What makes a Martial Art?????

[chrismay101]

So what exactly makes a martial art?

Is being able to jump in the air and do 100 spining kicks Break boards with your hands, arm locking someone?

Or is it being able to perform your arts Kata, Pattern, Forms, Tul's

Or is it a combination of both.

some of the MMA fighters are they martial artists? or are they just good fighters?
Im not talking about the guys who have learnt Taekwondo, Karate, Ju-jitsu or any of the other arts - got there Black belts then learnt another art.
I mean they Learnt how to kick, punch, grapple and thats it or are these the true martial artists?

Just want peoples opinions?
Please no arguments.

[Chizikunbo]

First and foremost RESPECT makes a martial artist, and seperates us from common street thugs, the second aspect is PHILOSOPHY, cause without philosophy we are just stylized brawlers...
--josh

[tellner]

This is where a little etymology can help. Back in the day Art meant great skill, generally of a sort which transcended mere technical perfection. Martial meant things associated with Mars, the god of war, but had conotations of physical conflict of other sorts. Someone with Art is a martial artist. The school or style is just someone's particular avenue to that exalted state. Throughout history students of any discipline start by copying the master. They learned the technical aspects of their practice, gained skill and eventually worked for him or set out on their own. Masters of Defense in the West and their equivalents elsewhere had similar schools although fewer of their students made a living at it than did the the blacksmiths, the bakers or even the fine and decorative artists.

So if you're learning the skills and understanding to help you master and gain Art in things related to combat or conflict - don't get me started on what constitutes "real" combat - you're doing a martial art. If you're making progress towards that you are a student of the martial arts. If you've gotten there and other people who have can recognize it then you are a martial artist.

Forms, breaking things, snappy delivery and a working knowledge of about fifty words in Korean may be useful means towards that goal. They are training aids in pursuit of Art in the old sense. Someone who doesn't have that but has the attributes and skills that will help him in whatever fight he's likely to get into is closer to the right track.

[Xue Sheng]

Said it before and I will say it again

Before coming to MT I would have said

martial arts

any of the traditional forms of Oriental self-defense or combat that utilize physical skill and coordination with or without weapons, as karate, aikido, judo, or kung fu, sometimes practiced as sport.

After coming to MT I now say

any of the traditional or non-traditional forms of self-defense or combat that require training and that utilize physical skill and coordination with or without weapons. Sometimes practiced as sport.

One of the things I train is Sanda, no forms and it is very much a martial art
Another thing I train is Xingyi which has forms and is very much a martial art
And another is Taiji which has a whole lot of forms and it too is very much a martial art.

Is MMA a martial art, I would say yes, very much so.

[tellner]

First and foremost RESPECT makes a martial artist, and seperates us from common street thugs, the second aspect is PHILOSOPHY, cause without philosophy we are just stylized brawlers...
--josh

I have a huge Honeydew list today, so you'll just get the short version.

First, not one in a thousand martial arts teachers knows the square root of diddly about philosophy, either homegrown or traditional. Rather fewer are qualified to instruct it. What passes for philosophy in most martial arts schools is few platitudes, some warmed over Zen by someone who has never spent a day sitting and staring at a wall, maybe a few quotes from the Tao Te Ching and speculations on the dojo kun.

Any practice taken far enough will lead one outside the purely physical and technical. You'll get insights and gain perspective about the outer world and the inner. If you know people who've gone through the same thing many will have reached similar conclusions through a similar process of development. When you're a student they will teach you things to keep
you headed in the right direction. This is true for any worthwhile practice from botany to barrel making.

If you're bumping up against mortality, profound emotional trauma and having to do terrible things on a regular basis it will be a lot more acute. That's why the Janissaries were tutored by Bektashi Sufis and why the Samurai practiced esoteric Buddhism. People like that need to find a way to live with these extremely unpleasant realities and maintain their humanity in the face of horrors which they may have to perform. There's also nothing quite like getting shot at to get you considering the bigger questions even if it's only "What happens when we die? Why am I holding this spear? Why didn't I stay on the farm, grow rice and marry the neighbor girl like Momma wanted me to?"

