kata?

[Kung Fu Wang]

forms are not a catalogue of the techniques of the system.

Forms are not a catalogue of the techniques (vocabulary) of the system. It also contains a set of principles (grammar) of the system (such as to use a kick to set up a punch).

When you learn "This is a book", you should be able to construct sentences such as:

- This is a pen.
- This is not a book.
- That is a book.
- ...

The ability to remember "this is a book" may not be as important as the ability to "create" your own sentences by using the same grammar - subject, verb, article, object.

 

[Flying Crane]

Forms are not a catalogue of the techniques (vocabulary) of the system. It also contains a set of principles (grammar) of the system (such as to use a kick to set up a punch).

When you learn "This is a book", you should be able to construct sentences such as:

- This is a pen.
- This is not a book.
- That is a book.
- ...

The ability to remember "this is a book" may not be as important as the ability to "create" your own sentences by using the same grammar - subject, verb, article, object.

Yeah. I'm not a fan of the language analogy to training, but I get what you are saying.

 

[Steve]

Or how cantankerous we are as a group. It's a toss-up.

Speaking of cantankerous... Earlier in the thread, you stated that no one has ever joined your school to learn NGA. That they all join to learn self defense. How do you reconcile that you are teaching them something they aren't interested in learning? That's like going to he pound to adopt a cat and being convinced that a dog will be just as good, because they're both pets.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Speaking of cantankerous... Earlier in the thread, you stated that no one has ever joined your school to learn NGA. That they all join to learn self defense. How do you reconcile that you are teaching them something they aren't interested in learning? That's like going to he pound to adopt a cat and being convinced that a dog will be just as good, because they're both pets.

This again? I do teach self-defense. You just don't like my definition.

 

[Steve]

This again? I do teach self-defense. You just don't like my definition.

I thought you said you teach NGA. weird. Mostly just me being cantankerous. Like 51% is just being ornery because your statement stood out and I missed it the first read through.

However, 49% thinks the distinction between the following two statements is significant and important:

1: I will teach you self defense.
2: I will teach you {style}, which will be very helpful if {context}.

For example, I will teach you BJJ, which will be very helpful if you are taken to the ground and want to return to your feet.

The context will likely be much more than a simple statement, but the point is that specificity matters.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I thought you said you teach NGA. weird. Mostly just me being cantankerous. Like 51% is just being ornery because your statement stood out and I missed it the first read through.

However, 49% thinks the distinction between the following two statements is significant and important:

1: I will teach you self defense.
2: I will teach you {style}, which will be very helpful if {context}.

For example, I will teach you BJJ, which will be very helpful if you are taken to the ground and want to return to your feet.

The context will likely be much more than a simple statement, but the point is that specificity matters.

Actually, the style is HOW I teach SD. If I had expertise in another style I considered applicable, I'd use it as the method of SD. Just because I teach a style doesn't mean I'm not teaching SD. The physical defense needs techniques and principles - that's what a style/art is. When you teach BJJ, if you teach it with a SD focus, then you are teaching SD, and BJJ is the tool.

My point in the earlier comment was that nobody has ever walked into any school where I taught and said, "I've been looking for Nihon Goshin Aikido. Do you teach that?" Instead, they say things like, "I'd like to learn to defend myself against an attack. Do you teach that?"

I could honestly answer either question with, "Yes, I teach that." I just don't get the chance to answer the first one.

 

[lklawson]

Are you this much of an ******* in real life or just online?

Pretty much, yeah, I behave exactly the same; if you're a douche to me "in real life" then you get reciprocal treatment. Why would you expect it to be any different?

Let me make one thing very clear

Clarity doesn't seem to be your forte.

to you since you seem rather dense in the head:

Well, we martial artists often make fun of people with a glass jaw.

I am not your student and I have nothing to learn from you.

You're hurting my feelings. Didn't you just imply that everyone can learn something from everyone else?

If you think I'll automatically start respecting a jumped up parrot

Now I have this image in my mind.

This means war!

like yourself then you have another thing coming.

I've got something coming? Is it a prize? I love prizes! Did you find it in a box of crackerjacks like you found your platitude about "100 paths?"

Being an "advisor" on here doesn't give you the right to down-talk and patronize everyone who expresses an opinion different to yours.

Nah. Acting like a douche gets you talked down to. Being an Advisor gets me a bed of money to sleep on.

