guys....
can you either let it go or take it to PM?
thanks.
can you either let it go or take it to PM?
thanks.
Unreality Based Self Defense
- Thread starter Phil Elmore
- Start date
Cruentus
Grandmaster
Uhh...why? I actually like reading the discussion back and forth. It doesn't appear that Phil or Robert has gotton out of line, have they?
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Well, I think I already explained my argument pretty thouroughly, and I disagree that it's out of the bounds of martial arts discussion: to repeat, the issue is: what's all this "reality," we keep hearing so much about? A secondary issue: where does martial arts study intersect social concerns?
Cruentus
Grandmaster
Originally posted by KennethKu
Yeah. Sure beat the hell out of reading about dumb threads like " Does your school have air-conditioning?", "Should I wear ear rings to the dojo?"
LOL :rofl:
Cruentus
Grandmaster
Sticking to the issues here...
Reality: If I read correctly, I think I am more on Phil's side of this issue. I am a realist, and I believe that there is a "reality." Just because I believe that jumping off a 50 story building won't kill my body, that doesn't make it so. The problem is, none of us have a perfectly clear perception of what "reality" is. I may believe in a Judeo-Christian God, and my friend might be athiest. One of us is correct, and one of us isn't. I may believe that I have 350K in my pocket, but the Bentley dealership only sees a pocket full of lint. Unless I can convince the dealership of my reality, I'll have to continue driving my Maxima, because I won't be purchasing that vehicle. Point is, just because I believe something is true, that doesn't make it so. I do believe that our different perceptions of reality is usually where and why things get argued.
Social concern and martial study cross over: I am not sure "where" the precise place they cross over is at, but I don't feel that is relevent. To me, what is important is that they do indeed cross over. I think that everything to what people "carry" to our social mentality given the time/place, the environment, etc., etc., all must be taken into account concerning self defence and martial studies. Your tactics are going to be different in an inner city today VS. the wild west in the 1800's, or feudel Japan, or 1950's in the Filipines. I study Filipino Martial arts. Some of what I do is very specific (like stick training) others is more broad for general self defence. The point is, I believe it is important for me to understand the culture/environment of where my arts came from, and the culture/environment of where I am today, so I can apply something that may have been designed for a different environment to todays standards. To not have this understanding makes my "self-defense" unrealistic. Example: Sword and dagger fighting may not apply directly to an encounter that I may have in a parking lot somewhere. I most likely will not have to "duel" with a sword dagger ever in my life. If I honestly thought that I would, then I would be living in fantasy land. The training of these weapons can however build attributes that cross over to a situation that I may be in today. As long as I understand these, then my training will be able to help me today.
Some of our training, such as maintaining personal space, is universal. A major factor of self defense, whether in Feudal Japan or Detroit 03' is maintaining our personal space, and asserting this when needed. This is an example of a universal self defense concept I believe that is a truth that was covered well in Phil's article.
The point is, not having a social/cultural reference is poor self defense in my opinion, because the environment and social mentality of your attacker plays too significant of a role to be seperated.
Ayn Rand: I thought a major part of this arguement was involving Ayn Rand's philosophies concerning "objectivism." I can't agree with everything rmcrobertson has said, but I do believe that Ayn Rands "philosophies" are inherently flawed. I am not passionate enough about the subject to really want to argue much about this one online, but I think that there have been many publications "debunking" her philosophies that have been written. Some have been referenced here. These are better explainations then I could ever want to give on the subject.
But I will restate again; the article was good, and I think that Ayn Rand had little to do with it.
:asian:
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Problem is, concepts like, "social space," are constructed very differently in different societies...apparently, getting on and off the Tokyo subway would be read by most Westerners as being under repeated attack--at first, anyway.
There's certainly a "reality," out there--look at, say, Lacan's crack that," reality is what hurts." Sure. But "realism," "aliveness," well, terms like that are very much up for grabs. Not only do they have a history of being constructed differently--but look at all the arguments on these sites that revolve around things like the "unrealism," of traditional martial arts...and end up completely dead-ended, because nobody can agree on what, "the real," is...
Some think, "realism," means training for cage fights...I think that's absurd.
There's certainly a "reality," out there--look at, say, Lacan's crack that," reality is what hurts." Sure. But "realism," "aliveness," well, terms like that are very much up for grabs. Not only do they have a history of being constructed differently--but look at all the arguments on these sites that revolve around things like the "unrealism," of traditional martial arts...and end up completely dead-ended, because nobody can agree on what, "the real," is...