Of course, most people will not be professional soldiers or get in more than one or two life-threatening situations. Like the physical training the philosophical should be appropriate to your situation, your goals and your capacity. That's why there are different yogas for soldiers, peasants and priests. If you are going to be in combat every day for the next five years you need one thing. If you are taking up Oriental boxing as a hobby, a sport and a social activity you can probably get by at the fortune cookie level or use it as an excuse to study other interesting things. There's no need for the trauma of the other sort. And there's no reason to spend inordinate time and energy on it. If you're a competitive athlete you need the things that coaches have been doing for millenia. And if you want to be a conscious, complete, fully awakened human being martial arts can be a wonderful vehicle for that. Unless your teacher is also trained in an appropriate spiritual discipline it can be a very tough row to hoe. The overwhelming majority aren't no matter how many stripes they have on their fashionably frayed black belts.

Then there is the matter of "respect" and "humility". A lot of martial artists take great pride in their humility and are pretty arrogant about how humble they are. Unlike mere brawlers they are Martial Artists. They know the True Meaning of Respect. Hai, Sensei!

Big. ****ing. Deal.

Don't strain your arm patting yourself on the back.

If your school derives from mass physical training for soldiers there will be an emphasis on military style discipline. That means tearing someone down and destroying him so that he can be rebuilt into the sort of competent Pfc. who will stay in line, perform predictably and charge into cannon fire without a second thought. If that's what you want, the US Army is looking for people who want to serve their country. And they'll do a much better job because the training is designed by the best professionals in the business. You'll get the whole thing, not just bits of PT from someone else's army sixty years ago. Part of that training is reflexive obedience to authority. In many martial arts schools that constitutes "respect". "Salute the uniform, not the man" turns into neurotic performance and exaggeration of rituals connected with the training when it's divorced from actually going out onto the battlefield.

Outside of that it's mostly a matter of not being a complete *******. That's something that's harder than most of us imagine. Be polite and respectful to elders. Don't cause fights. Don't give offense that could cause fights unless you have a really good reason to start one. Be kind to those weaker than you. That's what a lot of this comes down to. It gets formalized because people want to make sure everyone's reading off the same page and because there are some pretty dimbulbs out there who need to have things made really really clear.

Look at wild animals. If they are hurt, they can't forage. If they can't forage they die. The more social they are the more mechanisms they have to keep from fighting unless they really have to. There are threat displays, dominance and submission displays, Don't Screw With Me displays, displacement gestures, appeasement gestures and all the rest. They're all ways of communicating intention and avoiding mistakes. It's not just the predators. Wildebeest do amazing jumping displays when predators get too close. They're saying "See how athletic I am? If you hunt me you'll get tired and won't eat today. So let's avoid the unpleasantness. Go eat him over there. He's kind of lame and scrawny."

Respect in this case means an understanding that the other guy can be dangerous. Because of that it's best not to underestimate him or get into a situation unless you've got a reason that outweighs the risks. That's what most of this comes down to, making sure people don't get into fights that they don't have to or shouldn't. Well, that and not being a jerk so that you will be able to function in the world. Different cultures have different ideas about exactly what that means, so there are different forms of respect and different standards about proper human relations. And they can look pretty weird when they're applied outside that culture.


Hell, here's a better example close to home. I spent a summer living with some friends. They had a cat. He was a huge, muscular small-animal-killing kind of ur-cat. He hadn't had his spark plugs since he was a kitten, but the queen cats would come around when they were in heat to look for him. He'd look at them as if to say "I don't know what you want from me, lady." :) He wasn't a house cat. Definitely outdoors. And he would do things like push his food dish out so that birds would come and eat from it while he lay in ambush.

One night we heard sounds like something out of the Christian hell. He was in the garage pretty cut up. There was his orange fur. There was gray fur. There were cat claws. There were bits of racoon claw. After that this young boar racoon would come in every night. He wouldn't attack the cat. He'd go over to the food dish. He and the cat would exchange a look. He'd take two mouthfulls of kibble and head off. The cat respected the fact that the coon really could have killed and eaten him. The coon understood that if he did he'd be too badly jacked up to find food and would probably starve. In the world of combat that is the essence of respect.

People always bring up trash-talking MMA competitors. Some athletes are good people. Others are prima donnas. Others trash talk to establish dominance over opponents or as a marketing ploy. They are all tactics for competition, part of the game. So a lot of the whole "They are not Martial Artists who understand Respect" is really asking the wrong question. Besides, a lot of the really Great Masters of Old were arrogant, nasty, spiteful, violent, drunken skirt-chasing sons of bitches.