 

[Midnight-shadow]

Actually, Kirk started out in a fairly conversational tone. Your initial disagreement (and, yes, you did disagree with him - the actual words "I disagree" aren't necessary to establish that) was genial enough and his reply was a reasonable challenge to your stated view, including a few points supporting his own. You were the first to get upset in this exchange (apparently because Kirk quoted himself to make the point that you said something roughly equivalent to what he originally said).

You're getting very worked up - if the tone of your words here are any indicator - about someone standing by his point, then making a fairly humorous point about repetition. His tone was genial until yours wasn't. This is a discussion board. People here disagree, sometimes vehemently. Sometimes we even enjoy the argument.

Am I somehow typing in some foreign language here? Here's how the discussion between myself and Kirk has gone so far. He made a statement that so far in 9 pages, nobody can agree on what the purpose of kata is. I then replied saying that to me the amount of pages signifies how important kata is, and then followed up that statement by saying that the reason for so much disagreement is because the purpose of kata is different for each person depending on the style they practice and each individual kata they learn. How is that disagreeing with Kirk's statement? If anything I'm agreeing with him and offering a reason as to why. I thought that was pretty clear in my posts but then Kirk asks me to explain myself, which I didn't feel was necessary as I had already explained my point.

So not only did Kirk not understand my posts and tell me to repeat myself, he also did it in an obnoxious and pretentious manner, that I quite frankly found very insulting. Don't get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with someone disagreeing with me and having to defend my opinion, but treating me like one of his students and repeating himself over and over like a parrot really pisses me off. If he disagrees with my opinion that's fine, but at least have the decency and courtesy to respect my opinion and not treat me like a child.

 

[lklawson]

Am I somehow typing in some foreign language here? Here's how the discussion between myself and Kirk has gone so far. He made a statement that so far in 9 pages, nobody can agree on what the purpose of kata is. I then replied saying that to me the amount of pages signifies how important kata is, and then followed up that statement by saying that the reason for so much disagreement is because the purpose of kata is different for each person depending on the style they practice and each individual kata they learn. How is that disagreeing with Kirk's statement? If anything I'm agreeing with him and offering a reason as to why. I thought that was pretty clear in my posts but then Kirk asks me to explain myself, which I didn't feel was necessary as I had already explained my point.

Sure; the problem appears to be your preconceived notions coupled with a simultaneous comprehension issue and insistence on "being right." If you were going for the basic tenor of newbies to MT, congratulations, you nailed it!

like a parrot

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Am I somehow typing in some foreign language here? Here's how the discussion between myself and Kirk has gone so far. He made a statement that so far in 9 pages, nobody can agree on what the purpose of kata is. I then replied saying that to me the amount of pages signifies how important kata is, and then followed up that statement by saying that the reason for so much disagreement is because the purpose of kata is different for each person depending on the style they practice and each individual kata they learn. How is that disagreeing with Kirk's statement? If anything I'm agreeing with him and offering a reason as to why. I thought that was pretty clear in my posts but then Kirk asks me to explain myself, which I didn't feel was necessary as I had already explained my point.

So not only did Kirk not understand my posts and tell me to repeat myself, he also did it in an obnoxious and pretentious manner, that I quite frankly found very insulting. Don't get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with someone disagreeing with me and having to defend my opinion, but treating me like one of his students and repeating himself over and over like a parrot really pisses me off. If he disagrees with my opinion that's fine, but at least have the decency and courtesy to respect my opinion and not treat me like a child.

This seems, then, to be related to something being discussed in another thread. Your original communication didn't communicate what you hoped it would. Both Kirk and I read it as a disagreement with his post, and that apparently wasn't your intent. Rather than clarify when asked, you apparently took the request as a challenge to your ____ (expertise, understanding, something else?) _____.

To quote George Bernard Shaw (I think), "The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."

 

[Midnight-shadow]

This seems, then, to be related to something being discussed in another thread. Your original communication didn't communicate what you hoped it would. Both Kirk and I read it as a disagreement with his post, and that apparently wasn't your intent. Rather than clarify when asked, you apparently took the request as a challenge to your ____ (expertise, understanding, something else?) _____.

To quote George Bernard Shaw (I think), "The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."

The amount of pages shows how meaningful kata are, and depending on the style and individual movements, they can be used for training in many different ways. That is the beauty of it and the more you learn and practice them, the more meaningful they become.

