In the end, are we all not simply doing our own thing?

[Flying Crane]

we all train in our respective methods, and do it the best that we understand it, and I'll bet that means that eventually, we do it differently from our classmates and from our instructors. Some of us change the methodology a bit as we gain an understanding of the underlying principles and then come up with practices that reinforce those principles more effectively for us personally.

The method, the system, is a way to build skill. The method can be changed. Sometimes change is well informed, sometimes it is naive and foolish.

There is a lot of stuff out there that I would say is junk. Maybe I'm right about some of it, maybe I'm wrong about some of it.

Nobody has a monopoly on the "right" way to do things, and yet a lot of people have no idea of what they do not understand.

Spirited and rigorous debate is a good thing, but at the end of the day don't forget that what is posted here has no bearing on what happens in the world out there.

But in the end, we are all doing our own thing, to the best of our understanding. We are responsible for our own training. Take ownership of what you know. Do it the best that you can. If you find out how to do it better, then do that.

I dunno, just felt like it needed to be said.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Sounds about right to me.

 

[Martial_Kumite]

Yep.

 

[Tez3]

 

[Buka]

Damn spot on. And thanks for the reminder.

And, Tez, that pic is just nuts! (in a good way)

 

[oaktree]

I think what the forum offers us is the chance to understand our position in our training by interacting with others be for good or worse. It takes a commitment to come to the site, log in hit reply and type a message.

What others do what they think are an opinion which does have an impact on our thinking and reflection of the arts we practice. At times it does get heated, sometimes angry sometimes vengeful but that is just the ebb and flow of the site. I suspect that if we actually were on the mat and discussing things or over some pizza and beer a lot of things would a lot clearer.

 

[drop bear]

Either side taken in absolute is wrong.

You can't have one right way. You cant just let everybody do their own thing either.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'll even go so far as to say I think it's important that we are each doing our own thing. I find little value in any attempt to exactly replicate what another has done, like a senior student (someone who has a firm grip on the art) attempting to replicate their instructor's approach. We each have different strengths, weaknesses, limitations, motivations, thought processes, points of view, and desires. Why should any two of us have the same approach to our training?

That's not to say we can't find like-minded people. But it's best when we find those people then get to talk about not only what we agree on, but also what we disagree on or see differently.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

we all train in our respective methods, ...

We all train a subset of our MA style methods. I like single leg. My friend think it's low level skill. My friend likes knee lift leg blocking throw. I think it uses too much strength.

In my MA style, there are over 60 major principles. No matter how I may modify my personal training, I still only train within that boundary.

 

[kuniggety]

Either side taken in absolute is wrong.

You can't have one right way. You cant just let everybody do their own thing either.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Unless your opinion disagrees with mine, because then it's just wrong.

 

[drop bear]

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Unless your opinion disagrees with mine, because then it's just wrong.

Yeah because being an emotionless jedi is healthy.

 

[TSDTexan]

View attachment 20600

Hitting the dislike button, because sometimes you have to disagree, for principles' sake.

 

[TSDTexan]

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Unless your opinion disagrees with mine, because then it's just wrong.

If true: Logic dictates that Obi Wan is an absolute sith lord.

 

[Tez3]

I think one of the reasons 'fraud busting' on here isn't allowed is because it's so difficult to say it actually is a 'fraud' or fake. I look at fraud from a criminal sense of the word, ie someone knowingly and deliberately sets out to deceive for gain. Civilians may well look at it differently.
To me it isn't a fraud if the instructor believes what they are doing is correct, that they think their techniques and methods work even when the rest of us think or know that they don't. It's a shame for the students of course if they are being taught something that doesn't work ( we touched on this in the women's self defence thread) that they have a false sense of security because of what they have been taught but if the intent isn't to take money off these people while knowing they are teaching poor techniques then it's not fraud. It's disappointing, it's mistaken and it's a great shame but not fraud. Is it fake though, probably not.
In UK law dealing with the selling of goods and services something has to be 'fit for purpose' otherwise you are entailed to get your money back. 'Fit for purpose' is a very good phrase, it covers martial arts quite nicely because whatever you want from martial arts you should have training that is fit for purpose. If someone posts up their new style, their ideas you should ask firstly what is the purpose of this training and when told you can ask 'is this fit for purpose'? Is what you do fit for your purposes? If yes then crack on enjoy your training, if not look for something else that is fit for your purpose but in the end all our purposes are different, as the OP says we all do our own thing and long may it be so.

 

[BuckerooBonzai]

Yeah because being an emotionless jedi is healthy.

Grey Jedi is the way to go, eh?

