What makes a Master?

[skribs]

I could've sworn there was a recent discussion on this topic, but the most recent version of this thread I could find was back in 2006. That thread is old enough to be an adult today. I thought I'd revive this question for current members.

What makes a Master? More specifically: what makes a good one? (Or Professor, Sensei, Sifu, Level 5 Wizard Extraordinaire, whatever it is in your art).

I know the simple answer is based on being Black Belt, or 4th or 5th degree and/or completing some class. But what does it really mean? What is it that separates the honorary title from the normal coach or instructor? What is it that separates a good honored teacher from a mediocre or a bad one?

I may or may not have an essay due in the intermediate future that's prompting this question.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

What makes a Master?

Someone can

- fight.
- teach his/her students how to fight.

These requirements eliminate those who:

- can fight, but doesn't know how to teach.
- knows how to teach but is not a fighter himself/herself.

 

[HighKick]

I could've sworn there was a recent discussion on this topic, but the most recent version of this thread I could find was back in 2006. That thread is old enough to be an adult today. I thought I'd revive this question for current members.

What makes a Master? More specifically: what makes a good one? (Or Professor, Sensei, Sifu, Level 5 Wizard Extraordinaire, whatever it is in your art).

I know the simple answer is based on being Black Belt, or 4th or 5th degree and/or completing some class. But what does it really mean? What is it that separates the honorary title from the normal coach or instructor? What is it that separates a good honored teacher from a mediocre or a bad one?

I may or may not have an essay due in the intermediate future that's prompting this question.

For me, it is someone who has a deep, deep knowledge in a specific field AND enough real-world, hands-on experience to apply this knowledge in a tangible way. It is a plus if they can effectively teach their knowledge to someone else.
Not all masters teach.

Yes, I believe this takes decades for nearly everyone.

 

[mograph]

One might want to define a master in a discipline by that individual's attitude and behaviour towards the discipline under discussion.
To me, it doesn't matter how much they know, or what they've done, but how they think and act (or thought and acted if they're very old, or deceased) towards their discipline.

I would say that they show or have shown:

• character
• an ability to teach
• respect for competitors and students
• expertise

The first three are necessary, but not sufficient.
The last quality is probably what separates a master from a good teacher: degree of expertise.

Is there a hard barrier in terms of expertise? Once you get "here," you're now a master?
As we know, ask a master, and they wouldn't say they're a master, rather that their teacher was a master.

So I'd be careful to avoid saying that there's any such thing as an objective level called "master."
Rather, that one approaches mastery of that art. If they fit the categories above, they are approaching mastery.

But sure, in some cases, we can use the word as shorthand, as in "Yo-Yo Ma is a master of the cello."
I just don't think that we need to use the title "Master" as much as we do.

That's my opinion, of course.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Someone can

- fight.
- teach his/her students how to fight.

These requirements eliminate those who:

- can fight, but doesn't know how to teach.
- knows how to teach but is not a fighter himself/herself.

I like the description, but I place those qualifications as a good instructor/teacher. In our organization that is 3rd dan.

As I understand it, a master is a teacher of teachers, so IMHO, it is slightly more nuanced in both fighting skills and teaching skills, with arguably more emphasis on the latter. I think this is what Mograph was getting at as well; expertise, experience, etc.

 

[windwalker099]

But what does it really mean?

What makes a master.

An individual who has attained a high level of skill and knowledge in their field, formally acknowledged as such by their peers.
A master chef is recognized by other master chefs, not just food enthusiasts.

 

[Sammy Naur]

Master is one of those titles that can mean something real, or total nonsense. In martial arts there really are more fake masters than real ones imho.

To keepit real, it takes about 12,000 hours of training to become a master electrician, not including time "in belt" as a journeyman. This usually takes at least 7 years or more.
Even then, from a layman point of view, most people would consider even a skilled journeyman to be a master in the literal sense. Master electricians are typically supervisors, business owners, large scale project overseers, etc.

As a core grappling and boxing guy, doing Asian arts like Judo...there's typically no use of the term at all, unless the subject is very old and had it a long time.

I think the trouble with the term today especially in martial arts, is anyone can call themselves one, or grandmaster which is even worse. And then get a lot of people to nod and agree.

This is why I prefer titles like "coach" or "instructor". Master is a little creepy.

 

[Buka]

Masters come in all sorts of greatness.