Thoughts on the "what martial art should I take for self-defense" question

[drop bear]

ive not made up any statics, ive used data and methods that are in the public domain to make a prediction, you can test the prediction if you wish, but only if you also use data to do so other wise all we are getting is your biased opinion based on no data or defined method at all

that you are incapable of making the distinction between separate topics...... , it really isn't my job to make up for the failure of the Australasian education system

I thought you just pulled the 50/50 out of thin air. But ok show us the data.

 

[_Simon_]

It is a very good example of how anecdotal evidence can be misleading. And in martial arts anecdotes is quite often all there is.

In relation to MA, for sure. And I think you can use some semblance of scientific method for MA. But not to the degree that it is perfectly guaranteed that learning a system will absolutely protect you in self defence under all circumstances. It's a game of likelihoods as the variables are so tremendously vast (the lab won't always perfectly replicate the SD situation). But evidence based in regards to MA training and self defense related reasons, yeah I think it can be a helpful guide.

That being said I truly think that anecdotes do have their place. But not as a basis of certainty for whether something will work or not.

 

[jobo]

I thought you just pulled the 50/50 out of thin air. But ok show us the data.

i made my methodology for arriving at that figure clear in the post where i first quoted the 50 50 figure, im not running a remedial class in statistics, go back and read it

 

[jobo]

In relation to MA, for sure. And I think you can use some semblance of scientific method for MA. But not to the degree that it is perfectly guaranteed that learning a system will absolutely protect you in self defence under all circumstances. It's a game of likelihoods as the variables are so tremendously vast (the lab won't always perfectly replicate the SD situation). But evidence based in regards to MA training and self defense related reasons, yeah I think it can be a helpful guide.

That being said I truly think that anecdotes do have their place. But not as a basis of certainty for whether something will work or not.

if we are talking one to one ,a lot of the variables are controllable, at least most of the time, if you get attacked whilst wearing slippy shoes thats rather your own fault, dont wear slippy shoes, or pants so tight you cant kick, if you get attacked by someone stronger or faster you should have trained harder

theres really only one uncontrollable variable, that is you know the attack is coming or you dont and even that is to some degree predictability on situation and circumstances, there are times and places where this is more likely than others

 

[dvcochran]

your making much the same error as him, human attributes, all of them,including an ability to fight cluster around the mean average, that is fighting ability is not a steady progression across the population, rather most people are very much the same level ergo, if you raise your self above the average, then circa 80 % of the population has less ability than you

this is very much the 80-20 principal. for comparatively little effort you can get 80% of you goal ( your goal being to defend against all comers)

chasing down progression above that becomes increasingly difficult and ends up at the top end with full time fighters who can donate their waking hours to marginal improvements

any adult male of average size/ physical abilities who takes up a MA can reasonably expect that they can raise themselves to the 80% mark


that is they can beat 4 out of every five people who attack them at random, if they are below average physical abilities, its some what harder to predict and they need to focus on increasing their fitness to get in the frame

That sir is what we call 10 gallons of shxt in a 5 gallon bucket. That incorrect crap is running out on all sides.

 

[jobo]

That sir is what we call 10 gallons of shxt in a 5 gallon bucket. That incorrect crap is running out on all sides.

well thats the usual standard of discussion and dissection of a concept i expect from you

if you want to take issue with either the standard distribution across human populations or the law of diminishing returns, both universal accepted models then fine,, try it, otherwise il just note your opinion

 

[dvcochran]

Sigh... it doesn't disprove divinity. The bible was indeed written by people, the issue is that he then leapt to therefore concluding it disproves divinity.

Scientific method is certainly not applicable to any topic. Can you prove the beauty of art or even predict the emotional reaction someone will have to a painting using the scientific method?

Full agree.

an·ec·do·tal
/ˌanəkˈdōdl/
Learn to pronounce

adjective

1. (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.

