Requirements for 10th Degree

[KenpoIsIt]

So, as of this reply we have listed the following 6 requirements.

1. Time at the Art.
2. Contributions to the Art.
3. Recognition, Verification, and Validation by a Jury of Peers.
4. Developed New Innovations within the Base System.
5. Lifelong Committment to the Art.
6. 30 Years of Training Minimum after receiving 1st Black.

Have I left anything out? Is there anything more to add or does everyone feel this is more than enough? Please share your thoughts.

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

The Qualities and Characteristics of Rank

First-degree black belt.

A first-degree black belt (junior instructor) has achieved a certain level of physical expertise. Understanding the concepts and principles of motion, he has become a formidable fighter defensively and offensively. However, his skills outstrip his ability to communicate and teach, so teaching is essential to any further progress.

Second-degree black belt.

For the second-degree black belt (associate instructor), the ability to teach has begun to reinforce new-found skills. He has discovered that "to teach is to learn", and this is accompanied by a re-evaluation of past mistakes and bad habits. A new sense of responsibility appears, and he must begin to cultivate an image of authority within the school.

Third-degree black belt.

At third degree (senior instructor), the black belt finds that first- and second-degree black belts look to him for guidance and direction in the execution of techniques. He now has the authority within the school environment to organize a curriculum, express policy and set up tests.

Fourth-degree black belt

At fourth degree (head instructor), the black belt acquires the privilege of overriding others within the school after careful discussion, as well as a more mature ability to communicate that allows teaching first-, second- and third- degree black belts. Together with these responsibilities, the fourth-degree black belt assists the master instructor in seminars, demonstrations and other public functions at which the school and the art are represented. His physical expertise should be noticeably above that of more junior black belts, particularly in terms of speed, power and timing

Fifth-degree black belt

The fifth degree black belt (associate professor) has reached the level at which he begins to teach the art beyond the realm of the school. Although the school curriculum has been carefully spelled-out, he is no longer bound by it and has acquired the ability to tailor it to fit individual students. At fifth degree, in short, the black belt now moves on to a broader base of responsibility

Sixth-degree black belt

The sixth-degree black belt (professor) has now reached a level at which he can not only teach the art but begin to formulate its concepts and principles outside his school. As a result, caution becomes imperative. He has advanced to a critical point in his art, and it is at this point that his accumulation of time in grade becomes his defense against teaching what he cannot later retract

Seventh-degree black belt

At seventh degree (senior professor), a noticeable change takes place in the black belt's understanding of his art. He becomes capable of ascertaining the problems that lie within the teaching of the curriculum. Working from a broader base and beginning to teach locally, nationally and internationally what was once taught mainly at home, he now recognizes that his former ways may not work abroad and must be tailored to particular minds, cultures and agendas. He has realized that while the language of the art remains the same, the varied applications of that language must be fitted to the environment. In brief, a seventh degree who goes out to teach in the world must have learned to tailor his teachings to the place and the people.

Eighth-degree black belt

At eighth degree (associate master), the black belt's concerns shift to exploring areas of physical mastership that were not visible to him in the past. His art eventually begins to expand physically and mentally, so much so that a definite physical change becomes evident, expressing the fact that he has begun to settle into a physical mastery. Thus, movements are less contrived because they are in the process of embodied within him.

Ninth-degree black belt

At ninth degree (master of arts), the black belt has reached a level where, at any given moment, he can choreograph a technique by reaching a "superconscious" level. No longer separate from the art he has internalized, he has at last embodied it and become an element of it. What he teaches and what he physically embodies are indivisible. His contributions to the martial arts inside and outside the community are many, and his rank is backed by at least 25 years of sacrifice and service

Tenth-degree black belt


Tenth degree represents a lifelong endeavor to help all humankind. The rank is so respected by peers and students that the person's word affects the course of the art.

(The titles for the 10 ranks of black belt and the basic ideas of the differences between them came from Ed Parker. I have added a few needed definitions and explanations and provided interpretations.)- Larry G. Tatum


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Kirk]

Those are majorly cool. The problem is, not all seniors follow that
methodology.

 

[Kenpo Yahoo]

Kirk,

Over the last several posts you've identified yourself as a traditionalist. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with that. However, I would like to take a look at some of the statements you've made.

where is it written that somebody can't study the art on their
own, for their own well being? Why do they HAVE to teach?

