of the statement, I don't regret it. Right or wrong, at the time of that statement, I felt there may have been a threat.

I am not "ghandi." I do believe in survival. Sometimes that means that there needs to be a mutual "threat" in place so that one party doesn't take advantage of another. Ex. If the drunk guy at the bar understands that I will not allow him to blast my friend in the face without a "fight," he may think twice or reassess his motive.

Sometimes immediate"threat" or "violence" is needed to prevent violence, and to survive, which is why we train. However, this is not the same as "promoting violence" in my opinion.

PAUL
:asian:

 

[loki09789]

Black Bear wrote, on your WS Poll page:

"I like PAUL's fine, except that I'd put something in there specifically about the willingness to use force or violence when these things are threatened. That seems to be a part of what we mean by warrior spirit. "

And you responded with adding the clause

"by any means necesary"

That would include violence, I think.

Also

How immediate is a threat if you are a "six hour drive away"

I don't think the 'survival' defense would hold up if you had followed through.


Paul M

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by loki09789
"And, I am not suggesting that you or anyone else INTENDS to promote violence. You, as well as others have said many times that you don't."

okay, but you said"

"If you don't understand, or if you simply refuse to realize the logical inconsistancy of "I don't promote violence, but I think experience is nessecary to truely understand "fighting" " In an activity (martial art) where the focus is trying to better understand "fighting," then I can't help you.

Don't worry, I don't fault you too badly for it, as I am sure that you won't be alone in your opinion."

Sounds suggestive to me.

Paul M.

Your right. I am clearly saying that the stance of, "I don't promote violence, but I think experience is nessecary to truely understand "fighting" " in an activity (martial art) where the focus is trying to better understand "fighting" is logically inconsistant, and inadvertently promoting violence.

I don't believe that this is your INTENT, but I believe that this is what is happening with that logic.

It is what it is.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by loki09789
Black Bear wrote, on your WS Poll page:

"I like PAUL's fine, except that I'd put something in there specifically about the willingness to use force or violence when these things are threatened. That seems to be a part of what we mean by warrior spirit. "

And you responded with adding the clause

"by any means necesary"

That would include violence, I think.

Also

How immediate is a threat if you are a "six hour drive away"

I don't think the 'survival' defense would hold up if you had followed through.


Paul M

Again, I am not Ghandi. "By any means nessicary" means that your willing to use violence to protect yourself, family, friends, etc. "willing to use violence" is not "promoting violence." "Promoting violence" is what happends when you want to or thirst to use violence or get into violent encounters. THis can be particularly propigated when the belief is that you don't truely understand "fighting" unless you are in "real fights."

The threat was not to me, it was to a friend. I warned the person (Dr. B) who I thought was being threatening not to hurt someone with his antics. My mistake was in my anger, I worded my "warning" wrongly, and it resulted in my suspension. What you don't know is that I also warned the recipient (Bob) of the threat that if he seeks out this person (Dr. B) for a "training exchange" and gets thumped, then he is asking for it and I won't back him on that one.

Regardless, thats all water under the bridge now. I can say that my choice in words was desirable, but I can't say I was promoting violence, even if I am treading a thin line. The FACT is, if you, myself, or anyone sets up a circumstance where someone gets injured or hurt or killed, then there will be "Dire consequences" whether I drive 6 hours to deliever them or not. These consequences would most likely be of a legal nature over anything else. These are just the facts. Pointing them out is protection, not promoting violence.

PAUL

 

[Dan Anderson]

FOOD FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:flame: :biggun:
:zap: :ripper:

Sorry, couldn't help it.

Yours,
Dan

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by Dan Anderson
FOOD FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:flame: :biggun:
:zap: :ripper:

Sorry, couldn't help it.

Yours,
Dan

Hey Dan...your promoting culinary violence! :rofl:

 

[Tgace]

So how effective is Modern Arnis empty hand???

 

[loki09789]

I will clarify one point about old business and then let this drop:

"What you don't know is that I also warned the recipient (Bob) of the threat that if he seeks out this person (Dr. B) for a "training exchange" and gets thumped, then he is asking for it and I won't back him on that one."

Bob spoke/wrote Jerome and clearly understood the training exchange as sincere and not an ambush. I know this because I spoke with Bob H. directly about this.

I would not want a misinterpretation of Dr. Barber's intention with the training exchange to become accepted as publicized 'fact'. Much like some of the percieved reasons for separations/leavings of MA and such.


Paul M.

 

[Cruentus]

I can say that my choice in words was desirable, but I can't say I was promoting violence, even if I am treading a thin line.

What I ment to say way "I can't say that my choice in words was desirable, but I can say that I wasn't promoting violence, even if I was treading a thing line."

Whew.

Sometimes you get-a-typin' too fast for your ability to correct grammer!

So...uh....how 'bout that Modern Arnis empty hand effectiveness!?

:rofl:

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by loki09789
I will clarify one point about old business and then let this drop:

"What you don't know is that I also warned the recipient (Bob) of the threat that if he seeks out this person (Dr. B) for a "training exchange" and gets thumped, then he is asking for it and I won't back him on that one."

Bob spoke/wrote Jerome and clearly understood the training exchange as sincere and not an ambush. I know this because I spoke with Bob H. directly about this.

I would not want a misinterpretation of Dr. Barber's intention with the training exchange to become accepted as publicized 'fact'. Much like some of the percieved reasons for separations/leavings of MA and such.


Paul M.

Given past experiences and performance, nothing can be "clearly understood" regarding that issue. Especially at the time that my comments were made.

However, that's good that people talked and sorted things out.

Like I said, its all water under the bridge for me...

PAUL

 

[loki09789]

Okay, things were dicey at that time because attitudes were swollen but, between Bob and Dr B, they decided what was clearly understood. Your perception has little to do with that.

And...

Isn't the 'answering a percieved threat with a counter threat' a way of escalating the stress and likelyhood of a fight? Thereby, within the tactic, fighting is being promoted. I only say this because if the person doesn't back off, what next? You have to follow through on your counter threat - or be percieved as weak, which is like blood in the water to a shark, when you are dealing with someone who is already demonstrating a disregard for humanity.

Paul M.

 

[Datu Tim Hartman]

Originally posted by Tgace
So how effective is Modern Arnis empty hand???

I say very, but I also think that most people who teach Modern Arnis don't know enough about it to prove it either way. Most people become competent martial artists and then add Modern Arnis to their training. The majority of them never had to make their arnis training work, because they can fall back on their primary system to fall back on. There are very few of us out there who started in Modern Arnis and actually had to make it work for them. :asian: