What MUST be taught in a Self-Defense Course?

[MI_martialist]

How basic do you think you can get with absolute neophytes and several weapons in 2 hours? You'll give them a 2-minute demo, hand them the weapon, and they'll have about 15 minutes to use it. That's not a useful timeframe for teaching from scratch. About all you can hope to do with physical stuff in a 2-hour class is pass along ways to use what they already know, or give an introduction to what they may want to learn later.

Not really, but one can get very basic...

 

[MI_martialist]

Um no. First more than a couple of us have spoken about what we think can be taught in that block, not simply what can not.

Second a preconceived notion is an opinion formed beforehand without adequate evidence. The people commenting on what can and can not be taught adequately in a two hour block are experienced Martial Artists and fighters, some of them even Instructors with a focus on self defense. That is speaking from experience, experience is evidence ergo it is not based on a "preconceived notion" of the Martial Arts.

The assumption everyone is making is that they know what weapons will be used, what format will be used, if any "techniques" will be taught, the effectiveness or lack thereof of any technique teaching...no one has even come close to asking a basic question like...what weapons would you use? What would you do with those weapons? What is the goal of the session? Simply because everyone assumes they already know...not basic enough.

 

[Juany118]

The assumption everyone is making is that they know what weapons will be used, what format will be used, if any "techniques" will be taught, the effectiveness or lack thereof of any technique teaching...no one has even come close to asking a basic question like...what weapons would you use? What would you do with those weapons? What is the goal of the session? Simply because everyone assumes they already know...not basic enough.

Sorry but I don't care what weapon or technique is used. I have been a soldier, am a cop and throughout a martial artist. You are the one with preconceptions that appear to be based on limited experience.

As an example, I would challenge you to name a weapon which would be used in such a seminar that one of us who have been responding to this thread don't have experience with. As for the goal, we have answered that, indirectly by saying "you can teach X" in a two hour block. The other things not so much.

 

[MI_martialist]

Sorry but I don't care what weapon or technique is used. I have been a soldier, am a cop and throughout a martial artist. You are the one with preconceptions that appear to be based on limited experience.

As an example, I would challenge you to name a weapon which would be used in such a seminar that one of us who have been responding to this thread don't have experience with. As for the goal, we have answered that, indirectly by saying "you can teach X" in a two hour block. The other things not so much.

I am confused...where did I say you did not have experience with a weapon?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The assumption everyone is making is that they know what weapons will be used, what format will be used, if any "techniques" will be taught, the effectiveness or lack thereof of any technique teaching...no one has even come close to asking a basic question like...what weapons would you use? What would you do with those weapons? What is the goal of the session? Simply because everyone assumes they already know...not basic enough.

No, I've made precisely NONE of those assumptions. I'm saying that it doesn't matter which weapons you choose, which techniques you choose, and what teaching methods you use. In 2 hours, you cannot teach beginners useful techniques with multiple weapons. It has to do with understanding how the brain learns physical skills. That's just not enough time for anything new.

 

[MI_martialist]

No, I've made precisely NONE of those assumptions. I'm saying that it doesn't matter which weapons you choose, which techniques you choose, and what teaching methods you use. In 2 hours, you cannot teach beginners useful techniques with multiple weapons. It has to do with understanding how the brain learns physical skills. That's just not enough time for anything new.

So, once again, you are making assumptions that are not true. Who said there was anything new? Who says there is any learning happening? Not enough basic thinking.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So, once again, you are making assumptions that are not true. Who said there was anything new? Who says there is any learning happening? Not enough basic thinking.

Since the title of the thread includes the word "taught", that's what we should be talking about. If there's no learning, there's no teaching. If you're not introducing anything new, then you're assuming the participants are all capable of at least a few techniques with weapons, which would be a bad assumption for all but a few audiences.

Try being less insulting in your replies. It does nothing to make you sound more intelligent.

 

[Brian King]

For a two hour block of instruction- getting them to understand when they have the right to fight/get physical according to the local laws and customs (legal, social, moral). Run them through scenarios where they get loud and put up fence, disengage, or avoid. Have your 'assaulting dummy' well trained in how to approach the folks to get their nervous system engaged and then let them practice breathing and talking to regain 'calmness' and clarity of thought. Do not have an assaulting dummy that must always get physical. Wolfing is deep enough for such a short block.