Some think, "realism," means training for cage fights...I think that's absurd.
Z
ZIM
Guest
OK so now you want to bring up Lacan?
For him, the Real was 'the impossible to say', a 'return of the repressed'- not an account of reality or the objective world.
So, by invoking Lacan, I must ask 'are you seeking to explain the disagreements basis, or seeking to reach consensual agreement?'
Because, if the first, you've only restated the situation more obscurely, in fact stating that consensus about 'reality' can NOT be reached because nobody can speak/write clearly/totally about it.
If the latter, Rand is the better choice [of the 2] for 'objective' consensus, despite noted problems.
But I like Lacan better than Rand and less than Orwell. Seriously, I'm not nitpicking on you... I just find literary-based argument funny.
For him, the Real was 'the impossible to say', a 'return of the repressed'- not an account of reality or the objective world.
So, by invoking Lacan, I must ask 'are you seeking to explain the disagreements basis, or seeking to reach consensual agreement?'
Because, if the first, you've only restated the situation more obscurely, in fact stating that consensus about 'reality' can NOT be reached because nobody can speak/write clearly/totally about it.
If the latter, Rand is the better choice [of the 2] for 'objective' consensus, despite noted problems.
But I like Lacan better than Rand and less than Orwell.
Seriously, I'm not nitpicking on you... I just find literary-based argument funny.
Brother John
Senior Master
sums it up well!
Training for a sport is real
for that sport.
Your Brother
John
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Personally, I think Lacan's division of Real, Imaginary and Symbolic really helps me understand some things in martial arts training, but what the hell.
K
Kingston
Guest
I personaly am not a fan of "the fence" (though it has great technique vs technique advantages....)
fence wont cover multi attackers......have someone attack you with a whip, or a sword, a chain.....good luck.
It seems your actions are more agressive type of defence...someone comes into your space...you back off, put up your hands (even though palms are showing.....that picture looked threatening to me....)
that type of posture will make a person go "wow, sorry" if they weren't going to attack you...or perhaps laugh....after all they where looking for a fight right?
sucker punches do happen.....your fence wont help that, though awarness will.
having your hands up is a good sport strategy.....also mite help you for some 1v1 bar brawls.....
Now im a fan of the passive stance....but in the way i heard "the fence" discribed, and how the picture looked. Also how your friend who makes knives (sorry cant remember his name, im lazy) he said something like "if i see a guy coming at me im going to let him know i know what hes up to, im not just going to stand there and let him hit me"
Well this is all good.....but why bother with any type of passive stance, or modified stance if your trying to tell him to "back off or get hurt"
People pick up on body language....I dont have to say anything...if you bump into me...I take a step back and put up my hands....looking imposing....you can read it like a book, it says "get away from me if you know whats good for you"
I remember reading an article about how a homeless man confronted you (or came into your personel space) you described how you put up your hands, and said back off......this may work for someone wanting a free handout .....But remember.....people who start fights are looking for fights.......you cant give them any reason......because people will look for any reason.
now....the fence ONLY works if you know someone is in your personal space (or mite attack you)....I know for a FACT that you can defend yourself from almost any position with you hands, relatively, to your sides...so....if you know the person is a threat....you can get ready....it wont be a sucker punch...THEREFORE if he tries to punch you.....hands up, hands down....only difference....hands up lets the guy know your afraid/think him a threat.
people read your body language JUST as much as what you say.
......Having you hands down gives you even footing for ANY situation, at ANY moment......and gives a unasuming body language, that doesn't stick you out in a crowd.
Its not the guy standing in fron of you that you need to "fence" off, it's his friend who is behind you, or beside you...thats laughing to himself as your totaly distracted by the "bait"
Anyway just my thoughts
fence wont cover multi attackers......have someone attack you with a whip, or a sword, a chain.....good luck.
It seems your actions are more agressive type of defence...someone comes into your space...you back off, put up your hands (even though palms are showing.....that picture looked threatening to me....)
that type of posture will make a person go "wow, sorry" if they weren't going to attack you...or perhaps laugh....after all they where looking for a fight right?
sucker punches do happen.....your fence wont help that, though awarness will.
having your hands up is a good sport strategy.....also mite help you for some 1v1 bar brawls.....
Now im a fan of the passive stance....but in the way i heard "the fence" discribed, and how the picture looked. Also how your friend who makes knives (sorry cant remember his name, im lazy) he said something like "if i see a guy coming at me im going to let him know i know what hes up to, im not just going to stand there and let him hit me"
Well this is all good.....but why bother with any type of passive stance, or modified stance if your trying to tell him to "back off or get hurt"
People pick up on body language....I dont have to say anything...if you bump into me...I take a step back and put up my hands....looking imposing....you can read it like a book, it says "get away from me if you know whats good for you"
I remember reading an article about how a homeless man confronted you (or came into your personel space) you described how you put up your hands, and said back off......this may work for someone wanting a free handout .....But remember.....people who start fights are looking for fights.......you cant give them any reason......because people will look for any reason.
now....the fence ONLY works if you know someone is in your personal space (or mite attack you)....I know for a FACT that you can defend yourself from almost any position with you hands, relatively, to your sides...so....if you know the person is a threat....you can get ready....it wont be a sucker punch...THEREFORE if he tries to punch you.....hands up, hands down....only difference....hands up lets the guy know your afraid/think him a threat.
people read your body language JUST as much as what you say.
......Having you hands down gives you even footing for ANY situation, at ANY moment......and gives a unasuming body language, that doesn't stick you out in a crowd.
Its not the guy standing in fron of you that you need to "fence" off, it's his friend who is behind you, or beside you...thats laughing to himself as your totaly distracted by the "bait"
Anyway just my thoughts
Sorry, I'm a little late to the party here..so I'll be brief:
"Censorship" : no, thread steering as the topic of 'Ayn Rand' doesn't appear to have much to do with the topic of 'Unreality Based Self Defense'. When posts cover both, some disjointment is normal. Mod saw the tangent, asked if it should split, was told yes, so did so.
"Moderator Warnings": Were placed due to a perception of heat levels rising. These are often placed -before- a 'flame war' breaks out. Preventive damage control.
"Problems with Moderation" : Should be addressed through the appropriate channels. That being a thread in the support forum, or a PM/Email to an Administrator.
"Respect for mods" : simply put - If you aint got it, either complain through channels, or move on. Please refer to our posted rules for details.
"Sharp Phil & rmcrobertson debate" : I see a debate abet a somewhat redundant one on certain points. No flamewar. Continue the debate, but if it gets 'flaming', please take it off-board.
"Thread Contents" : If anyone is unhappy with the topics posted, please feel free to add your own to the mix, rather than relying on others to initiate intelectual discourse.
If I've missed anything (outside of this threads main topic) my apologies. If you feel the need to comment on this post, please either contact me thru PM or by posting in the support forum if it needs public addressing.
Thank you.
:asian:
"Censorship" : no, thread steering as the topic of 'Ayn Rand' doesn't appear to have much to do with the topic of 'Unreality Based Self Defense'. When posts cover both, some disjointment is normal. Mod saw the tangent, asked if it should split, was told yes, so did so.
"Moderator Warnings": Were placed due to a perception of heat levels rising. These are often placed -before- a 'flame war' breaks out. Preventive damage control.
"Problems with Moderation" : Should be addressed through the appropriate channels. That being a thread in the support forum, or a PM/Email to an Administrator.
"Respect for mods" : simply put - If you aint got it, either complain through channels, or move on. Please refer to our posted rules for details.
"Sharp Phil & rmcrobertson debate" : I see a debate abet a somewhat redundant one on certain points. No flamewar. Continue the debate, but if it gets 'flaming', please take it off-board.
"Thread Contents" : If anyone is unhappy with the topics posted, please feel free to add your own to the mix, rather than relying on others to initiate intelectual discourse.
If I've missed anything (outside of this threads main topic) my apologies. If you feel the need to comment on this post, please either contact me thru PM or by posting in the support forum if it needs public addressing.
Thank you.
:asian:
Cruentus
Grandmaster
You feel comfortable just using your awareness skills, and keeping your hands at your sides but ready, while monitoring your space the whole time. Me too. This is because of the way we are trained.
I think that awareness is more important than anything else.
However, I still like the article because it speaks to someone who might not train the same way you or I do. If I was teaching a class for beginners, like a womens self defense or what have you, I would say that putting your hands up and asking someone assertively to stay out of your personal space (if they seem like they are threatening to violate your space) would be great advise for them. I cannot teach them the awareness skills, or the skills and concepts behind monitoring your personal space in one class; this is a developed skill.
