In Defense of the McDojo

[Steve]

I agree that we're missing each other here. I don't quite see how that would be so, unless the instructor were utterly incompetent.

LOL. You said it, not me. But to answer your question (if you're serious), in wrestling, kids get to wrestle. In golf, kids get to play golf. Clarinet players play the clarinet. Chess club members play chess. But, unique to Martial Arts, kids who are in martial arts class tend to get promoted for, at best, kicking pads and competing in TKD tourneys... or at worst, NOT doing these things. How many children's martial arts classes teach any practical self defense skills?

So, if a child has any confidence in his or her ability to defend himself, they are dangerously deluded.

Bill, its very important that martial arts training consist of both adequate skills training and values training. Inadequate or outright fake skills training makes the place nothing but a charm school; teaching the physical skills without the values poses the very real risk of turning out better grade bullies and thugs.

I think that values are a product of actions not words. A good coach/teacher will be a good role model. I do agree, though, that any person interacting with kids in a position of authority should strive to set a good example and be a positive role model. This includes violin teachers. Where kids are involved, we aren't training killers. We're training productive citizens.

Do marksmanship instructors teach values? Do we expect them to?

If they're teaching kids, then yes. By stepping into the role of coach, they WILL be influencing the kids they teach, for good or ill.

I agree that such values are accepted and desired in professional and amateur athletes. However, I am not familiar with any coach of a pro or college team that lost consistently but was kept around because they taught good values. None that were fired for having a winning season but not passing on effective life lessons.

It's very different for adults than for kids, but I'd argue that you can ALWAYS tell who had strong, positive role models as coaches and teachers and who didn't.

We do demand sportsmanship in our athletes, and I agree that they must be learning it somewhere; probably from coaches and teachers and leaders and parents and clergy and so on. I'm noting however that we do not fire coaches who don't teach morals along with how to throw a change-up pitch.

Do we fire them? Of course we do. Teachers and coaches who step over ethical boundaries get fired all the time. Outside of that, we do expect our coaches to set a good example, work hard and impart qualities like sportsmanship. At least, that's how it is around here, and how it was where I grew up.

I think no activity inherently by itself teaches morals and values; it is the interactions among human beings that provide this learning.

Morals and values are best learned by children through observation, and when old enough feedback. However drilling "morals" and the preachy version of the stereotypical McDojo actually, IMO, isn't the best way to teach what we hope to...

I think that if the training comes first (in whatever activity), the students have the chance to pick up on the life lessons.

EXACTLY!

If that is the case, then the McDojo is no more guilty of failing to teach morals, values, or ethics than any non-McDojo, right?

Except that a McDojo actually teaches negative values. Like, getting something for nothing. Being promoted for tenure not effort. That no matter how little you try you will ALWAYS succeed. Or in really bad examples, that they might have a chance of defending themselves because they're black belts.

I mean, this is one of the main arguments I've read in this thread against the McDojo - they don't teach ethics.

They don't, but I don't think you understand the argument of why.

Yet if your statement is true, everything teaches ethics.

Where kids are concerned, they're always learning something.

Again, Bill, I see what you're saying, but it's clear that I'm just not making my points. But once again, reading through the thread, I'm not sure how I can say it differently.

 

[Blade96]

Not following you here. A block, a kick, a punch - all are done in a particular manner based on the martial arts tradition. Surely that can be taught completely effectively, but utterly divorced from any life-lessons or moral teachings.

Not really. If your gonna teach a MA - which is teaching people how they can beat the living snot out of each other, if the need arose, like in self defence, then they also need to be taught morals and respect and things like that. Otherwise, what do you think might happen? People are being taught how to beat the living snot out of each other.

therefore people who can beat the living snot out of each other w/out morals and respect and discipline and stuff vs people who can beat the living snot out of each other who have respect and love and kindness and decency and respect for their opponents.

Weigh it.

 

[JWLuiza]

Not really. If your gonna teach a MA - which is teaching people how they can beat the living snot out of each other, if the need arose, like in self defence, then they also need to be taught morals and respect and things like that.

That's an opinion. It might be right, but the argument is that you CAN divorce the morals from the training

Otherwise, what do you think might happen? People are being taught how to beat the living snot out of each other.
therefore people who can beat the living snot out of each other w/out morals and respect and discipline and stuff vs people who can beat the living snot out of each other who have respect and love and kindness and decency and respect for their opponents.

I find it more likely that there is a selection bias going on... The people who fit in with a school's culture are more likely to stick around. Jerks who are going to be amoral and use it inappropriately are politely excluded from participation.
Weigh it.

I had about 10 minutes of lectures on morality in 18 years of training, yet we have a responsible set of practitioners at my school.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Not really. If your gonna teach a MA - which is teaching people how they can beat the living snot out of each other, if the need arose, like in self defence, then they also need to be taught morals and respect and things like that. Otherwise, what do you think might happen? People are being taught how to beat the living snot out of each other.

therefore people who can beat the living snot out of each other w/out morals and respect and discipline and stuff vs people who can beat the living snot out of each other who have respect and love and kindness and decency and respect for their opponents.

Weigh it.

If that's the case, then you must be against right-to-carry states that don't require licensing and testing. I mean, if you can carry a weapon without getting the ethical training necessary to learn how to respect your fellow human being...

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Do we fire them? Of course we do. Teachers and coaches who step over ethical boundaries get fired all the time.

That's something entirely different. Teachers and coaches who violate rules is not what I was talking about. I said teachers who simply fail to teach ethics, morals, or whatever else you think they ought to teach in addition to their actual job description. We don't fire them for failing to do so.

Outside of that, we do expect our coaches to set a good example, work hard and impart qualities like sportsmanship. At least, that's how it is around here, and how it was where I grew up.

We may expect it (I said that), but we don't demand it, nor do we keep coaches around who lose all their games but teach good morals, nor do we fire coaches who win all their games but fail to teach ethics.

We do not demand it. There is no athletic department equivalent of a 'McDojo'. No 'McCoaches'.

We only seem to put that onus on martial arts training. I'm becoming more convinced that the reasoning behind it is artificial.

Is it really that we despise McDojos for not teaching ethics, or is it that we do not like them for being successful and for treating martial arts training like a business instead of a passion?

 

[Blade96]

If that's the case, then you must be against right-to-carry states that don't require licensing and testing. I mean, if you can carry a weapon without getting the ethical training necessary to learn how to respect your fellow human being...

If its gun control your talking about then yeah, I would naturally be against that.

Who in their right mind would think any shmuck should be able to carry a weapon.

No licensing and testing? Huh? say huh? I know the gun is to the americans as the sword is to the Japanese, but sheesh.

 

[Steve]

That's something entirely different. Teachers and coaches who violate rules is not what I was talking about. I said teachers who simply fail to teach ethics, morals, or whatever else you think they ought to teach in addition to their actual job description. We don't fire them for failing to do so.

A history teacher doing it well is teaching good ethics and positive life lessons. A history teacher doing it poorly is teaching poor ethics and negative life lessons. A football coach who is coaching kids well is, by example, demonstrating ethical behavior and positive life lessons. A football coach who is abusive or negligent as a coach is doing the opposite.

The point I'm making, Bill, is that every adult who interacts in a position of authority with kids, whether as a teacher, mentor, coach, pastor, scout leader, parent or whatever, IS teaching these kids ethics. Whether overtly or indirectly, life lessons are being conveyed.

The second point I'm making are that often the BEST life lessons are the ones learned by example. These are the ones that stick. For example, I can tell a kid to be honest til I'm blue in the face, but the best thing I can do to influence kids is to act with integrity myself.

Taking these two points, my conclusion is that an endeavor like McDojo martial arts training is contrary to acting with integrity because it purports to teach something other than what it actually teaches.

Honestly, I would be a little alarmed if my kid's history teacher prosyletized in the middle of class. Overt ethics lessons like that really have no place in school. I do, however, expect the teachers to set a strong, positive example for the kids, teaching them positive values through example.

I expect the same from coaches and even martial arts instructors. Where I think things go awry is when these lessons supplant the other things being taught. If I'm actively sermonizing to the kids on the football field instead of teaching them to punt, pass and kick, I'm getting it all wrong... not to mention a little creepy. This is, though, exactly what many martial arts instructors do. They don't teach any practical martial arts. They sermonize to kids overtly in lieu of martial arts training while demonstrating behavior that is counter to the values they purport to teach.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

A history teacher doing it well is teaching good ethics and positive life lessons. A history teacher doing it poorly is teaching poor ethics and negative life lessons. A football coach who is coaching kids well is, by example, demonstrating ethical behavior and positive life lessons. A football coach who is abusive or negligent as a coach is doing the opposite.

The point I'm making, Bill, is that every adult who interacts in a position of authority with kids, whether as a teacher, mentor, coach, pastor, scout leader, parent or whatever, IS teaching these kids ethics. Whether overtly or indirectly, life lessons are being conveyed.

I agree. I'm just saying that if they DON'T teach those lessons, they're not fired for it, and their schools are not regarded as 'McSchools'. We agree that it's desirable. We appear not to agree that teachers and coaches, et al, are held to the same standard as those who refer to martial arts centers as 'McDojos' if they don't teach ethics and morals, etc.

The second point I'm making are that often the BEST life lessons are the ones learned by example. These are the ones that stick. For example, I can tell a kid to be honest til I'm blue in the face, but the best thing I can do to influence kids is to act with integrity myself.

Also agreed. I am saying that I don't see what inherently is wrong with a McDojo that the instructors don't act with integrity or honesty, etc.

Taking these two points, my conclusion is that an endeavor like McDojo martial arts training is contrary to acting with integrity because it purports to teach something other than what it actually teaches.

They purport to teach martial arts, don't they? And they do, to a greater or lesser extent, don't they? What is it that they're advertising and not providing? These 'ethics' that are unwritten but apparently still required by you?

Honestly, I would be a little alarmed if my kid's history teacher prosyletized in the middle of class. Overt ethics lessons like that really have no place in school. I do, however, expect the teachers to set a strong, positive example for the kids, teaching them positive values through example.

Again, what you expect is one thing. What is required of their teaching contract is another. Society may expect teachers to teach strong values, but it doesn't require it, nor punish those who don't. Martial arts instructors apparently are held to a different standard.

I expect the same from coaches and even martial arts instructors. Where I think things go awry is when these lessons supplant the other things being taught. If I'm actively sermonizing to the kids on the football field instead of teaching them to punt, pass and kick, I'm getting it all wrong... not to mention a little creepy. This is, though, exactly what many martial arts instructors do. They don't teach any practical martial arts. They sermonize to kids overtly in lieu of martial arts training while demonstrating behavior that is counter to the values they purport to teach.

I was under the impression that it was the other way around. McDojos are accused of teaching just the art and not the ethics that you claim have to go with it in order for the teaching to be valid. Now which is it?

I am not aware of McDojos saying "We teach martial arts with a strong dose of good sportsmanship and strong ethical behavior." If they did and failed to provide it, then I have no problem with your point. I see them advertising karate, TKD, etc; and teaching. Well or poorly is another question, but I don't see them putting themselves forward as centers of ethical learning.

Again, I think we're getting back to a basic premise - some of us don't like McDojos, and we'll come up with a list of reasons why we don't. But those reasons (to me) are starting to fall apart under scrutiny. We don't like them because they don't teach ethics. Oh wait, we don't like them because they claim to teach ethics and don't. Oh wait, we don't like them because they preach ethics but don't teach martial arts. Oh wait, we don't like them because, er, uh, we just don't like them. That's what it's looking like to me at this point.

Seriously, what are your actual reasons for disliking McDojos?

 

[Xinglu]

Who in their right mind would think any shmuck should be able to carry a weapon.

The constitutional RIGHT to bear arms, no one has the right to abridge that right without first abridging the constitution.

Like it or not.

To topic, I wonder if it is the responsibility to of instructors to evaluate and teach ethics in regards to the use of what they are teaching.

Personally, I think it might be for those purely teaching SD, to teach a person who goes out and bullies others with their martial training needs some repercussions (IMHO) in the dojo.

However, what about those who's goal is to train sports MA or competitive fighting? Like MMA, Judo, and most TKD schools as of late? If the emphasis is on tournaments and not on SD are they obligated? I'm not so sure they should be. HS wrestling coaches never taught me "values." They taught me how to wrestle and win. Period.

 

[Xinglu]

The point I'm making ... is that every adult who interacts in a position of authority with kids, whether as a teacher, mentor, coach, pastor, scout leader, parent or whatever, IS teaching these kids ethics. Whether overtly or indirectly, life lessons are being conveyed.

I accept this, however it goes to the analogy of "sweeping your own porch," MA instructors should teach such things by actions and their own lives, not by preaching them in class.

Another way, is as part of the agreement to train, they agree to abide by a code of conduct both in and out of the dojo/gym/dojang/guan. Any blatant violation of that makes them subject to potential termination of training with no refund. There is no preaching or lectures on ethics that way.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

HS wrestling coaches never taught me "values." They taught me how to wrestle and win. Period.

Bingo. And while it is fair to say that it's a good thing in general if they teach ethics and values just by being good people and teaching by example, I don't really see people declaring a wrestling coach to be no good because they don't teach ethics along with wrestling holds.

So why would this be true of martial arts? Well, I mean eastern martial arts, of course wrestling is martial arts too.

 

[Steve]

I agree. I'm just saying that if they DON'T teach those lessons, they're not fired for it, and their schools are not regarded as 'McSchools'. We agree that it's desirable. We appear not to agree that teachers and coaches, et al, are held to the same standard as those who refer to martial arts centers as 'McDojos' if they don't teach ethics and morals, etc.

And I'm saying that EVERY adult DOES teach ethical lessons to kids by example. Kids are sharp and they know when our actions and our words are inconsistent.

Also agreed. I am saying that I don't see what inherently is wrong with a McDojo that the instructors don't act with integrity or honesty, etc.

Let me get this straight. You don't see anything inherently wrong with a McDojo instructor who is dishonest or acting without integrity? Even were kids not involved, I still have a hard time understanding this perspective. I would have thought that the one thing we could all agree on is that acting with honesty and integrity are behaviors to be endorsed. This is particularly so where kids are involved.

They purport to teach martial arts, don't they? And they do, to a greater or lesser extent, don't they? What is it that they're advertising and not providing? These 'ethics' that are unwritten but apparently still required by you?

That's what some claim. Many claim to teach self defense. Most do neither. As I said before, I believe that the average kid who's spent a year training in martial arts is LESS capable of defending him or herself than had there been no training at all.

Again, what you expect is one thing. What is required of their teaching contract is another. Society may expect teachers to teach strong values, but it doesn't require it, nor punish those who don't. Martial arts instructors apparently are held to a different standard.

There is a slight difference in that I can't always choose my child's teacher, although I have complete control over her coaches, instructors and other adult role models. I have, however, had one of my kids moved out of a class where the teacher was a poor excuse for a human being. She was let go after that year. Ultimately, I don't know why she was let go, but I'm confident that the poor example she set for the kids was the overt, in class manifestation of poor performance. As I said, a good teacher is teaching by example much, much more than reading, writing and arithmetic.

Think about teachers that you remember from school. Good ones and bad. The ones that made an impact, whether positive or negative, on your life. What do you remember? I'll bet dollars to donuts that you don't remember lesson plans.

I was under the impression that it was the other way around. McDojos are accused of teaching just the art and not the ethics that you claim have to go with it in order for the teaching to be valid. Now which is it?

I've been consistent all the way through. Whether I've been able to communicate my points effectively... well, I don't know.

I am not aware of McDojos saying "We teach martial arts with a strong dose of good sportsmanship and strong ethical behavior." If they did and failed to provide it, then I have no problem with your point. I see them advertising karate, TKD, etc; and teaching. Well or poorly is another question, but I don't see them putting themselves forward as centers of ethical learning.

They often don't even claim to teach martial arts. They usually lead with ethics and values and stop there. If you're not aware of this, then I'd encourage you to just google TKD (not to pick on just them, but as prolific as they are there are lots of websites). Take a look at the websites and I'm confident you'll see a trend. You'll see claims to developing character. You'll see them use words like honesty, integrity, discipline and the like. You'll see them claim to build strong families and such. Maybe not all of them on every site, but as I said, if you spend 30 minutes looking at TKD websites, you'll see what I mean.

Again, I think we're getting back to a basic premise - some of us don't like McDojos, and we'll come up with a list of reasons why we don't. But those reasons (to me) are starting to fall apart under scrutiny. We don't like them because they don't teach ethics. Oh wait, we don't like them because they claim to teach ethics and don't. Oh wait, we don't like them because they preach ethics but don't teach martial arts. Oh wait, we don't like them because, er, uh, we just don't like them. That's what it's looking like to me at this point.

I think it's a shame that you feel it's necessary to be so dismissive of positions that you clearly don't care to understand.

Seriously, what are your actual reasons for disliking McDojos?

Honestly, I have no idea how to answer this. After writing thousands of words in a sincere effort to be as plain as possible, the question I have is whether you're being serious or you're yanking my chain for fun.

 

[Steve]

I accept this, however it goes to the analogy of "sweeping your own porch," MA instructors should teach such things by actions and their own lives, not by preaching them in class.

Another way, is as part of the agreement to train, they agree to abide by a code of conduct both in and out of the dojo/gym/dojang/guan. Any blatant violation of that makes them subject to potential termination of training with no refund. There is no preaching or lectures on ethics that way.

I agree completely and I'm pretty sure I've been saying that. The extension to this is that, if an MA instructor doesn't actually teach kids martial arts, they're still learning by example... just not good lessons.

 

[Steve]

However, what about those who's goal is to train sports MA or competitive fighting? Like MMA, Judo, and most TKD schools as of late? If the emphasis is on tournaments and not on SD are they obligated? I'm not so sure they should be. HS wrestling coaches never taught me "values." They taught me how to wrestle and win. Period.

If you were a successful wrestler in high school, you learned values from your coach. You learned how to be on time for practice and to be at practice every day, because if you didn't make practices you'd be ineligible to compete. You learned a strong work ethic. You learned to be self reliant because on the mat, your coach or your teammates can't hold the bridge for you, even when you're really tired. If you were a successful wrestler, your coach taught you MANY things.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

And I'm saying that EVERY adult DOES teach ethical lessons to kids by example. Kids are sharp and they know when our actions and our words are inconsistent.

Yeah, and I'm agreeing with you. I'm also saying it's not a requirement for employment, just something we generally expect people to have; except you seem to think it's an explicit requirement for martial arts teachers. I'm also saying that you appear to be making the statement that this is something the McDojo operators do NOT have. If every adult has them, then why assume a McDojo doesn't?

Let me get this straight. You don't see anything inherently wrong with a McDojo instructor who is dishonest or acting without integrity?

No, I didn't say that. I said that teaching ethics (not being ethical) is not a requirement of teaching most things, even if it is to be desired.

Even were kids not involved, I still have a hard time understanding this perspective. I would have thought that the one thing we could all agree on is that acting with honesty and integrity are behaviors to be endorsed.

I think those are wonderful behaviors, and greatly to be endorsed. I have yet to see where you link being a McDojo operator with being dishonest or unethical.

You seem to be using circular logic. A McDojo is unethical because it behaves unethically, which is what a McDojo is.

This is particularly so where kids are involved. That's what some claim. Many claim to teach self defense. Most do neither. As I said before, I believe that the average kid who's spent a year training in martial arts is LESS capable of defending him or herself than had there been no training at all.

You said it, but you haven't defended it. In what way is a person taught to kick, block, and punch properly according to whatever particular martial art they're learning less capable of defending themselves if their instructor did not also teach them 'values' along with the mechanics of a good punch?

There is a slight difference in that I can't always choose my child's teacher, although I have complete control over her coaches, instructors and other adult role models. I have, however, had one of my kids moved out of a class where the teacher was a poor excuse for a human being. She was let go after that year. Ultimately, I don't know why she was let go, but I'm confident that the poor example she set for the kids was the overt, in class manifestation of poor performance. As I said, a good teacher is teaching by example much, much more than reading, writing and arithmetic.

All parents have such choices and responsibilities as parents. However, that's not the point I've been making, and I think you know that. Society does not name coaches as 'McCoaches' if they don't teach ethics along with volleyball or whatever.

Think about teachers that you remember from school. Good ones and bad. The ones that made an impact, whether positive or negative, on your life. What do you remember? I'll bet dollars to donuts that you don't remember lesson plans.

Again, not my point. Teachers that teach values along with Reading are terrific. Society does not require it. You claim that society does. That's not correct. You also want martial arts instructors to be required to teach values along with martial arts, or they're McDojos. I am now to the point where I'm going to say that's not correct either.

I've been consistent all the way through. Whether I've been able to communicate my points effectively... well, I don't know.

I understand your point - ethics are good, and teachers who teach them are good. I get it. But teachers are not required to teach ethics or values along with whatever their subject is. They're not, I don't care how much you think it's a good thing (and I think it's a good thing too). We can care all we like, society does not require it. Period.

Except you want to say that a martial arts instructor who does not teach ethics is a McDojo. That seems odd.

They often don't even claim to teach martial arts. They usually lead with ethics and values and stop there.

The signs I see on the door say 'karate' or 'tkd' not 'values'. I see the ads on TV and hear them on the radio too. Nothing about 'sportsmanship'. I hear about self-defense and karate, not morals.

If you're not aware of this, then I'd encourage you to just google TKD (not to pick on just them, but as prolific as they are there are lots of websites). Take a look at the websites and I'm confident you'll see a trend. You'll see claims to developing character. You'll see them use words like honesty, integrity, discipline and the like. You'll see them claim to build strong families and such. Maybe not all of them on every site, but as I said, if you spend 30 minutes looking at TKD websites, you'll see what I mean.

If they claim to do that, they I agree they ought to do that. And how do you know they don't? It's that circular logic of yours again. They can't teach ethics or values because they're a McDojo. What's a McDojo? Anyone who doesn't teach ethics and values. There's no winning with that logic.

I think it's a shame that you feel it's necessary to be so dismissive of positions that you clearly don't care to understand. Honestly, I have no idea how to answer this. After writing thousands of words in a sincere effort to be as plain as possible, the question I have is whether you're being serious or you're yanking my chain for fun.

I promise I'm not yanking your chain. I'm beginning to question the 'common wisdom' that says McDojos are bad, because I'm seeing the logic unravel. Exactly what is bad about a McDojo? I mean exactly. If they claim to teach something they don't, yeah, then I'd agree. But you can't say they don't teach ethics because they're McDojos and they're McDojos because they don't teach ethics.

A) I don't think they all claim to teach ethics,
B) I don't think teaching ethics is a required component of teaching martial arts,
C) I don't think other forms of instruction require instructors to teach ethics or values along with their subjects, and
D) How do you know they DON'T teach ethics and values?

I'm starting to wonder what's wrong with a McDojo other than you don't like them. If others have reasons to list, I'd like to hear them too.

Sorry, but I like my logic to make sense. If it doesn't make sense, I have to change my position. I'm beginning to doubt that there is anything inherently wrong with McDojos, because the logic I'm seeing is starting not to make any sense.

 

[Steve]

Yeah, and I'm agreeing with you. I'm also saying it's not a requirement for employment, just something we generally expect people to have; except you seem to think it's an explicit requirement for martial arts teachers. I'm also saying that you appear to be making the statement that this is something the McDojo operators do NOT have. If every adult has them, then why assume a McDojo doesn't?



No, I didn't say that. I said that teaching ethics (not being ethical) is not a requirement of teaching most things, even if it is to be desired.



I think those are wonderful behaviors, and greatly to be endorsed. I have yet to see where you link being a McDojo operator with being dishonest or unethical.

You seem to be using circular logic. A McDojo is unethical because it behaves unethically, which is what a McDojo is.



You said it, but you haven't defended it. In what way is a person taught to kick, block, and punch properly according to whatever particular martial art they're learning less capable of defending themselves if their instructor did not also teach them 'values' along with the mechanics of a good punch?



All parents have such choices and responsibilities as parents. However, that's not the point I've been making, and I think you know that. Society does not name coaches as 'McCoaches' if they don't teach ethics along with volleyball or whatever.



Again, not my point. Teachers that teach values along with Reading are terrific. Society does not require it. You claim that society does. That's not correct. You also want martial arts instructors to be required to teach values along with martial arts, or they're McDojos. I am now to the point where I'm going to say that's not correct either.



I understand your point - ethics are good, and teachers who teach them are good. I get it. But teachers are not required to teach ethics or values along with whatever their subject is. They're not, I don't care how much you think it's a good thing (and I think it's a good thing too). We can care all we like, society does not require it. Period.