Maybe it's just us liking to disagree over and over, but in my opinion the purpose of kata varies depending on the style you practice, and each individual kata you practice. And since pretty much everyone here is of a different style or lineage, and everyone practices different kata, everyone has a different opinion on the purpose of kata.

I fail to see how my opinion wasn't made clear on this, and I even expanded on my original answer when requested:

I am merely pointing out that every person here will have a slightly different interpretation of the purpose of kata because of the huge variety of styles represented on this forum. To me, this shows how important and multifaceted the forms are as they can be used in so many different ways to train. And quite frankly, we could go on like this for another 100 pages and nobody can be proven right or wrong, because the forms are understood and used in a different way by each person.

Here, I'll even summarize both mine and Kirk's points into a single sentence to make it easier for you:

"nobody can agree on the purpose of kata because the purpose is different for each person based on the Martial Arts style they practice and each kata they learn." I honestly don't know how much clearer I can be at this point.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I fail to see how my opinion wasn't made clear on this, and I even expanded on my original answer when requested:



Here, I'll even summarize both mine and Kirk's points into a single sentence to make it easier for you:

"nobody can agree on the purpose of kata because the purpose is different for each person based on the Martial Arts style they practice and each kata they learn." I honestly don't know how much clearer I can be at this point.

Have you noted the tone of your own replies to me? I stepped in to give you my interpretation of what I was seeing. Even when I pointed out the obvious miscommunication, you remain defensive, pointing at your own posts and saying, "See? This is what I said. I was very clear!" It might be more helpful to instead look at the situation and ask yourself why at least some folks didn't understand what you meant. Or even ask me why I thought you were disagreeing. Or just try saying it in a different way, and ask if that's clearer. Pointing back to your previous posts doesn't make them any clearer in the original context. Obviously, now that I know the intent behind them, they are clearer, but that doesn't help any of us improve.

 

[lklawson]

Have you noted the tone of your own replies to me? I stepped in to give you my interpretation of what I was seeing. Even when I pointed out the obvious miscommunication, you remain defensive, pointing at your own posts and saying, "See? This is what I said. I was very clear!" It might be more helpful to instead look at the situation and ask yourself why at least some folks didn't understand what you meant. Or even ask me why I thought you were disagreeing. Or just try saying it in a different way, and ask if that's clearer. Pointing back to your previous posts doesn't make them any clearer in the original context. Obviously, now that I know the intent behind them, they are clearer, but that doesn't help any of us improve.

Like cursive writing, introspection isn't taught in school.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Midnight-shadow]

Have you noted the tone of your own replies to me? I stepped in to give you my interpretation of what I was seeing. Even when I pointed out the obvious miscommunication, you remain defensive, pointing at your own posts and saying, "See? This is what I said. I was very clear!" It might be more helpful to instead look at the situation and ask yourself why at least some folks didn't understand what you meant. Or even ask me why I thought you were disagreeing. Or just try saying it in a different way, and ask if that's clearer. Pointing back to your previous posts doesn't make them any clearer in the original context. Obviously, now that I know the intent behind them, they are clearer, but that doesn't help any of us improve.

My tone has been one of extreme exasperation, and once again I'm scratching my head wondering if I've somehow shifted to a different language without knowing it. Once again I'm forced to refer back to my previous posts, where I wrote:

Did I? I don't ever saying the words "I don't agree with you" or any connotation of those words. I am merely pointing out that every person here will have a slightly different interpretation of the purpose of kata because of the huge variety of styles represented on this forum. To me, this shows how important and multifaceted the forms are as they can be used in so many different ways to train. And quite frankly, we could go on like this for another 100 pages and nobody can be proven right or wrong, because the forms are understood and used in a different way by each person.

As you can see, I did question why Kirk thought I was disagreeing with him and reworded my statement with more detail. His only reply to that is to put a link to my original post.....So yes I am being quite defensive because right now because I feel like I'm conversing with a bunch of morons who can't understand the English language. I honestly can't tell if you guys genuinely don't understand what I'm writing or if you are just trolling me. Really the only thing I could have done differently is offer an example to explain my opinion, so here's an example. You have one person who practices Taijiquan and another who practices Hung gar. The Taijiquan practitioner does his forms to develop balance and grace, whereas the Hung Gar practitioner is training to have a strong rooted stance. Both pracitioners have different aims in practicing their forms based on their separate arts.