So, although you or I can can maintain our personal space through many different methods, without having to put our hands up and verbally assert ourselves (although I think it would be foolish to remove putting my hands up and a verbal command from my repiroire, but I can be more selective as to when this would be nessicary), that doesn't mean everyone else can. So, I still maintain that this is a good article, and good advice!
I think that awareness is more important than anything else.
However, I still like the article because it speaks to someone who might not train the same way you or I do. If I was teaching a class for beginners, like a womens self defense or what have you, I would say that putting your hands up and asking someone assertively to stay out of your personal space (if they seem like they are threatening to violate your space) would be great advise for them. I cannot teach them the awareness skills, or the skills and concepts behind monitoring your personal space in one class; this is a developed skill.
So, although you or I can can maintain our personal space through many different methods, without having to put our hands up and verbally assert ourselves (although I think it would be foolish to remove putting my hands up and a verbal command from my repiroire, but I can be more selective as to when this would be nessicary), that doesn't mean everyone else can. So, I still maintain that this is a good article, and good advice!
But I have enjoyed the thread and the Primary stated topic. I had an observation and a fairly simple question based on this article and previous ones I have read of your Phil.
Firstly: I just cracked up at the idea of raising your hands around a stranger ... what hopped into my mind was things like grocery stores, McDonalds, the line at the movie or theater, etc. In them you were wearing a coat and tie and put your guard up ... then I imagined myself doing the same ... then I thought about Austin Powers and completely cracked up. No insult intended at all. The observation was that we would both look like real goobers if we took life that seriously and actually did that, like some overexuberant 17 year old with seriously arrested development and no social skills, along with some comment about our hands "being registered lethal weapons." You just gotta laugh, cuz if you cannot laugh at yourself, life has, well ... think grey and dismal to say the least.
Second: In true self-defense situations I have two options, I can identify myself as a Martial Artist, I can conceal the fact that I am a Martial Artist. They do not get any notice, raising of the hands, unless I can do it in a natural way, gesturing or "talking with my hands" as some people do. I learned this in the 80's while working with psych patients who were extemely explosive and assaultive, i.e. how to get my hands up without being threatening. It is one of the things I stress in self-defense classes and to my students. I will not surrender any tactical advantage I have. Once the fight "is on", then it is a different matter of course.
Enjoyed the article and most of your's. I don't always agree, but it always provides "grist for the mill."
-MB
Firstly: I just cracked up at the idea of raising your hands around a stranger ... what hopped into my mind was things like grocery stores, McDonalds, the line at the movie or theater, etc. In them you were wearing a coat and tie and put your guard up ... then I imagined myself doing the same ... then I thought about Austin Powers and completely cracked up. No insult intended at all. The observation was that we would both look like real goobers if we took life that seriously and actually did that, like some overexuberant 17 year old with seriously arrested development and no social skills, along with some comment about our hands "being registered lethal weapons." You just gotta laugh, cuz if you cannot laugh at yourself, life has, well ... think grey and dismal to say the least.
Second: In true self-defense situations I have two options, I can identify myself as a Martial Artist, I can conceal the fact that I am a Martial Artist. They do not get any notice, raising of the hands, unless I can do it in a natural way, gesturing or "talking with my hands" as some people do. I learned this in the 80's while working with psych patients who were extemely explosive and assaultive, i.e. how to get my hands up without being threatening. It is one of the things I stress in self-defense classes and to my students. I will not surrender any tactical advantage I have. Once the fight "is on", then it is a different matter of course.
Enjoyed the article and most of your's. I don't always agree, but it always provides "grist for the mill."
-MB
This can be perceived as threatening or defensive, contingent on context. I think hands up can be good, unless then the perp thinks that it is now a challenge and they cannot back down. I much rather have hands up, one on my chin, the other across my body ... maybe touching the raised hand's elbow, or both gesturing, as if saying "you know", palms in of course, as this is less threatening (and protects the veins.)
Provisio: Known tactics that are effective should be part of you prepared strategy in situations like this.
and
Overeaction can be the cause of an opponent's reaction, be it good or bad.
-MB
Provisio: Known tactics that are effective should be part of you prepared strategy in situations like this.
and
Overeaction can be the cause of an opponent's reaction, be it good or bad.
-MB
SenseiBear
Blue Belt
If you seriously hurt or kill an attacker in an altercation, the fact that you warned and tried to passively fend off an intrusion may help when you are on the stand trying to defend your actions to the now cleaned up and injured assailant, or his grieving loved ones.
Cruentus
Grandmaster
Good point.
Similar threads
