can you explain how it is you put these two together?
Humilities role, if any, in training for self defense?
- Thread starter Brian King
- Start date
When you are
- fighting, you should act like a tiger (bad guy) and eat your opponent alive.
- no fighting, you should act like a sheep (good guy) and be the nicest person on earth.
If someone tries to knock you out, should you knock him out first?
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Humility is like a sense of humor. Some people are funny and some are not. You can learn a few jokes, but if it's not who you are, you will never get a laugh.
Some people are humble and some are not. If it's not genuine, it just comes off as insincere, like false modesty.
At some point, we should all make peace with who we are.
Some people are humble and some are not. If it's not genuine, it just comes off as insincere, like false modesty.
At some point, we should all make peace with who we are.
I would be interested if you would explain how you see it Steve.. like is it at a certain age? or when does it happen, as you suggest, that we say.. ok I am at that point, there is no more to be done and nothing that can any longer be changed, I must make peace with who I am??
so do you become the "tiger (bad guy)" when you are fighting?
Steve
Mostly Harmless
First, just to be clear, I think we can always try to improve ourselves. But I believe that after about age 6 or 7, the core of a person is pretty much set, and absent a momentous event, these traits are unlikely to ever change very much. Lazy, humble, thoughtful, shy, competitive. You are who you are. As to when we make peace with it? Sometimes never.
This isn't to say that you can't be a better version of yourself.
That sounds like a cop-out to me personally. It may become harder to change your basic self as you get older, and your early traits are unlikely to ever change very much without significant work. However, to say that a person is the way they were made in their youth sounds like an easy way to avoid taking responsibility for who a person is. We are all responsible for who we are, and can make whatever changes we deem necessary at any age. Anything less is making excuses and passing the buck to avoid the difficult job, in my opinion.
Yes I do. I also don't teach any students who doesn't have tiger spirit. One guy tried to test his 1st degree black belt. His skill met the requirement, but since in one fight, he was afraid to step into the ring because his opponent was too strong. Without showing his "tiger spirit", his 1st degree black belt testing was denied.
In Chinese wrestling, it's encouraged to play offense and lose than to play defense and win. This kind of mind set is very different from the other MA systems. This is why all the defense and counters are taught a year later (some teachers even teach it 3 years later). The Chinese wrestling system just encourage attack, attack, and still attack. The ACSCA (American Combat Shuai Chiao Association) black belt testing requirement are:
1st degree - attacking skills,
2nd degree - tournament experience and record,
3rd degree - defense and counter skills.
You can see that "defense and counters" are only tested during the 3rd degree black belt time frame.
The "tiger spirit" can be seen in the following clip.
I have always told my students, "If you are not crazy enough and enjoy to be thrown on the ground 200 times daily, the Chinese wrestling may not be for you."
To me, the "personality disorder" is far from enough.
Last edited:
Steve
Mostly Harmless
I don't see this as having anything to do with accountability one way or the other. I personally just think that's the way it goes. Accept who you are without blinders and work to become the best possible version of yourself you can be. I even said that in the post you quoted. Striving to be a better version of yourself sounds like accountability to me.
Reminds me of the fable about the frog and the scorpion. A scorpion asks a frog to swim him over to the other side of a river. The frog is like, 'No way. You'll sting me and I'll drown." The scorpion replies, "Why would I do that? If you drown, I'd drown, too." This convinced the frog, and so the scorpion climbs onto the frog's back and away they went.
Halfway across the river, the scorpion stings the frog, who begins to feel the paralysis right away. "Why did you sting me? Now we'll both drown," said the frog. "I had to," replied the scorpion. "It's my nature."
You're entitled to your beliefs, but I vehemently do not agree with them. In my mind, they leave entirely too much room for excuses. I used to tell my Scouts, and my own kids, that if you find yourself making an excuse, stop and figure out what you messed up so you don't do it again as you never have an excuse without messing something up first.