Even in the same style, different forms are designed to accomplish different things. In the white crane style I practice our first form is designed to a) teach you how to walk forwards and backwards, and b) how to breath and tense your body for an incoming strike. On the other hand our second form, which is our stance form is designed to develop solid stances as well as balance and grace when moving between the stances. 2 forms from the same system but with completely different purposes.

EDIT: You know what else pisses me off? The fact that your replies to me so far have pretty much consisted of "if you had done x,y and z we would have understood you better and we wouldn't be in this situation". Each of the things you have brought up have been things I've done which is why I'm constantly having to go back and copy paste my previous posts. Not once have you even acknowledged the points I've made as a contribution to this thread, except to say that I was disagreeing with Kirk. So here's an idea: instead of criticising me for your own misunderstandings why not take the time to read my posts and respond to the things I say as a part of the discussion, rather than try to lecture me about how to debate.

 

[Deleted member 34973]

Am I somehow typing in some foreign language here? Here's how the discussion between myself and Kirk has gone so far. He made a statement that so far in 9 pages, nobody can agree on what the purpose of kata is. I then replied saying that to me the amount of pages signifies how important kata is, and then followed up that statement by saying that the reason for so much disagreement is because the purpose of kata is different for each person depending on the style they practice and each individual kata they learn. How is that disagreeing with Kirk's statement? If anything I'm agreeing with him and offering a reason as to why. I thought that was pretty clear in my posts but then Kirk asks me to explain myself, which I didn't feel was necessary as I had already explained my point.

So not only did Kirk not understand my posts and tell me to repeat myself, he also did it in an obnoxious and pretentious manner, that I quite frankly found very insulting. Don't get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with someone disagreeing with me and having to defend my opinion, but treating me like one of his students and repeating himself over and over like a parrot really pisses me off. If he disagrees with my opinion that's fine, but at least have the decency and courtesy to respect my opinion and not treat me like a child.

You will get this from a few of the Advisors and so-called mentors. My advice, ignore their responses. If you disagree with these self proclaimed experts. Some will dislike every post or comment that you make.

This is why I ignore their comments and advice.

Dog piling is a favorite thing here at MT.
But it is funny to watch.

 

[Deleted member 34973]

You will now see ikky, dislike everything you post.

 

[Flying Crane]

Like cursive writing, introspection isn't taught in school.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

That's unfortunate. I guess I'll need to teach my son cursive writing when he gets older.

 

[Steve]

They taught my kids cursive in school.

 

[Flying Crane]

They taught my kids cursive in school.

I have actually heard that it is on the way out. Maybe not everywhere. Yet.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

My tone has been one of extreme exasperation, and once again I'm scratching my head wondering if I've somehow shifted to a different language without knowing it. Once again I'm forced to refer back to my previous posts, where I wrote:



As you can see, I did question why Kirk thought I was disagreeing with him and reworded my statement with more detail. His only reply to that is to put a link to my original post.....So yes I am being quite defensive because right now because I feel like I'm conversing with a bunch of morons who can't understand the English language. I honestly can't tell if you guys genuinely don't understand what I'm writing or if you are just trolling me. Really the only thing I could have done differently is offer an example to explain my opinion, so here's an example. You have one person who practices Taijiquan and another who practices Hung gar. The Taijiquan practitioner does his forms to develop balance and grace, whereas the Hung Gar practitioner is training to have a strong rooted stance. Both pracitioners have different aims in practicing their forms based on their separate arts.

Even in the same style, different forms are designed to accomplish different things. In the white crane style I practice our first form is designed to a) teach you how to walk forwards and backwards, and b) how to breath and tense your body for an incoming strike. On the other hand our second form, which is our stance form is designed to develop solid stances as well as balance and grace when moving between the stances. 2 forms from the same system but with completely different purposes.

EDIT: You know what else pisses me off? The fact that your replies to me so far have pretty much consisted of "if you had done x,y and z we would have understood you better and we wouldn't be in this situation". Each of the things you have brought up have been things I've done which is why I'm constantly having to go back and copy paste my previous posts. Not once have you even acknowledged the points I've made as a contribution to this thread, except to say that I was disagreeing with Kirk. So here's an idea: instead of criticising me for your own misunderstandings why not take the time to read my posts and respond to the things I say as a part of the discussion, rather than try to lecture me about how to debate.

Actually, I've been trying to facilitate some understanding between you and Kirk. Your lashing out and calling everyone who doesn't understand your point "morons" makes me less interested in doing so.