When analyzing the definition you can see that what is sometimes considered anecdotal Has been proven by fact or research. A person's life experience is the best testing ground out there. It may not be research in the classical sense but is a much better test bench none the same.
The running joke within statisticians is that as long as the '0' keeps moving the numbers do not have much meaning. And yes, the '0' moves around quite a lot. For some people, ala Jobo, it never stops moving.

 

[jobo]

Sigh... it doesn't disprove divinity. The bible was indeed written by people, the issue is that he then leapt to therefore concluding it disproves divinity.

Scientific method is certainly not applicable to any topic. Can you prove the beauty of art or even predict the emotional reaction someone will have to a painting using the scientific method?

it depends which particular divinity your disproving, the only '' evidence '' ( and i used the term advisedly) for the Christian god is the bible ( other holy books are available), if you disprove the bible as being accurate then thats the whole lot gone. thers nothing left to disprove

if the evidence is that god talks to you or other manifestation of supernatural beings then that clearly explained by the science of
Psychiatrists

if its that you cant explain the natural world with out resorting to invoking super natural beings you need a few science books

yes science can very much explain beauty , its party cultural, but there are ratio and colour mixes that are more appealing than others, emotional effects of beauty can also be very much explained, my emotional response to a beautiful woman are very predictable

the whole science of advertising is based on prediction of emotional response to visual images or other sensory inputs

 

[drop bear]

i made my methodology for arriving at that figure clear in the post where i first quoted the 50 50 figure, im not running a remedial class in statistics, go back and read it

So there is no data. It is now methodology.

 

[drop bear]

In relation to MA, for sure. And I think you can use some semblance of scientific method for MA. But not to the degree that it is perfectly guaranteed that learning a system will absolutely protect you in self defence under all circumstances. It's a game of likelihoods as the variables are so tremendously vast (the lab won't always perfectly replicate the SD situation). But evidence based in regards to MA training and self defense related reasons, yeah I think it can be a helpful guide.

That being said I truly think that anecdotes do have their place. But not as a basis of certainty for whether something will work or not.

You want to strive for better than random chance though.

 

[jobo]

Sigh... it doesn't disprove divinity. The bible was indeed written by people, the issue is that he then leapt to therefore concluding it disproves divinity.

Scientific method is certainly not applicable to any topic. Can you prove the beauty of art or even predict the emotional reaction someone will have to a painting using the scientific method?

Just as an amusing aside, ive been reserching vampire myths, and way back when pope Benedict the 14th, issued a proclimation that vampires were ficticious,,, he new this coz god had told him,???????????, dont ask questions,, just pass the collextion plate

 

[Headhunter]

That sir is what we call 10 gallons of shxt in a 5 gallon bucket. That incorrect crap is running out on all sides.

Yeah that sums up the majority of his posts

 

[_Simon_]

You want to strive for better than random chance though.

Yeah for sure that's it. And it seems like it's more a thing of improving likelihoods rather than guaranteeing anything. And what methods will be more efficient in that. But yeah, if anything making it less likely to fall to chance

 

[_Simon_]

it depends which particular divinity your disproving, the only '' evidence '' ( and i used the term advisedly) for the Christian god is the bible ( other holy books are available), if you disprove the bible as being accurate then thats the whole lot gone. thers nothing left to disprove

if the evidence is that god talks to you or other manifestation of supernatural beings then that clearly explained by the science of
Psychiatrists

if its that you cant explain the natural world with out resorting to invoking super natural beings you need a few science books

yes science can very much explain beauty , its party cultural, but there are ratio and colour mixes that are more appealing than others, emotional effects of beauty can also be very much explained, my emotional response to a beautiful woman are very predictable

the whole science of advertising is based on prediction of emotional response to visual images or other sensory inputs

.. well it sounds like you know everything about absolutely everything then, and can explain anything away. Carry on I guess... awaiting your book release.

