What does it mean to you?

[Daniel Sullivan]

This whole discussion and the related ones make me so glad that we do not wear our rank in kendo.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

This is a stunning statement. Since I can't think of anyone who wouldn't strike with nasty intent if their life was on the line, I assume you mean someone who is predisposed to this "mental state." Sounds like a thug to me. Moreover, I find it the highest of virtues of a black belt to shy away from physically striking another person, though they know they have the ability to immobilize them

Not sure why you find that stunning, Danny. I certainly wasn't talking about a thug mentality. Let me try to explain my position further.

Surely you've run across some people in a dojo who are just naturally timid. They look fine doing basics or performing forms, but when practicing either a live drill with another person or when they are sparring, they freeze up. The two most apparent reasons for this I can think of are:

1) They are afraid of feeling pain
2) They are afraid of hurting someone else

Either is a problem when you are training for self-defense. We practice actions in the dojo that we may need to repeat in real life, agreed? With that premise, I use hard sparring as a tool in my dojo to condition students to both receive and give out blows. One must be mentally prepared for possibility of hurting another person.

Gun instructors tell people that they shouldn't carry a gun until they're prepared to actually use it otherwise it may actually be a liability that can be used again them. It's like that with bare hand combat. What good is being able to punch through some boards unless one also has the mental capacity to do the same with an attacker's face?

You assume that one can simply turn on the aggression when forced to by a violent assailant. That may be, but it may also be that the same person may abort their counter at the last moment due to an internal ethical conflict. Training is mental also, you realize. The more you learn to both take and receive a hit in the dojo, the better the chances you have of doing both successfully outside of the dojo.

As for your hierarchy of virtues, sure it's great to be able to avoid conflict altogether. That said, it's for the fubar moments that we train.

 

[ynnad]

Not sure why you find that stunning, Danny. I certainly wasn't talking about a thug mentality. Let me try to explain my position further.

Surely you've run across some people in a dojo who are just naturally timid. They look fine doing basics or performing forms, but when practicing either a live drill with another person or when they are sparring, they freeze up. The two most apparent reasons for this I can think of are:

1) They are afraid of feeling pain
2) They are afraid of hurting someone else

Either is a problem when you are training for self-defense. We practice actions in the dojo that we may need to repeat in real life, agreed? With that premise, I use hard sparring as a tool in my dojo to condition students to both receive and give out blows. One must be mentally prepared for possibility of hurting another person.

Gun instructors tell people that they shouldn't carry a gun until they're prepared to actually use it otherwise it may actually be a liability that can be used again them. It's like that with bare hand combat. What good is being able to punch through some boards unless one also has the mental capacity to do the same with an attacker's face?

You assume that one can simply turn on the aggression when forced to by a violent assailant. That may be, but it may also be that the same person may abort their counter at the last moment due to an internal ethical conflict. Training is mental also, you realize. The more you learn to both take and receive a hit in the dojo, the better the chances you have of doing both successfully outside of the dojo.

As for your hierarchy of virtues, sure it's great to be able to avoid conflict altogether. That said, it's for the fubar moments that we train.

Good follow up and clarification of your position. Thanks.

Danny

 

[MJS]

The BB is the end of one journey and the beginning of another. I think its safe to say that we've all seen someone reach BB and leave the school, never to train again. For those people, that was the end of their journey. We could look at it like a high school diploma. You get your diploma and have some options: Continue your education thru college, or go out and get a job. Those that go to college, would be akin to those martial artists that reached BB level, which is one journey, and then begin a new one, which would be college. Those that get the HS diploma, would be akin to those that just reach BB and then stop.

I would imagine that many of us, whos focus is self defense, do our best to bust our *** in the dojo, but despite our training, no, it doesnt put a red S on our chest, as a BB, while one would assume our skills would give us an edge in a fight, doesn't necessarily mean that it'll always happen.

As for the street...my interpretation of that is simple....any place that harm can come to you; a place that is outside of the comforts of the training hall; a bar, a club, walking to your car after you leave work or the store; depending on your job, the street could mean a career as a LEO or Corrections Officer. Those are just a few examples.

A BB should have a very good knowledge of the material. They should know history of their art, they should be capable of thinking outside of the box, meaning, instead of just being bound by a set technique, can they continue on if that tech. goes south? They should be capable of taking full control of a class, with or without assistance, and be capable of maintaining full control over it, from start to finish. They should be capable of teaching the fine points of a technique or a kata. They should be able to answer the majority of questions that they could face in a class, but if they can't, be capable of finding a source to get that answer.

Of course, the learning should never end. I mean, if you have a strong desire to train and want to keep going, you should always strive to make yourself better.

 

[ATC]

Very nice all. So far everyone has state very clearly what their opinion of a Black Belt is. As you can see the opinions all vary to some extent.

I believe that the Black Belt will mean something different to each base on each persons life experiences. Some you can tell hold a BB in the highest regards and put a very high standard to it. Some see it as simply a goal that was reached and now have set a new goal. And still some see it as a symbol of basics before building to something higher.

It seems that the BB is more personal and dynamic in meaning than something static. It is more than just can you passed this test. It seem that the test is nothing more than a ritual for ones mind to say, "I have reached something" because I can pass this test. What I am saying is, that if you take away the test and the belt but still encompass your same definition, then are you still a black belt? If one never takes the test nor wears the belt but has all of what any of you stated then what is he or she?

I find it funny that we debate so strongly why someone should not have something that really means nothing if you look at it for what it really is. We strive to reach something so we can say, "I am this". But what is this? This, is really something different to each of us and if it is different then did we not already have it in the first place? We simply now know we have it.

A Black Belt to me is finally understanding myself. To me I now know how to give back and help someone else reach what it is they are looking for.

If you all go back and look at your answers and then take away your black belts, are you still all that you stated in your answers. If you simply did the MA and never tested and never reached a BB could you not still be everything that you stated in your answer? Getting your BB only justified in your mind what you already were or were looking for in yourself.

To me the Black Belt is just something that let me know I am a leader, I am confident, I am me.

Learning to fight can be taught to anyone. You don't even need a belt system for this. Just come by train, sparr then fight. Do this enough times and you will be good fighter. So the BB has to be much much more than that.

A BB is nothing more that what you think it is. You could see someone with a BB and they could be everything you consider a BB to be. But they may see themselves as not worthy of that BB. So they would see you as not worthy of yours. Each person sees a BB as something different.

In the end the BB is something personal and is different to each and no amount of debate will ever make anyone see it any differently.

 

[ATC]

A BB is nothing more than what you think it is. You could see someone with a BB and they could be everything you consider a BB to be. But they may see themselves as not worthy of that BB. So they would see you as not worthy of yours.

I meant to say that, they could see you worthy of your, due to some trait or characteristic that you have that they don't, but want to have. In the end it is still personal to each and different.

 

[Nomad]

A black belt is familiar with the curriculum, and can perform the formal elements such as kata and partner drills under pressure.

A black belt has faced and overcome challenges and obstacles along the way, and in doing so, has gained a better than average understanding of their own physical and mental limitations.

A black belt will "get" the drill better and faster than the other students, understanding some of the underlying principles, and should be able to pass the information on to others (teaching or assisting).

Personally, I like the analogy that up until black belt, students are learning to use particular tools like a hammer or saw; after black belt, they can start building cabinets and furniture with them.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

A black belt in the academy I attend means you have gone through the curriculum and have demonstrated an ability to perform it to your own level.

This seems to be where the market is now and it isn't going back. It seems that the logical next step in the evolution of belt advancement is to develop some other form of distinguishing those who perform at higher levels. Isn't this the point of the belt system to begin with? I'm sure traditionalist lamented the introduction of the belt system to begin with. Now, it must continue to evolve with the culture it is in. You can't change the culture.

Reminds me of Dilbert's cartoon yesterday. The boss told an employee that she was making significantly less than the market average, but that he wasn't going to stand for that. He was going to make sure he got the market to lower the average salary.