The implication is given by titles such as Associate Professor, Professor, and Senior Professor. One cannot be a Professor without "professing" what he/she knows to other people. If you never aspire to teach or don't ever teach, then you shouldn't really expect anything above 4th or 5th. Which is to say that anyone above 4th or 5th who has NEVER taught shouldn't really be wearing that rank.

if I have the ability to only teach what
I've been taught, and one of my students has the ability to
expand upon it and turns it into something really awesome, then
am I not deserving of a 10th?

I enjoyed brother John's analogy, so I'll say one thing and leave it at that. Does Bill Gates owe anything to his high school math teachers for teaching him how to manipulate the basic number system? He essentially expanded on this theory and created Microsoft. So does he owe his ex-teachers money or shares in his company?

Those are majorly cool. The problem is, not all seniors follow that
methodology.

I understand that you are talking about the definitions that Clyde threw out there, but assume for a moment that all seniors did follow the same methodology. We would all be doing the same damn thing that everyone was doing 40 years ago. Innovation was the heart of Mr. Parkers kenpo system. He continually progressed, changed, altered, and innovated to find the best way possible. Many seniors would agree that he didn't have a chance to finish his art (if that would have even been possible), heck it only went up to green before he tried to adopt the 16 system. So if Mr. Parker was an innovator and a non-traditionalist, an individual who sought to perfect his art, why would you want to do things the exact same way as it was done when he left us?

I don't think this means you have to create a new system, rather expand upon the knowledge base he gave you. Kenpo is like the dictionary. Mr. Parker took a bunch of different things from different languages (martial arts) and threw it together to make a concise listing of martial principles, much the same way the folks at Merriam- Webster do. Many times, the dictionary is updated to add newly created words, or to provide new words for old meanings. Nothing is trashed, simply altered.

Times change and as our exposure to the different elements increases, so to should our art and the way we perceive and execute it.

 

[XtremeJ_AKKI]

I was hoping you'd post that; those guidelines, though not universal, are still EXCELLENT! :asian:

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
Kirk,

Over the last several posts you've identified yourself as a traditionalist. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with that. However, I would like to take a look at some of the statements you've made.

Let me qualify first. I'm a purple belt. This is all what's in my head
at this time. So before someone says "why would anyone care
what a purple belt's opinions are" well then stop right here, and
don't bother reading further. If you wanna discuss why I bother
to express my opinion on this matter, hey cool start another
thread. Plus, I fully admit that this opinion could change
drastically once I've learned something.

I wouldn't say I'm a traditionalist, really. But lets use the math
analogy. There are set ways that we all are taught math in the
public school system. It's tried and true, and it works. You should
not let any Tom Dick or Harry come in and start revolutionizing
this method on any whim at any time. The damage could be atrocious. That's not to say that we should never try other
ways to educate ... but we should be fully aware of the dangers.

Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
The implication is given by titles such as Associate Professor, Professor, and Senior Professor. One cannot be a Professor without "professing" what he/she knows to other people. If you never aspire to teach or don't ever teach, then you shouldn't really expect anything above 4th or 5th. Which is to say that anyone above 4th or 5th who has NEVER taught shouldn't really be wearing that rank.

There's tradition right there. Those titles were attached to the
ranks, because Mr Parker didn't want nichidan, sandan etc. But
when did degrees of black belt even come into play? Does a
10th dan in say, Aikido (if such a thing even exists) have to go out
and change up Aikido into some other art just to earn that 10th?
Traditionally, has teaching been a requirement for degree
promotion in other arts? I sincerely don't know, and if it is, then
I recant my side of things. I ask again .. where does it say that
one HAS to teach?

Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
I enjoyed brother John's analogy, so I'll say one thing and leave it at that. Does Bill Gates owe anything to his high school math teachers for teaching him how to manipulate the basic number system? He essentially expanded on this theory and created Microsoft. So does he owe his ex-teachers money or shares in his company?

No way in hell I'd ever say that. But it IS proof that Bill's teachers
did their jobs, and did them well. Bill couldn't have gotten to
where he was without them. While they deserve nothing Bill has
earned for himself and others ... they DO deserve credit for
educating him, and making him capable.

Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
I understand that you are talking about the definitions that Clyde threw out there, but assume for a moment that all seniors did follow the same methodology. We would all be doing the same damn thing that everyone was doing 40 years ago. Innovation was the heart of Mr. Parkers kenpo system. He continually progressed, changed, altered, and innovated to find the best way possible. Many seniors would agree that he didn't have a chance to finish his art (if that would have even been possible), heck it only went up to green before he tried to adopt the 16 system. So if Mr. Parker was an innovator and a non-traditionalist, an individual who sought to perfect his art, why would you want to do things the exact same way as it was done when he left us?

