Psychology of fighting

Eric Daniel

Green Belt
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
128
Reaction score
1
Location
Moses Lake, WA
what is the psychology of fighting? Does anyone have any notes to share on fighter psychology and mentality?For me the meaning of Psychology is The mental states and processes of a person or persons, and fighting to me is a confrontation between one or me people, with or without weapons. A context might be you are walking home and someone jumps out of the bushes and says he wants your walet or he will kill you.
Sincerely, Eric Daniel
 
Eric Daniel said:
what is the psychology of fighting? Does anyone have any notes to share on fighter psychology and mentality?For me the meaning of Psychology is The mental states and processes of a person or persons, and fighting to me is a confrontation between one or me people, with or without weapons. A context might be you are walking home and someone jumps out of the bushes and says he wants your walet or he will kill you.
Sincerely, Eric Daniel

Wouldn't that be the Psychology of surviving?
 
There is a quote that I feel is applicable here:

"Do not hurt where holding is enough
Do not injure where hurting is enough
Do not maim where injuring is enough
Do not kill where maiming is enough
The greatest warrior is one who does not need to kill"
 
I'm very interested in the first one shirtripper. It seems like a very scientific approach to the chaos of a stressful and spontaneous situation.
 
Haven't read it myself. Hoping to though. I have read On Killing and it is very interesting.
 
BlueDragon1981 said:
My philosophy.....don't get hit
Isn't that a pretty unrealsitic philosophy? At least as far as true self defense goes?

7sm
 
7starmantis said:
Isn't that a pretty unrealsitic philosophy? At least as far as true self defense goes?

7sm
I think it is a unrealistic philosphy but it is a great philosophy when you are just training in the Martial Arts because I don't really think someone will be in a martial art class for very long if they hit each other all the time.
 
Eric Daniel said:
I think it is a unrealistic philosphy but it is a great philosophy when you are just training in the Martial Arts because I don't really think someone will be in a martial art class for very long if they hit each other all the time.

But thats the fun part. I'm serious. If you aren't getting hit, you aren't training hard enough or you need better training partners.

Lamont
 
Yes but we're talking about the psychlogy of fighting.
A philosophy for fighting that requires not getting hit is really not going to work. Everyone will get hit, its a fact you must deal with if your going to be fighting.

7sm
 
whatever you call it, it is a seperate state of mind when a person fights. Once the fight begins the brain functions very differently, I sometimes compare it to a dream state. After much training you begin to become more aware of what is happeneing and that is a huge advantage.
 
In the very few physical confrontations I've had I've noticed (after it was over) that there was no thought occurring. Unlike sparring, where I have passing ideas and tactics, my body went on complete instinct during the actual fight.

This is the state I would expect from decades of training to react instinctively. That doesn't mean I wasn't aware of my surroundings but instead that it was very surreal as my mind and body fused into a single cohesive unit so as to resolve the situation.

So, instead of employing psychology during the fight, I believe it is far more important to instill psychology prior to it. This would mean diligent, thoughtful training in the same way all good martial artists do.

When the time comes, our lifelong journey of philosophy will become "us" in that moment of need. Everything before that moment, including sparring, is simply another training tool to prepare.
 
OnlyAnEgg said:
There is a quote that I feel is applicable here:

"Do not hurt where holding is enough
Do not injure where hurting is enough
Do not maim where injuring is enough
Do not kill where maiming is enough
The greatest warrior is one who does not need to kill"

I've heard that quote before (or something like it), but I've always found it interesting that Bruce Lee said the opposite.

"Let your opponent graze your skin as you smash into his flesh. Let him smash into your flesh while you break his bones. Let him break your bones as you take his life."

Granted, he's not the best example to use as far as street-fighting and survival goes, but doesn't this say something about how survivng a physical conflict is all a matter of perspective?
 
It's similar to the Shaolin addage of maiming to avoid killing, etc... because all life is precious.

Bruce Lee's is a little more to the point when it's reached that level. I personally am a big fan of avoidance as the best policy to fighting, but when it's time to go, do it, be done with it, go home safely. Maximum violence regulated by need to ensure your safety.
 
I might say that Bruce Lee said it in the opposite way, not that he said the opposite. He's still just one level above his opponent. That's advocating a response that's proportionate, but sufficient to meet the needs of the situation.
 
Back
Top