 

[_Simon_]

Just as an amusing aside, ive been reserching vampire myths, and way back when pope Benedict the 14th, issued a proclimation that vampires were ficticious,,, he new this coz god had told him,???????????, dont ask questions,, just pass the collextion plate

Yeah, you've gotta be careful with that sort of thing for sure, I'm certainly not naive, and am a big fan of questioning things. But in saying that, with humility realising that the mind doesn't have all the neat little answers (and tends to attach itself to viewpoints more as an identity protection thing). I think context matters too

 

[jobo]

Yeah, you've gotta be careful with that sort of thing for sure, I'm certainly not naive, and am a big fan of questioning things. But in saying that, with humility realising that the mind doesn't have all the neat little answers

Yeah, you've gotta be careful with that sort of thing for sure, I'm certainly not naive, and am a big fan of questioning things. But in saying that, with humility realising that the mind doesn't have all the neat little answers (and tends to attach itself to viewpoints more as an identity protection thing). I think context matters too

(and tends to attach itself to viewpoints more as an identity protection thing). I think context matters too

:have you read the bible, i mean read it from cover to cover like a novel ?

i have( and the Koran ) and apart from those in the church, im the only person i know, including some devout Christians who have

i keep my bible handy, with post it notes on various pages, so that when the jehovah's witnesses call, i can invite them in for a discussion on theology, two hours later we are still on Leviticus and they are edging towards the door. they always seem to want to leave when we get to the parts about infanticide and raping slaves,, funny that

its particularly amusing if they are Afro american or African which quite a few are, and i say are you alright with this raping slaves bit, their jaw drops , its just like they had never read that bit ???

i did start going out with one very pretty JW lady, she was so pretty i faked considering conversion, then it turned out she had read the bit about sex before marriage so i lost
interest

i similarly considered turning to Islam, at a troubled time in my life coz they have a fantastic support network. out of the two id definitely choose Islam and you always get coffee and cake at the mosque, just dont make the mistake of walking over the invisible line with your shoes on, or they get really cross

 

[_Simon_]

:have you read the bible, i mean read it from cover to cover like a novel ?

i have( and the Koran ) and apart from those in the church, im the only person i know, including some devout Christians who have

i keep my bible handy, with post it notes on various pages, so that when the jehovah's witnesses call, i can invite them in for a discussion on theology, two hours later we are still on Leviticus and they are edging towards the door. they always seem to want to leave when we get to the parts about infanticide and raping slaves,, funny that

its particularly amusing if they are Afro american or African which quite a few are, and i say are you alright with this raping slaves bit, their jaw drops , its just like they had never read that bit ???

i did start going out with one very pretty JW lady, she was so pretty i faked considering conversion, then it turned out she had read the bit about sex before marriage so i lost
interest

i similarly considered turning to Islam, at a troubled time in my life coz they have a fantastic support network. out of the two id definitely choose Islam and you always get coffee and cake at the mosque, just dont make the mistake of walking over the invisible line with your shoes on, or they get really cross

I have actually jobo, cover to cover, probably about 10 years ago, and I go back to it every so often. To be honest the way I see things and have grown over the last 10 years has changed dramatically so I will probably go back and read it all again from a new perspective, as I was definitely in a different place then and would be reading it from that particular viewpoint. Also read the gospel of Thomas, which wasn't included in any bible, I think because it runs against the belief that Christ and God were outside of you, whereas this text really focuses you within yourself, nonduality and Christ consciousness within you.

We're actually on the same page here with some stuff, and absolutely, there is alot of... questionable stuff XD. Like I said, it's a collection of books written by people, and I think the error lies in taking it as a whole singular work, trying to prove or disprove it etc, and also in saying it is the literal word of God, which is a very very dangerous position to take. I have personally experienced quite recently people who have hid behind and used bible scripture to justify treating people absolutely horrendously. It was traumatic, and horrible, but alot was learned during it.