Okay, sure ... Mr Parker was innovating, and alway studying. He
came and initially categorized motion, and spelled out the
principles and rules of kenpo and motion. On occasion, he'd take
out one technique or set, and replace it with one that he thought
taught that principle/lesson better. He had a scientific approach,
and a business approach when doing this. But did he ever say,
that one should shuck the entire curriculum, and replace it with
100% new stuff, in order to prevent a static art? I think what he
left us with is a system that allows you to take things from other
stystems and styles quickly, and easily. The black belts in my
school can pick up drills and techniques VERY quickly from other
styles. If they like it, and think it'd work for them they bring it into
their own personal collection of fighting. They don't have to
completely study another style, they can look, take what they
want and move on.

If you and I were both black belts in kenpo, and then while still
pursuing kenpo, I went and studied Muay Thai, and you went
and studied Wing Chun. We learned the drills, exercised them
often. We learned techniques, went back and added them to
kenpo techniques, wherever they could fit. A year later, you and
I meet back up .. do you think that our kenpo would look exactly
like each other's? I can't speak from experience, but I think not.
Would you and I NOT be doing kenpo? Again, I think not. That's
why EPAK is such a revolutionary style, IMO. I don't think Mr
Parker said "Here's delayed sword. Now when you advance in
the ranks, I don't want you to teach delayed sword, change it,
make it different. And to quote brother John, I hope & pray that I
made sense.

Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
Times change and as our exposure to the different elements increases, so to should our art and the way we perceive and execute it.

Yes ... and the system as it is, is set up to do exactly that.

All the opinion of a highly passionate, yet lowly purple belt.

 

[Kenpomachine]

Originally posted by Kirk
Let me qualify first. I'm a purple belt.

And you have a well thought opinin, which is all that matters, because as you said

Originally posted by Kirk
Plus, I fully admit that this opinion could change
drastically once I've learned something.

Originally posted by Kirk
I wouldn't say I'm a traditionalist, really. But lets use the math
analogy. There are set ways that we all are taught math in the
public school system. It's tried and true, and it works. You should
not let any Tom Dick or Harry come in and start revolutionizing
this method on any whim at any time. The damage could be atrocious. That's not to say that we should never try other
ways to educate ... but we should be fully aware of the dangers.

You contradict yourself in here. The damage can be atrocious if the new method is wrong, but the benefits can be huge if it's well done.

Originally posted by Kirk
Traditionally, has teaching been a requirement for degree
promotion in other arts? I sincerely don't know, and if it is, then
I recant my side of things. I ask again .. where does it say that
one HAS to teach?

Well, master comes from latin and it means exactly TEACHER, and implies that the holder of the title knows his/her stuff upside down and inward out.

Originally posted by Kirk
Okay, sure ... Mr Parker was innovating, and alway studying. He
came and initially categorized motion, and spelled out the
principles and rules of kenpo and motion. On occasion, he'd take
out one technique or set, and replace it with one that he thought
taught that principle/lesson better. He had a scientific approach,
and a business approach when doing this. But did he ever say,
that one should shuck the entire curriculum, and replace it with
100% new stuff, in order to prevent a static art? I think what he
left us with is a system that allows you to take things from other
stystems and styles quickly, and easily. The black belts in my
school can pick up drills and techniques VERY quickly from other
styles. If they like it, and think it'd work for them they bring it into
their own personal collection of fighting. They don't have to
completely study another style, they can look, take what they
want and move on.

You need a very good foundation in kenpo to do so. You can't do it any way you like, but need to still respect kenpo principles and concepts.

Originally posted by Kirk
If you and I were both black belts in kenpo, and then while still
pursuing kenpo, I went and studied Muay Thai, and you went
and studied Wing Chun. We learned the drills, exercised them
often. We learned techniques, went back and added them to
kenpo techniques, wherever they could fit. A year later, you and
I meet back up .. do you think that our kenpo would look exactly
like each other's? I can't speak from experience, but I think not.
Would you and I NOT be doing kenpo? Again, I think not. That's
why EPAK is such a revolutionary style, IMO. I don't think Mr
Parker said "Here's delayed sword. Now when you advance in
the ranks, I don't want you to teach delayed sword, change it,
make it different. And to quote brother John, I hope & pray that I
made sense.

Yes ... and the system as it is, is set up to do exactly that.

All the opinion of a highly passionate, yet lowly purple belt.