(interested to see if Disney explores this as a "canon" idea in the next movie)

 

[BuckerooBonzai]

I'll even go so far as to say I think it's important that we are each doing our own thing. I find little value in any attempt to exactly replicate what another has done, like a senior student (someone who has a firm grip on the art) attempting to replicate their instructor's approach. We each have different strengths, weaknesses, limitations, motivations, thought processes, points of view, and desires. Why should any two of us have the same approach to our training?

That's not to say we can't find like-minded people. But it's best when we find those people then get to talk about not only what we agree on, but also what we disagree on or see differently.

I agree with this but it took me quite a few years and many different dojangs and instructors to come to this realization.

I have completed 9 full moves in the last 21 years and every time it has been a distance of at least 500 miles, but usually more around 1,000-7,000 miles, and each time I had to find a new dojang to train in once I arrived in the new city/State/Country..

I see a lot of the students (and Masters) of my original school, which I still really love and keep in contact with, devotedly trying to all do each technique and pooomsae EXACTLY the same.

I really think that this is not best. I think that it is okay to "evolve" (might sound pretentious but that's the best word I can come up with) some techniques over time and especially I find that I like to alter the rhythm and pace of some of the poomsae.

In my opinion, too many schools are too worried about making sure that every student does every technique/poomsae exactly the same way every time.

I am not advocating for a beginner to branch out on her/his own and not listen to their instructor, but I think that it is natural, after 10 or 20+ years, that instructors will start to change a bit and have their own "flavor" to their techniques.

 

[Buka]

The title of this thread - says it all.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

We all train a subset of our MA style methods. I like single leg. My friend think it's low level skill. My friend likes knee lift leg blocking throw. I think it uses too much strength.

In my MA style, there are over 60 major principles. No matter how I may modify my personal training, I still only train within that boundary.

Agreed. I've yet to see an art that actually had "hard boundaries", where it was easy to say, "This thing is within our art, and that thing is not." Arts are defined by the principles, IMO, and it's impossible to train everything that fits those principles, so we all train a subset of what the complete art can be.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think one of the reasons 'fraud busting' on here isn't allowed is because it's so difficult to say it actually is a 'fraud' or fake. I look at fraud from a criminal sense of the word, ie someone knowingly and deliberately sets out to deceive for gain. Civilians may well look at it differently.
To me it isn't a fraud if the instructor believes what they are doing is correct, that they think their techniques and methods work even when the rest of us think or know that they don't. It's a shame for the students of course if they are being taught something that doesn't work ( we touched on this in the women's self defence thread) that they have a false sense of security because of what they have been taught but if the intent isn't to take money off these people while knowing they are teaching poor techniques then it's not fraud. It's disappointing, it's mistaken and it's a great shame but not fraud. Is it fake though, probably not.
In UK law dealing with the selling of goods and services something has to be 'fit for purpose' otherwise you are entailed to get your money back. 'Fit for purpose' is a very good phrase, it covers martial arts quite nicely because whatever you want from martial arts you should have training that is fit for purpose. If someone posts up their new style, their ideas you should ask firstly what is the purpose of this training and when told you can ask 'is this fit for purpose'? Is what you do fit for your purposes? If yes then crack on enjoy your training, if not look for something else that is fit for your purpose but in the end all our purposes are different, as the OP says we all do our own thing and long may it be so.

I agree that's probably the reason for the rule. On many sites, I've seen rampant "fraud busting" that was really just attacking someone for not being what the forum members thought they ought to be, rather than actual fraud. I used to use the term "McDojo" to refer to schools that gave belts with no concern to quality, offered bad instruction, and seemed to have a purely commercial focus. (I stopped using the term, because it started to mean something else to others.) To me, a McDojo is a bad thing, but not necessarily a fraud. Now, if they claimed to be teaching effective self-defense skill, they might be both (there's a school in my area that makes this claim, and I'm pretty sure someone with a couple of boxing lessons - literally - could beat all of the black belts, on at a time, including the instructor). And some will call any school teaching "ineffective" technique a fraud, though many of them don't purport to teach self-defense or competitive fighting skills. And then we get into the discussions like in the "Aikido Hate" thread, where some don't think the art is good because of its training methods, and that has degraded into fraud-busting on some forums.

So, fraud-busting turns into a contentious issue if it's not constrained to what's purely legal. And even then - with the example I used - it can get hard to figure where to draw that line, and can get contentious all over again.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Grey Jedi is the way to go, eh?

(interested to see if Disney explores this as a "canon" idea in the next movie)

Some of my favorite stories in the fantasy genre show a "good" character drawing on what is considered the "bad" side of a power, rather than resisting and rejecting it.