And that is about all I have to say now about philosophy and respect.

[xTNVx NirVana]

Wow, nice speech.
Bigger than I would write for a school report sometimes
Hehe

[kuntawguro]

wind him up and watch him go!!!

[Kacey]

From Merriam-Webster:


Main Entry: martial art
(http://m-w.com/dictionary/martial%20art)Function: noun
: any of several arts of combat and self defense (as karate and judo) that are widely practiced as sport
- martial artist noun

This is, of course, the most basic definition. Most people would add things to it - for myself, I would add that to be a good martial art, and therefore a good martial artist, there must be some measure of morality, of proper use of the skills obtained - otherwise, you are, IMHO, a street brawler who fights for the pleasure of fighting.

[exile]

not one in a thousand martial arts teachers knows the square root of diddly about philosophy, either homegrown or traditional. Rather fewer are qualified to instruct it. What passes for philosophy in most martial arts schools is few platitudes, some warmed over Zen by someone who has never spent a day sitting and staring at a wall, maybe a few quotes from the Tao Te Ching and speculations on the dojo kun.
...a lot of the really Great Masters of Old were arrogant, nasty, spiteful, violent, drunken skirt-chasing sons of bitches.

And that is about all I have to say now about philosophy and respect.

I'm not sure anything else needs to be said. From their own writings, and what was reported about them by their contemporaries, Bushi Matsumura, Anko Itosu, Chotoku Kyan and Choki Motobu were hard-fighting, hard drinking street brawlers who fought out of both necessity and pleasure, or something related to it. There is no question they did `fieldwork' in their exploration of karate's technical possibilities: as Bruce Clayton reports of Motobu, possibly Itosu's most gifted student ever, `every time Itosu taught him a new technique, Motobu would rush down to Shuri's red-light district and try it out'; he also cites Mark Bishop to the effect that `Kyan admonished his students that hard drinking and fornication with prostitutes were an essential part of their martial arts training', and by all accounts he practiced what he preached. Matsumura and Itosu were both ruthless fighters who dispatched their opponents pitilessly and swiftly, without worrying too much about minimizing damage. Taken as a group, the founders of modern karate and its Japanese and Korean variants were harsh, tough fighters who would have laughed in your face if you tried to tell them that respect, humility, or anything else except for fighting skill, were essential to being a martial artist.

Funakoshi sold karate to the Japanese education and military bureaucracy as a character-builder, sure. But as Bill Burgar observes, `character building' had a somewhat different meaning in 1920s Japan than it does in the modern West, something more along the lines of trainability for, and acquiesence in, self-sacrifice in the service of the Emperor (in particular, self-sacrifice on the battlefield). And Funakoshi sold the same story to the American occupiers of Japan after the war for a different purpose, as part of a con job that karate wasn't, after all, about training people to fight effectively. This allowed him and his students to keep teaching it during the postwar phase when the Allied authorities were demilitarizing Japan down to the bone and suppressing every vestige of preparedness for combat that they could find.

Anyone is free to ignore these facts, of course. But I don't think that a definition of `martial art' which excludes the founders of Okinawan karate, Shotokan and related Japanese styles, and the Korean arts which became Tang Soo Do and Taekwondo, is going to have much credibility, eh?

[Xue Sheng]

I'm not sure anything else needs to be said. From their own writings, and what was reported about them by their contemporaries, Bushi Matsumura, Anko Itosu, Chotoku Kyan and Choki Motobu were hard-fighting, hard drinking street brawlers who fought out of both necessity and pleasure, or something related to it. There is no question they did `fieldwork' in their exploration of karate's technical possibilities: as Bruce Clayton reports of Motobu, possibly Itosu's most gifted student ever, `every time Itosu taught him a new technique, Motobu would rush down to Shuri's red-light district and try it out'; he also cites Mark Bishop to the effect that `Kyan admonished his students that hard drinking and fornication with prostitutes were an essential part of their martial arts training', and by all accounts he practiced what he preached. Matsumura and Itosu were both ruthless fighters who dispatched their opponents pitilessly and swiftly, without worrying too much about minimizing damage. Taken as a group, the founders of modern karate and its Japanese and Korean variants were harsh, tough fighters who would have laughed in your face if you tried to tell them that respect, humility, or anything else except for fighting skill, were essential to being a martial artist.