If your black belt means more than others' and you want to distinguish that, then add a distinguishing factor, but you are not going to change what a black belt means in the culture.

One question that I have for you is this: what do you mean by "and have demonstrated an ability to perform it to your own level?"

Do you mean to perform:
A. at a proficient level within the bounds of one's physical ability?

or

B. from beginner to first kyu material regardless of how precise or how sloppy, with the mentality that not everyone can be as good as everone else?

"A" is more than reasonable. "B" = belt factory and usually subpar training. Regardless of where the market is going.

In fact, looking at things based on where the market is going is the fatal mistake. Just because the market is willing to go their does not mean that it is the best place to go or where you should go.

Remember that the market was not the motivation of the belt system. Japan was in a period of cultural transition at that point and so were the martial arts.

Also remember that Kano was considered to be one of the best among his contemporaries and the belt system (white and black) was to enable new students to recognize advanced students at a glance, and thus know who they could ask questions of, as well as for him to pick out the advanced from the not advanced in a large group. Green was added later, not surprisingly, to give new students an intermediate goal to work towards. I do not know that the concept of charging for belt tests even existed at that point (I do not believe so).

No, I would gather that the "traditionalists" as you say did not like it. The kyu/dan rank system was culled from the strategy game of Go and the idea of colored tokens to differentiate the students came from, I believe, competative swimming. But the dislike was in the fact that Kano devised a system that was more accessible to the common person, not because they thought that he was a belt factory or a fraud. As I said, his skills, both as a practitioner of Jujutsu and as a teacher were highly regarded by his peers. I think that fact that he regularly beat them from what I recall likely did not make them happy either.

I am sure that a judoka could elaborate or put it a better way (which I would welcome, by the way), but that is essentially it.

Daniel

 

[ynnad]

One question that I have for you is this: what do you mean by "and have demonstrated an ability to perform it to your own level?"

Do you mean to perform:
A. at a proficient level within the bounds of one's physical ability?

or

B. from beginner to first kyu material regardless of how precise or how sloppy, with the mentality that not everyone can be as good as everone else?

"A" is more than reasonable. "B" = belt factory and usually subpar training. Regardless of where the market is going.

In fact, looking at things based on where the market is going is the fatal mistake. Just because the market is willing to go their does not mean that it is the best place to go or where you should go.

Remember that the market was not the motivation of the belt system. Japan was in a period of cultural transition at that point and so were the martial arts.

Also remember that Kano was considered to be one of the best among his contemporaries and the belt system (white and black) was to enable new students to recognize advanced students at a glance, and thus know who they could ask questions of, as well as for him to pick out the advanced from the not advanced in a large group. Green was added later, not surprisingly, to give new students an intermediate goal to work towards. I do not know that the concept of charging for belt tests even existed at that point (I do not believe so).

No, I would gather that the "traditionalists" as you say did not like it. The kyu/dan rank system was culled from the strategy game of Go and the idea of colored tokens to differentiate the students came from, I believe, competative swimming. But the dislike was in the fact that Kano devised a system that was more accessible to the common person, not because they thought that he was a belt factory or a fraud. As I said, his skills, both as a practitioner of Jujutsu and as a teacher were highly regarded by his peers. I think that fact that he regularly beat them from what I recall likely did not make them happy either.

I am sure that a judoka could elaborate or put it a better way (which I would welcome, by the way), but that is essentially it.

Daniel

I most certainly mean "A." And by "market," I don't necessarily mean the "profit-at-the-expense-of-the art" degradation of martial arts. What I mean is the culture of store front martial arts that all of us (with the exception of a few) participate in. My point is that in this culture a black belt doesn't mean what it used to mean. And being a student of sociology and cultures, I can tell you it is impossible to go back. Future leaders among our art will be the ones who are able to chart a healthy development forward integrating the well established commercial aspect of martial arts with the tradition of excellence. Academia accomplishes this with honor roles, presidents lists, special awards and the like. How might martial arts recognize black belts who have achieved a higher level of excellence and dedication than ones who just met the basic standards the marketplace has come to expect for a black belt?