Give examples of people engaging in violence (but not necessarily physical) and get the class to discuss the examples. For example people getting into someone's space to argue is a form of violence that often is answered with violence even though the person that was originally doing the arguing did not think that they were engaging in violence, or that it might be answered with physical violence. Give examples of social and asocial violence and get them thinking about how they might respond to being engaged in or witnessing such violence.

The class should get them thinking about self defense but not leave them afraid. It should help to get them to start noticing situations and circumstances around them. It should be fun and empowering not fear educing or endangering.

Good luck with your class
Regards
Brian King

 

[Juany118]

I am confused...where did I say you did not have experience with a weapon?

My point was you said "you don't know what weapons maybe be used..." Etc (a paraphrase). The point is, collectively, between me, @JowGaWolf and @gpseymour we likely cover everything you can think of, GP has his own school, so please rather than keep saying we don't know, tell us something that could be taught in 2 hours to practical effectiveness in regards to physical techniques.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

For a two hour block of instruction- getting them to understand when they have the right to fight/get physical according to the local laws and customs (legal, social, moral). Run them through scenarios where they get loud and put up fence, disengage, or avoid. Have your 'assaulting dummy' well trained in how to approach the folks to get their nervous system engaged and then let them practice breathing and talking to regain 'calmness' and clarity of thought. Do not have an assaulting dummy that must always get physical. Wolfing is deep enough for such a short block.

Give examples of people engaging in violence (but not necessarily physical) and get the class to discuss the examples. For example people getting into someone's space to argue is a form of violence that often is answered with violence even though the person that was originally doing the arguing did not think that they were engaging in violence, or that it might be answered with physical violence. Give examples of social and asocial violence and get them thinking about how they might respond to being engaged in or witnessing such violence.

The class should get them thinking about self defense but not leave them afraid. It should help to get them to start noticing situations and circumstances around them. It should be fun and empowering not fear educing or endangering.

Good luck with your class
Regards
Brian King

This is an excellent suggestion.

 

[marques]

...How long did it take you to be able to use a technique in sparring or competition?...

That leads to other interesting points:

- There is knowing 1) the technique alone, 2) then applying the technique in combination, 3) applying in sparring, 4) applying in competition, 5) and applying in self-defence or war...

- Another thing (quite similar) is we may be able to KO, brake articulations, kill..., but capable? In wich circumstances? Rory Miller asked in a book, 'In which circumstances would you kill?' It was an interesting philosophical reflexion and the conclusions useless, I hope... I am digressing.

The first point is more about 'can we apply under fear, adrenaline?' The second point is more about conflictual values (we may think so strongly that killing is bad that we may be killed instead of kill...).

PS: Reading myself, I found to much "kill" here. But it is only the higher end of 'self-defence'! We should not (need to) worry too much about that...

 

[drop bear]

Yeah I am getting pretty conceptual here.

 

[MI_martialist]

My point was you said "you don't know what weapons maybe be used..." Etc (a paraphrase). The point is, collectively, between me, @JowGaWolf and @gpseymour we likely cover everything you can think of, GP has his own school, so please rather than keep saying we don't know, tell us something that could be taught in 2 hours to practical effectiveness in regards to physical techniques.

I have not said that you do not know. What I have said is that you are too stuck in your preconceived notions to even bother asking what weapons, and in what way would their use be instructed...you have finally gotten to that point, but certainly not from a standpoint of wanting to know and understand, but rather from a standpoint of you collectively already know everything so you are challenging me.

 

[Juany118]

I have not said that you do not know. What I have said is that you are too stuck in your preconceived notions to even bother asking what weapons, and in what way would their use be instructed...you have finally gotten to that point, but certainly not from a standpoint of wanting to know and understand, but rather from a standpoint of you collectively already know everything so you are challenging me.

Here is how a discussion like this actually works.

1. A premise is put forward, questions are asked. In this case

I am teaching a very short Self-Defense Class (2 hours) in late November and was going over my past courses' syllabus and wanted to fine tune it a bit.

What do you think MUST be taught in a quick and dirty Self-Defense seminar?

The people attending will likely have no experience in Martial Arts or Self-Defense and most likely will not be following up with any additional training either. What would you offer someone in 2 hours time that could assist them in defending themselves in the futute?

2. People based on their experience answer the question.

3. If someone disagrees with these conclusions you don't simply dismiss them by saying "preconceived" this or that in what amounts to fiat statements, instead you propose what alternatively could be taught in the context of the original question.

Now I am all for learning new stuff, many a post on these forums have opened my eyes to other possibilities. If you have something that fits into the last half of #3 I would actually be very interested in reading it.

