Philosophical question from a newbie

[Steve]

Obviously, there are kids who play sports because they want scholarships or because they have natural talent that they want to develop to progress to a higher level. There are also some kids who play for fun and exercise. However, if you are in a group class in karate, and there are some people (adults) who simply want exercise and some who really want to excel at MA, how would the instructor know the difference? How would he/she evaluate and instruct/correct, without knowing who is there for what purpose?
There are no definitive right answers. To me, if you are in a "class" then the object is to learn what is being taught. While some people may do some things better than others, there is still a point where something is being done right and when it is not. There are "cardio" kickboxing classes for people who are looking for exercise. So, maybe there should be cardio karate classes, as well.

I think you answered your own question. "How would he/she evaluate and instruct/correct, without knowing who is there for what purpose?"

The answer is, "if you are in a "class" then the object is to learn what is being taught. While some people may do some things better than others, there is still a point where something is being done right and when it is not."

It's really that simple.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is possible that, by weeding out those who did fail, then what you have left are those who are either more capable, or who work harder. To me, if you are allowing those who did fail, to remain among those who did not, that comprises the group already living up to a higher standard. They didn't need to fail first, to realize they had to try harder. Why do original grades remain on your college transcript, even after you retake a class and get a better grade? Try failing some classes in college then taking them again. You're not getting into Harvard Law school like that. Failure, is failure and I don't know how you can rationalize it any other way. Giving someone a second chance is giving that person a second chance to fail. That's creating a lower standard. It's the way everything is going in society because the young people of today are too overindulged and catered to, to handle the ramifications of failure, which is essentially someone saying, "no," and they are unaccustomed to that concept. Coddling and enabling are setting a lower standard.

You’re talking about an entirely different concept. If people aren’t allowed to fail and continue, you aren’t focused on developing people, but in finding the people who need the least development.

 

[MadMartigan]

You’re talking about an entirely different concept. If people aren’t allowed to fail and continue, you aren’t focused on developing people, but in finding the people who need the least development.

Exactly. That may work great for a professional sports team or even a competitive ufc gym team, but martial arts are for more than the top 0.01% of the population.
I see more success in someone who has fallen and gotten back up, than someone who has never fallen at all. It's not perseverance until things go wrong and you keep going anyway.