That's the reason only a few people can make ghanges to the system and the system remaining still the same. The have a good working knowledge of kenpo, and a sound knowledge of the principles and concepts behind.
It's like the tale of the blind people trying to know an elephant. If you don't have a full picture of it, you can't even try to begin to comprehend and understand the elephant... But you can begin to talk about it. And you can't bash other person who just have a take on another aspect of the elephant based in what you have, because you both may be right.

 

[Kenpo Yahoo]

Let me qualify first. I'm a purple belt. This is all what's in my head
at this time. So before someone says "why would anyone care
what a purple belt's opinions are" well then stop right here, and
don't bother reading further. If you wanna discuss why I bother
to express my opinion on this matter, hey cool start another
thread. Plus, I fully admit that this opinion could change
drastically once I've learned something.

Every blackbelt has passed through this stage, no need to try and qualify your opinions.

I wouldn't say I'm a traditionalist, really. But lets use the math
analogy. There are set ways that we all are taught math in the
public school system. It's tried and true, and it works. You should
not let any Tom Dick or Harry come in and start revolutionizing
this method on any whim at any time. The damage could be atrocious. That's not to say that we should never try other
ways to educate ... but we should be fully aware of the dangers.

That's fine basic arithmetic is tantamount to what you learn as a yellow belt. From here you should learn fractions, integrals, derivitive, partial derivitives, differential equations, mathematics for scientists, number theory, set theory, quantum mathematics, etc. All of these essentially stem from the idea that 1+1=2, this would be considered the base. If no one were to ever try to develop beyond these traditional methods of mathematics we would still live in the dark ages. Engineers, Scientists, and Physicists, and mathematicians all learned basic math, but they continued to learn and expand their knowledge on the subject and this is why so many things are possible.

Traditionally, has teaching been a requirement for degree
promotion in other arts? I sincerely don't know, and if it is, then
I recant my side of things. I ask again .. where does it say that
one HAS to teach?

For someone who isn't a traditionalist, you sure do care alot about tradition. Again it's not necessarily a bad thing, so don't take it that way.

There's tradition right there. Those titles were attached to the
ranks, because Mr Parker didn't want nichidan, sandan etc

There is a huge difference in a tradition of titles and a tradition of doing things. Traditionally speaking when you are "knighted" by the Queen you take on the prefix "Sir" but when was the last time you saw Elton John riding in armor with a sword?

While they deserve nothing Bill has
earned for himself and others ... they DO deserve credit for
educating him, and making him capable.

No way, Gates understood hardware design and assembly language. Things he had to know to start Microsoft. Things that are only recently being taught in some high schools. By the way Gates dropped out of college to start Microsoft.

But did he ever say,
that one should shuck the entire curriculum, and replace it with
100% new stuff, in order to prevent a static art? I think what he
left us with is a system that allows you to take things from other
stystems and styles quickly, and easily. The black belts in my
school can pick up drills and techniques VERY quickly from other
styles. If they like it, and think it'd work for them they bring it into
their own personal collection of fighting. They don't have to
completely study another style, they can look, take what they
want and move on.

There is a big difference between scavenging a few minor "moves" from another art and developing a useful understanding of another art so that you can logically incorporate it into your current system. Or is kenpo the only art that requires years to master and fully understand? I seriously doubt it.

quote: Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
Times change and as our exposure to the different elements increases, so to should our art and the way we perceive and execute it.


Kirk
Yes ... and the system as it is, is set up to do exactly that.

Oh, so you mean the system has taken into account the current increase in the last 15 years of groundfighting? How about the prominence of clip knives? Or the proliferation of martial arts to the public (through things like Tae Bo workouts, the internet, M.A. videos, magazines, etc)?

Essentially EPAK responds to the reactions of a minimally skilled opponent (it can be seen in the open hand, and knife defenses). Why do most assume that there opponent won't be skilled, especially since any jackass can rent a video or buy something from Paladin Press. Now I don't think that we should all be training to fight No Holds Barred death matches or training to take on the militia, but too many things have been sugar coated (like the knife work) and have not been developed further in 15 years or more. Would Mr. Parker have been so stagnant? I think not. How many schools or associations teach a knife or club curriculum beyond what they learn in form 7 or whatever the heck it is?

The answer..... Not many.

You say that the system is designed to allow us to increase our understanding as our environment changes, so that we can innovate and create new solutions, so how come no one is doing this? Maybe they don't understand the system, is that what your saying? Maybe they don't understand the principles enough to build on the base, so they simply do what they learned all those years ago and never expand. Oh well, what can ya do!?!?