Funakoshi sold karate to the Japanese education and military bureaucracy as a character-builder, sure. But as Bill Burgar observes, `character building' had a somewhat different meaning in 1920s Japan than it does in the modern West, something more along the lines of trainability for, and acquiesence in, self-sacrifice in the service of the Emperor (in particular, self-sacrifice on the battlefield). And Funakoshi sold the same story to the American occupiers of Japan after the war for a different purpose, as part of a con job that karate wasn't, after all, about training people to fight effectively. This allowed him and his students to keep teaching it during the postwar phase when the Allied authorities were demilitarizing Japan down to the bone and suppressing every vestige of preparedness for combat that they could find.

Anyone is free to ignore these facts, of course. But I don't think that a definition of `martial art' which excludes the founders of Okinawan karate, Shotokan and related Japanese styles, and the Korean arts which became Tang Soo Do and Taekwondo, is going to have much credibility, eh?

Well of course it was that way in Japan…. OBVIOUSLY!!!!… Unlike China, they were all Confucian, Buddhist, and Taoist scholars…. :)

Aw who am I trying to kid :uhyeah:

Bottom-line here folks is that martial arts of old were designed for fighting, killing and survival not spiritual well being or honor. I am not as up on the history of Japanese martial arts as I am China but if I had to guess the whole honor thing came along with Bushido.

But when you are talking any thing from East Asia they do not separate things like we do so it can be said that Taoism and Buddhism are part of the martial arts of East Asia. This does not mean that every martial artist is a Taoist, Buddhist, Confucian or gives a hoot about honor. They just don’t see the separation between things like we do in the west.

So in China you have very well trained Taoist martial artists (Wudang) and you have very well trained Buddhist martial artists (Shaolin). Both are very religious both are martial artists but that does not mean that the guy down the street that is trained in Long Fist or Xingyi is either. It also does not mean that either Taoist or Buddhist will not kick your butt should they see fit or that they have any concern about honor what so ever beyond that which they feel is directly associated with Taoism or Buddhism and of course ancestor stuff and the Emperor, but they could be just as arrogant as the next guy.

[kidswarrior]

This is where a little etymology can help. Back in the day Art meant great skill, generally of a sort which transcended mere technical perfection. Martial meant things associated with Mars, the god of war, but had conotations of physical conflict of other sorts. Someone with Art is a martial artist. The school or style is just someone's particular avenue to that exalted state. Throughout history students of any discipline start by copying the master. They learned the technical aspects of their practice, gained skill and eventually worked for him or set out on their own. Masters of Defense in the West and their equivalents elsewhere had similar schools although fewer of their students made a living at it than did the the blacksmiths, the bakers or even the fine and decorative artists.

So if you're learning the skills and understanding to help you master and gain Art in things related to combat or conflict - don't get me started on what constitutes "real" combat - you're doing a martial art. If you're making progress towards that you are a student of the martial arts. If you've gotten there and other people who have can recognize it then you are a martial artist.

Forms, breaking things, snappy delivery and a working knowledge of about fifty words in Korean may be useful means towards that goal. They are training aids in pursuit of Art in the old sense. Someone who doesn't have that but has the attributes and skills that will help him in whatever fight he's likely to get into is closer to the right track.

OMG, I agree with tellner. Nuff said. :cool:

And anyone who can work 'etymology' into a MT discussion, well, that's extra credit. Now the long rant on philosophy which came later, I don't know. Didn't read the whole thing.

[exile]

Bottom-line here folks is that martial arts of old were designed for fighting, killing and survival not spiritual well being or honor. I am not as up on the history of Japanese martial arts as I am China but if I had to guess the whole honor thing came along with Bushido.


Hey, XS, not to derail the thread or anything... but did you just score your third gold star???

[Flying Crane]

The concepts of Honor, Respect, and Character-building in martial arts really came about with the modern age of effective police force and judicial system, which were designed to take on the roll of protection of the populace and retribution for crimes done. Theoretically, the individual was no longer supposed to take responsibility for their own safety (of course reality and theory are often at opposite ends of the spectrum), so the focus in training began to change.

