I think that the use of titles can be a slippery slope to a lot of things that inhibit the learning process, among other things, in my opinion. I also think the use of such things are in conflict with the message and goals of my training company.
I have used titles before, and they have been legitimate. I have high enough rank in the martial arts where I fit the criteria of “master” and “Guro” within area schools and affiliates (5th degree black belt in one style, other degrees and certificates in others). I was advised to do some different things to diversify myself when I first founded my training company, so I used “master of defense” for a short while (I think that lasted about a month or 2). Although my “titles” had legitimacy, it did not feel comfortable at all because I was philosophically in conflict over them. I just couldn’t take it seriously.
The reason for my philosophical conflict was because as a training model I believe that everyone who walks in the door has an individual identity, with individual experiences – and each individual law abiding citizen has equal rights to self-defense. Anyone can hurt another or be hurt by another, regardless of skill or rank and title for that matter. True, there are various skill levels when it comes to fighting, but I don’t think that these should be arbitrarily determined by a belt or by a title within a school or community. Without the use of such things, people are then required to take people on their individual merits and skills. If it is a lesson or instruction, you take the instruction on its own merits, not because “grandmaster said…”. Within a school, if one person doesn’t know something, they can learn it from someone who does – and ego’s that would get in the way of this process are left at the door.
The basic idea is that through my company I want to help people better themselves as individuals rather than create an environment where people work towards some sort of collective ideal (black belt, or sensei, or guro, and so on). I want to help people continue to develop their own identities through a quality training process, rather then trying to plug people in to a collective identity; in such environments people tend to base their identities on a martial art style (I’m a Tea Kwon Doist) or club or organization (I’m with the IMAF) or iconic individual (I train with Hongkongphooey, or in “Hongkong Phooey Karate”). If I want people to be themselves, creating a collective environment as is done in the martial arts seems to conflict with my goals and training model. The use of a title is ESPECIALLY in conflict with our model, because it places a person up as an “iconic individual” of which everyone within that training circle is supposed to model after. I want people to recognize my company as a provider of quality training, and I want people to benefit as individuals through our methods. I feel the use of a titles especially could conflict with these goals.
As to how this applies on the training floor, the best example of what I am talking about that people might recognize is the boxing gym or wrestling club model. You might call the coaches or trainers “coach,” but that is as far as it goes. Everyone is then taken on individual merits and skills, and because you put these skills to the test in the ring or on the mat, there is no need to arbitrarily determine these skills through the use of titles and rank. Everyone just trains and gets better while helping each other get better.
Now, even though my training company isnÂ’t geared towards competition, we test our skills every day we train in some type of results based fashion. It becomes a contest of bettering ourselves rather then trying to see who is better then each other. And, ultimately what will matter are our results on the streets or in the field if we ever get into a confrontation and have to use our lifesaving skills. So, in our environment, similar to the boxing gym, there is no need to arbitrarily determine skill level through rank and title. With our particular model those things would get in the way of the developmental process.
Now, that all said, I am describing what works best for me and my company, and what coincides best with our goals and methods. I know that many people are happy with the martial arts rank/title structure, and derive benefits from that structure. I am not going to say that rank and titles are evil and that others shouldnÂ’t have them. I am merely describing why I donÂ’t follow those conventions. Ultimately, people will have to discover what works best for them.
As to how I address others; in the past it was always very confusing to me how to handle this in the martial arts world. When I would have an exchange with someone, I would always expect that people would call me by my 1st name, and if they don’t then I usually ask them too. I often make the mistake of thinking that people have my same values and standards. My mistake in the past was that I would always assume that they thought the same way I did. So, after an exchange when they used my 1st name (as I wanted it) I would then use their 1st name, figuring that we are all adults here. Most people were comfortable with this, however this came back to bite me once when a “prominent instructor” (who was probably feeling insecure about his genitalia that day) decided to hammer me. One of his issues was that “you think your me and so-and-so’s equal and you use such disrespect…” yada, yada. By me having addressed this individual on a 1st name basis, as he did me, I was seen as disrespectful because he is so much “higher” then me, apparently.
Anyway, my point is that the whole thing can be quite silly. I now try to treat these issues as professionally as I can, where the protocol when communicating with someone personally is to call them by formal social titles such as “Mr.” or “Mrs.” This can be very difficult because I am very used to simply using peoples 1st names; but anymore I try not too unless given permission. I don’t deal with people’s titles much anymore (Sensei, Grandmaster, etc.) and I just stick to formal social address. If I know the person, then I of course will tend to call them what they want to be called, whether a formal title or name or whatever.
Well, the issue of “title” can be an interesting and surprisingly touchy subject for many people. This is how I have seen it best to handle these issues at this point.
Paul Janulis