 

[MI_martialist]

Here is how a discussion like this actually works.

1. A premise is put forward, questions are asked. In this case

2. People based on their experience answer the question.

3. If someone disagrees with these conclusions you don't simply dismiss them by saying "preconceived" this or that in what amounts to fiat statements, instead you propose what alternatively could be taught in the context of the original question.

Now I am all for learning new stuff, many a post on these forums have opened my eyes to other possibilities. If you have something that fits into the last half of #3 I would actually be very interested in reading it.

If I may:

1. A question was asked.
2. I posted my thoughts on the issue
3. Immediately I was told that it was not practical, and would not work...no where, not once did anyone say "what do you mean"? or "what weapons" or "what techniques" etc...nothing...

So, I am a little confused by your post as all I did was post my thoughts, then when no one was interested in understanding any part of what I posted because they all own schools, have experience, etc., it is true that it is preconceived notions that are tainting the thought process.

So, since you asked...let's start with a stick, or a pen, or a flashlight...

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If I may:

1. A question was asked.
2. I posted my thoughts on the issue
3. Immediately I was told that it was not practical, and would not work...no where, not once did anyone say "what do you mean"? or "what weapons" or "what techniques" etc...nothing...

So, I am a little confused by your post as all I did was post my thoughts, then when no one was interested in understanding any part of what I posted because they all own schools, have experience, etc., it is true that it is preconceived notions that are tainting the thought process.

So, since you asked...let's start with a stick, or a pen, or a flashlight...

And do what with it?

 

[oftheherd1]

So, once again, you are making assumptions that are not true. Who said there was anything new? Who says there is any learning happening? Not enough basic thinking.

Perhaps it would help my understanding if you told me (and others) what basics you are referring to. You keep saying basics, but I don't recall you ever defining what they are in the context of this thread.

 

[Juany118]

If I may:

1. A question was asked.
2. I posted my thoughts on the issue
3. Immediately I was told that it was not practical, and would not work...no where, not once did anyone say "what do you mean"? or "what weapons" or "what techniques" etc...nothing...

So, I am a little confused by your post as all I did was post my thoughts, then when no one was interested in understanding any part of what I posted because they all own schools, have experience, etc., it is true that it is preconceived notions that are tainting the thought process.

So, since you asked...let's start with a stick, or a pen, or a flashlight...

No you simply said that other people were making assumptions based on preconceived notions, that is not thoughts on the original question. However, again, if you want to actually note "basic" techniques that could be taught in the context of OP I would be interested to see them.

 

[wingchun100]

If I may:

1. A question was asked.
2. I posted my thoughts on the issue
3. Immediately I was told that it was not practical, and would not work...no where, not once did anyone say "what do you mean"? or "what weapons" or "what techniques" etc...nothing...

So, I am a little confused by your post as all I did was post my thoughts, then when no one was interested in understanding any part of what I posted because they all own schools, have experience, etc., it is true that it is preconceived notions that are tainting the thought process.

So, since you asked...let's start with a stick, or a pen, or a flashlight...

I don't think we need to ask what weapons because in 2 hours you will not be able to show enough. Now if you did only one weapon and showed one use for it, or if you picked several weapons that were similar and could be used in the same way, THEN you might have something there.

 

[wingchun100]

For a two hour block of instruction- getting them to understand when they have the right to fight/get physical according to the local laws and customs (legal, social, moral). Run them through scenarios where they get loud and put up fence, disengage, or avoid. Have your 'assaulting dummy' well trained in how to approach the folks to get their nervous system engaged and then let them practice breathing and talking to regain 'calmness' and clarity of thought. Do not have an assaulting dummy that must always get physical. Wolfing is deep enough for such a short block.

Give examples of people engaging in violence (but not necessarily physical) and get the class to discuss the examples. For example people getting into someone's space to argue is a form of violence that often is answered with violence even though the person that was originally doing the arguing did not think that they were engaging in violence, or that it might be answered with physical violence. Give examples of social and asocial violence and get them thinking about how they might respond to being engaged in or witnessing such violence.

The class should get them thinking about self defense but not leave them afraid. It should help to get them to start noticing situations and circumstances around them. It should be fun and empowering not fear educing or endangering.

Good luck with your class
Regards
Brian King

Good idea...except for when it comes to what would be legal or not, I would not bring that up unless the person leading the class (1) is a lawyer or someone in law enforcement who knows the laws, or (2) is able to bring an attorney to address the class.