On one level, the newer law enforcement systems are effective enough that most people do not have a regular reason to fight anybody. This gave people a reason to become introspective and come up with new reasons to justify training. So many people began making the philosophical connection, albeit somewhat forced. It also paved the way for karate daycare and the sensei as glorified babysitter. Martial arts did not need to prove their worth any longer, in order to survive. According to the new philosophy of training, martial arts aren't even about fighting anymore, and some would have you believe that THEY NEVER EVER WERE!

In old China, every village or clan had its own method of fighting. This is why we see so many different Chinese systems today, altho many are probably very similar to one another. But this was the first line of defense against bandits, marauders, and invading warlords. Their methods were designed to kill as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. After all, it was probably a three-week hike to the next larger town to get the local magistrate to come out with a group of soldiers/police to protect the citizenry. A bit late by then. The people needed to defend themselves, to the extreme.

[tellner]

Well Kacey, I'm not being negative about practicing martial arts. Even when it's tedious and difficult martial arts practice is about as much fun as you can have with all of your clothes on. It's a great hobby. If you have good teachers like I am blessed with you can get some skills with depth and learn how to be a better fighter. And as a discipline, not for discipline but as a discipline it can incidentally be a great vehicle for making some very worthwhile changes in yourself. For me there's also a religious aspect. My most deeply held beliefs require some sort of service to promote good and prevent evil. Providing for the common defense of good people helps fulfill that obligation.

Philosophy? Yes, it can be a vehicle for that, too. A lot of things that were woo-woo mumbo-jumbo and horse apples turn out to be simple matter of fact truths. At the proper time and in the proper measure the mental and spiritual training work synergetically with the physical. That depends on having the right sort of teacher. You can do it yourself, but then the teacher and the student both have to be the right sort of person :)

What do I dislike, maybe even despise? Lots of things. For instance, if I ever find the guy who invented the blow in cards in magazines or Canter and Siegel (who invented spamming) there may well be blood on the floor :ak47:

In this case what I hate are lies and nonsense designed to turn people into things. Most martial arts history is faked and prettied up. A lot of the "traditions", "philosophy", "respect" and ritualized trappings do not serve any useful purpose. They are there to make people unthinkingly obedient. Or they become an end in themselves. The more elaborate and rigid they become the easier it is to denigrate anyone who doesn't quite measure up. The more one's quality as a martial artist depends on following a code of dogma and ritual and the less on her actual qualities as a human being and fighter the crazier the whole thing gets. A lot of the supposed ancient traditions seem downright bizarre to people from the original cultures. They've taken on a life of their own in the minds of latter-day foreign practitioners. That life gets further and further from original intent.

Sometimes the original intent isn't all that hot. Others have alluded to the uses of what Draeger would call "Modern Budo" as tools to turn people into self-sacrificing machines. The advanced Buddhist idea of detachment becomes willingness to die for the State. Loyalty becomes subservience. Etiquette becomes a series of stupid status games based on secret knowledge of arbitrary rituals. Histories get invented to make local boxing the culmination of a 2000 or 4000 year unbroken history. This makes certain people falsely proud and everyone else seem a little less while bullying the faithful into giving up their critical faculties. After all, who are insignificant you to question the wisdom of millenia?

All of these things detract from the martial arts. They make unimportant things seem vital and cause people to lose their capacity to perceive things clearly.

My teacher's teacher has said a lot of very wise things over the years and the usual fraction of stuff that's nonsense. One of them was an unvarnished piece of The Straight Dope(tm): "The truth is hard enough. Don't feed them ********."

Ritual behavior disconnected from purpose is ********. So are things that actively make a worse fighter (in whatever arena the person is planning to fight in) for some abstruse senseless rationalization. So is pride of the sort masquerading as humility. So is mindless obedience to whomever is in authority even when there is evidence that they are leading you off the edge of a cliff. So are things which make you deny reality in favor of parrotting what you have been told. "Oh, that's not real martial arts. It's just fighting. Don't worry about it. Wave your arms and legs in patterns you don't understand and feel superior to him," is only one of the more obvious examples.

This stuff is hard enough when it's taught and done right. If you've got an interest in prevailing or even surviving in the conflict you are preparing for you don't have time for things that make you worse or blinder and stupider. You don't have the luxury of denying reality or doing things that really don't have a function, especially when you aren't experienced enough to tell the difference. If it does, then do it. If it doesn't, there's no reason to propagate the error by pushing it on the next generation of practitioners.