I have also had some very interesting conversations with JWs XD (and yes... Leviticus is....... interesting too to put it lightly haha). Some discussions were really lovely, and others there was just nowhere to go once a belief is firmly held onto, it's hard to really openly discuss.

I think that's great you've read those and also explored a little jobo. And what you have, which is a rigorous skepticism can actually be a real strength and serve you, and that in itself could be your own spiritual path.

Where it would have its limitations however is the denial of everything based on only using logic or scientific method, which is only limited to 'provables' and ideas of time and space. For the linear world of cause and effect that's fine, but misapplying it to the nonlinear (ie as seen in quantum mechanics) and it has no bearing or relevance whatsoever. But healthy skepticism is helpful, and it means you're not naive. But imbalanced skepticism leads to pride and lack of humility, lack of openness to growth.

And to me the difference between religion and spirituality is that religion does indeed involve spirituality, but it needs a system, adherence to a belief system, and scripture. It's a nice thing and beautiful when done with integrity, and to me spirituality takes the next step to being dedicated to truth alone, and in a nonreliance or nonattachment to scripture, and dismantling belief systems to reach the core of truth itself.

Anyway, we are potentially well off topic haha. The faking considering conversion just reminds me of George in Seinfeld XD classic.

 

[dvcochran]

I have actually jobo, cover to cover, probably about 10 years ago, and I go back to it every so often. To be honest the way I see things and have grown over the last 10 years has changed dramatically so I will probably go back and read it all again from a new perspective, as I was definitely in a different place then and would be reading it from that particular viewpoint. Also read the gospel of Thomas, which wasn't included in any bible, I think because it runs against the belief that Christ and God were outside of you, whereas this text really focuses you within yourself, nonduality and Christ consciousness within you.

We're actually on the same page here with some stuff, and absolutely, there is alot of... questionable stuff XD. Like I said, it's a collection of books written by people, and I think the error lies in taking it as a whole singular work, trying to prove or disprove it etc, and also in saying it is the literal word of God, which is a very very dangerous position to take. I have personally experienced quite recently people who have hid behind and used bible scripture to justify treating people absolutely horrendously. It was traumatic, and horrible, but alot was learned during it.

I have also had some very interesting conversations with JWs XD (and yes... Leviticus is....... interesting too to put it lightly haha). Some discussions were really lovely, and others there was just nowhere to go once a belief is firmly held onto, it's hard to really openly discuss.

I think that's great you've read those and also explored a little jobo. And what you have, which is a rigorous skepticism can actually be a real strength and serve you, and that in itself could be your own spiritual path.

Where it would have its limitations however is the denial of everything based on only using logic or scientific method, which is only limited to 'provables' and ideas of time and space. For the linear world of cause and effect that's fine, but misapplying it to the nonlinear (ie as seen in quantum mechanics) and it has no bearing or relevance whatsoever. But healthy skepticism is helpful, and it means you're not naive. But imbalanced skepticism leads to pride and lack of humility, lack of openness to growth.

And to me the difference between religion and spirituality is that religion does indeed involve spirituality, but it needs a system, adherence to a belief system, and scripture. It's a nice thing and beautiful when done with integrity, and to me spirituality takes the next step to being dedicated to truth alone, and in a nonreliance or nonattachment to scripture, and dismantling belief systems to reach the core of truth itself.

Anyway, we are potentially well off topic haha. The faking considering conversion just reminds me of George in Seinfeld XD classic.

Man oh man; that was freaking..... Awesome.
Absolutely could not have been said better. Much bigger words than I expect you imagine.
You very much have my respect and admiration

 

[_Simon_]

Man oh man; that was freaking..... Awesome.
Absolutely could not have been said better. Much bigger words than I expect you imagine.
You very much have my respect and admiration

Naww thanks @dvcochran that's very kind of you

 

[Gweilo]

Some discussions were really lovely, and others there was just nowhere to go once a belief is firmly held onto, it's hard to really openly discuss.

I think thats something we could all learn from