Your idea that we are the way we are, and can only hope to improve upon the way we are rather than rebuild our own character, just sounds to me like an excuse waiting to happen. It's a really simple thing for a person to say " ... sorry, but that's just the way I am" rather than facing the difficult job of changing themselves into something better.Of course, that's just my opinion and I'm sure other's will vary.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
If there's one thing we truly, vehemently disagree on, is that one should be so unhappy with who they are that they would want or need to fundamentally rebuild their own character. That's a sad statement. The person who is so broken that they must rebuild their character is the exception, and not the rule. I can't think of anyone, particularly any kids, who are so wrecked that their core personality should be "rebuilt."You're entitled to your beliefs, but I vehemently do not agree with them. In my mind, they leave entirely too much room for excuses. I used to tell my Scouts, and my own kids, that if you find yourself making an excuse, stop and figure out what you messed up so you don't do it again as you never have an excuse without messing something up first.
Of course, that's just my opinion and I'm sure other's will vary.
But you and I agree about excuses and accountability. AND that doesn't contradict what I've said earlier. Can you see how that is so? If not, I'm still not being clearIf we must agree to disagree, so be it. I'm just not sure I'm being clear, so please allow me one more shot.
I'm a lazy guy by nature. But I'm also accountable. I will happily and joyfully waste a lazy Sunday sitting on my back patio smoking a brisket or a pork butt, reading books and accomplishing nothing in particular. that's my idea of a great day. If I could do that every day, I couldn't be happier.
But I also understand that if I don't mow the lawn it won't get done. I understand that if I don't get my work done, I am accountable for it. Over time, I have acquired sufficient self discipline to be lazy when it's time to be lazy and to work hard when it's time to work hard. I haven't learned to not be lazy. Can't be done. It's my nature. But I can be accountable for the repurcussions of allowing myself to be lazy when there is work that must be done.
Does that make sense? Accepting of one's nature, including the ones that are "negative" and also being accountable. Much more positive life lesson, IMO, than recommending that people rebuild themselves from the ground up.
This is diverging from the OP point a little which was more about self defence rather than general demeanours of heads-down -and possibly hands-in-prayer- humility.. I had asked the question about humility in SD in particular.. all I had meant was that humility in our own defence is to concede.. yes I can be beat, or.. no I am not always assured of victory.. And why? because then we can stop pretending perfection in our SD or stop defending our practice when it is not entirely defensible.. and we can therefore openly look at the holes and flaws and we rectify those.. only this does not even mean we can say.. oh, I have looked at my weak left front kick or I have a technique to counteract my short reach and so now my SD practice is perfect.. no! if we keep a mind of humility that allow us to concede our failings and use it to continue to rectify, repair holes and improve then surely this is to our good?? the idea was not to be perfect.. the idea is keep at bay the tendence evident in MA which permits one to argue.. my art is better/best.. even see that in this very thread! and that might lead to complacency and complacency in SD is what get people hurt when it could be avoided.. any way that is what my point is though it is lost in among other very different ideas and but that is what I was meaning Jx
To be honest I've only ever met or read of two people who think their SD is perfect and both of them on here, one stated he never has any trouble because he's a big guy and knows BJJ the other was a fantasist bouncer. everyone I know is always looking to improve, to find those weaknesses and rectify them because you can't stop learning and you can't stop trying but you do need confidence in the abilities you do have.
The other thing is do you mean that when fighting for your life in a SD situation you should be able to concede if you feel you can't win? If so that is not an attitude that is healthy not is it a good attitude to take if attacked without provocation or at random. If you mean that you should think that before YOU start a fight over something stupid then yes I agree.
no Tez.. this conceding would be*before* there is ever any defence or any thought of any fight.. before this when there is plenty of time to work on the areas of shortfall or weakness, it is far too late when SD skills are needed to think of any thing.. this is why complacency that say -like some one earlier- my MA is great and yours is not, display lacking humility that can lead to that person not ever stopping to concede their weaknesses.. this is what I mean by humility in SD, nothing else.. Jx