Except you want to say that a martial arts instructor who does not teach ethics is a McDojo. That seems odd.



The signs I see on the door say 'karate' or 'tkd' not 'values'. I see the ads on TV and hear them on the radio too. Nothing about 'sportsmanship'. I hear about self-defense and karate, not morals.



If they claim to do that, they I agree they ought to do that. And how do you know they don't? It's that circular logic of yours again. They can't teach ethics or values because they're a McDojo. What's a McDojo? Anyone who doesn't teach ethics and values. There's no winning with that logic.



I promise I'm not yanking your chain. I'm beginning to question the 'common wisdom' that says McDojos are bad, because I'm seeing the logic unravel. Exactly what is bad about a McDojo? I mean exactly. If they claim to teach something they don't, yeah, then I'd agree. But you can't say they don't teach ethics because they're McDojos and they're McDojos because they don't teach ethics.

A) I don't think they all claim to teach ethics,
B) I don't think teaching ethics is a required component of teaching martial arts,
C) I don't think other forms of instruction require instructors to teach ethics or values along with their subjects, and
D) How do you know they DON'T teach ethics and values?

I'm starting to wonder what's wrong with a McDojo other than you don't like them. If others have reasons to list, I'd like to hear them too.

Sorry, but I like my logic to make sense. If it doesn't make sense, I have to change my position. I'm beginning to doubt that there is anything inherently wrong with McDojos, because the logic I'm seeing is starting not to make any sense.

I give up. You're trying to win a debate not have a discussion. I concede. You win.

 

[Xinglu]

If you were a successful wrestler in high school, you learned values from your coach. You learned how to be on time for practice and to be at practice every day, because if you didn't make practices you'd be ineligible to compete. You learned a strong work ethic. You learned to be self reliant because on the mat, your coach or your teammates can't hold the bridge for you, even when you're really tired. If you were a successful wrestler, your coach taught you MANY things.

Perhaps it's picking nits, but I don't consider professionalism a value. I know too many morally/ethically bankrupt people who are consummate professionals when it comes to their job/sport. But over all I think we agree, the things you are talking about should be learned in the MA too, by example and the action/consequence dynamic.

For example, I KNOW to block because my instructor told me, I LEARNED to block because I didn't and it hurt Two different things when you get down too it.

 

[Xinglu]

I'm starting to wonder what's wrong with a McDojo other than you don't like them. If others have reasons to list, I'd like to hear them too.

Sorry, but I like my logic to make sense. If it doesn't make sense, I have to change my position. I'm beginning to doubt that there is anything inherently wrong with McDojos, because the logic I'm seeing is starting not to make any sense.

The problem is, the term McDojo is subjective. It implies a certain meaning to some people, another to others, and something altogether different to another.

To truly have this conversation objectively you need all people involved to agree on a definition of "McDojo," which I doubt will happen.

To me, it is a business model that may or may not have any impact on the quality of training or material taught. Unfortunately many that fall under this bossiness model have proven to be poor at teaching and good at business. More than I am comfortable with have turned out to be outright frauds. However, some are legit schools with legit lineage and a great product/instruction. There are enough of those out there for me not to write them all off for their business model and take them each on a case by case basis.

 

[grydth]

I give up. You're trying to win a debate not have a discussion. I concede. You win.

Steve and Bill:

You guys have each contributed to one of the best discussions in recent times, one which has drawn in a variety of diverse people and opinions.

The subject of McDojos will always arouse some hot emotions...

How about both of you leaving the personal recriminations out and just continue making your excellent points? When you do that, the Forum wins.

 

[Touch Of Death]

While I firmly believe that defining and training strong ethical values, self integrity, respect of self and others, spirit, etc, is important, I do not think that should be the focus of a MA school, the focus should be the art and the content of the art.

If you are teaching a SD related art, your goal should be to teach your students just that, how to defend themselves, and when to defend themselves at the level of defense that is needed and no more than that level. Teaching these skills will teach them strong values, help them with their integrity, build their respect of themselves and others, and help them grow strong in self (spirit). But the focus should be on the art and skills of the art, and when to use them.

The bigger picture dictates that by teaching values, you are teaching self defense. Just a thought.
sean