 

[Stonecold]

The coulor of you belt only means you have learned the material being taught, that's it. When it come's down to fighting for real your belt doesn't matter. Some black belts have never been in a fight, some fight all the time.Some people train hard, some just do enough to get by.There is no standard level for Black Belts, If there were there would be a lot less...

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I most certainly mean "A."

That is what I figured. I just wanted to clarify.

And by "market," I don't necessarily mean the "profit-at-the-expense-of-the art" degradation of martial arts. What I mean is the culture of store front martial arts that all of us (with the exception of a few) participate in. My point is that in this culture a black belt doesn't mean what it used to mean. And being a student of sociology and cultures, I can tell you it is impossible to go back. Future leaders among our art will be the ones who are able to chart a healthy development forward integrating the well established commercial aspect of martial arts with the tradition of excellence. Academia accomplishes this with honor roles, presidents lists, special awards and the like. How might martial arts recognize black belts who have achieved a higher level of excellence and dedication than ones who just met the basic standards the marketplace has come to expect for a black belt?

My only comment to this is that the 'watering down' of the meaning of the black belt has probably put it where originally was intended to be in the first place and where, from what I understand, it is in Japan.

It was never intended to convey "superman" status to the wearer. It simply meant advanced student.

Really, I think that what needs to be addressed is not the meaning of a black belt but the two-fold issue of schools using it as a money making tool at the student's expense and the quality of training in the kyu grade material that one learns leading up to black belt; "profit-at-the-expense-of-the art" as you nicely put it. And that occurrs in many areas well before the student gets to black belt.

Essentially, the main issue is lousy schools, not the belt itself. But just because a lousy school puts a black belt on a subpar student does not mean that a good school's black belt is worth any less. As Stonecold said, the belt just means that you have completed the basic material. Saying that you have a black belt is like saying that you have a diploma; one school's basic curriculum and capability of teaching it will be different than anothers. Thus, having a black belt, period, is less telling than having a black belt from a particular school. There are schools where if you say, I have a black belt from Master such and such, people in the know will be polite and smile, but not take you seriously. There are schools where if you say that you are a black belt student of Master so and so, however, you are taken very seriously. The belt only has meaning within the school where it was given. Who it is that trained you and gave you the belt is more important than what color the belt is.

I am far, far less concerned about a solidly trained and enthusiastic ten year old receiving a black belt than I am about a really lackluster twenty five year old receiving one.

Daniel

 

[ynnad]

That is what I figured. I just wanted to clarify.


My only comment to this is that the 'watering down' of the meaning of the black belt has probably put it where originally was intended to be in the first place and where, from what I understand, it is in Japan.

It was never intended to convey "superman" status to the wearer. It simply meant advanced student.

Really, I think that what needs to be addressed is not the meaning of a black belt but the two-fold issue of schools using it as a money making tool at the student's expense and the quality of training in the kyu grade material that one learns leading up to black belt; "profit-at-the-expense-of-the art" as you nicely put it. And that occurrs in many areas well before the student gets to black belt.

Essentially, the main issue is lousy schools, not the belt itself. But just because a lousy school puts a black belt on a subpar student does not mean that a good school's black belt is worth any less. As Stonecold said, the belt just means that you have completed the basic material. Saying that you have a black belt is like saying that you have a diploma; one school's basic curriculum and capability of teaching it will be different than anothers. Thus, having a black belt, period, is less telling than having a black belt from a particular school. There are schools where if you say, I have a black belt from Master such and such, people in the know will be polite and smile, but not take you seriously. There are schools where if you say that you are a black belt student of Master so and so, however, you are taken very seriously. The belt only has meaning within the school where it was given. Who it is that trained you and gave you the belt is more important than what color the belt is.

I am far, far less concerned about a solidly trained and enthusiastic ten year old receiving a black belt than I am about a really lackluster twenty five year old receiving one.

Daniel

Great summary of your position. Very reasonable perspective.