Do I respect my teachers? Of course. Beyond the normal human courtesy everyone starts out with it's based on my experience with them and their record of showing they deserve it. Do I respect the rights and prerogatives of others? Hope so. Do I respect everyone I cross arms or get in a fight with? Damn skippy I do. I respect the fact that they are dangerous and show that respect by not pulling punches or letting up as long as they are a danger. Maybe some day I'll find someone whom I can "fight with contempt" as my guru puts it. But I'm not holding my breath over that one.

Beyond that, what sort of respect should a person give? How does putting reasonable limits on it make me negative about martial arts?

Here endeth The Rant :angel:

[exile]

The concepts of Honor, Respect, and Character-building in martial arts really came about with the modern age of effective police force and judicial system, which were designed to take on the roll of protection of the populace and retribution for crimes done. Theoretically, the individual was no longer supposed to take responsibility for their own safety (of course reality and theory are often at opposite ends of the spectrum), so the focus in training began to change.

On one level, the newer law enforcement systems are effective enough that most people do not have a regular reason to fight anybody. This gave people a reason to become introspective and come up with new reasons to justify training. So many people began making the philosophical connection, albeit somewhat forced. It also paved the way for karate daycare and the sensei as glorified babysitter. Martial arts did not need to prove their worth any longer, in order to survive. According to the new philosophy of training, martial arts aren't even about fighting anymore, and some would have you believe that THEY NEVER EVER WERE!

In old China, every village or clan had its own method of fighting. This is why we see so many different Chinese systems today, altho many are probably very similar to one another. But this was the first line of defense against bandits, marauders, and invading warlords. Their methods were designed to kill as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. After all, it was probably a three-week hike to the next larger town to get the local magistrate to come out with a group of soldiers/police to protect the citizenry. A bit late by then. The people needed to defend themselves, to the extreme.

Exactly right, and this was just what I was thinking of in connection with the different contexts in which TMAs were first created in Asia as vs. those which now support them in the modern West. I strongly suspect that, as with many things, the TMAs have been recruited to satisfy certain romantic yearnings that members of our (post)industrial urban societies harbor, which all our sophisticated (and extremely successful) reductionist views of the universe—and our place within it—just can't address. The immense popularity of Tolkien's work, and other fantasies incorporating essentially feudal ideals of chivalry, fealty and all the rest, is another expression of these same longings for a kind of heroic way of life that seems utterly impossible now (and in fact never really existed historically). But for some reason, we seem to want badly the possibility of such a way of life, of some kind...

The TMAs play perfectly into these vague aspirations, and the thoroughly fictitious codes of completely idealized ancient warriors and fighters wind up serving the same end as the fantasy medievalism, with the extra benefit that people can add a strong dose of humility, self-denial and wisdom—not exactly the strong points of the western heroic tradition, even in Arthurian legend, except in its most absurdly romanticized form!—into the mix. But the history of the TMAs and their practitioners, so far as we can document, is very much as you say in all the countries where they originated. They were harsh, brutal systems of self-defense designed for those harsh, brutal circumstances that most people were forced to live in throughout their lives.

Tellner's point about what `martial' (referring to combat) and `art' (referring to a well developed set of skills, as in e.g., `domestic arts' etc.) mean in combination really contains the answer to the OP's question, I believe. A martial art is a well-developed system of combat skills that has been tested by the experience of a sufficient number of fighters over time to have some claims to effectiveness in use in a violent physical confrontation (and thus has enough breadth and depth to provide resources to defend against a wide variety of common attacking moves). A martial artist is someone who has, to some degree or another, mastered such a system. Anything further you want to add on... well, that's up to you. But I don't think it makes sense to deny the description `martial art' to anything which meets this `minimalist definition', because so far as I can see, that definition correspnds to the common properties of the things we call martial arts. I certainly don't think there's the slightest historical justification for demanding training in, or knowledge of, Asian philosophical/religious/cosmological/whatever thought, or saintly humility, or any of the rest. I'm not saying that such knowledge or saintliness isn't admirable, just that it doesn't have any more to do with the TMAs than it does with other useful skill systems such as chess or skiing...

[tellner]

I propose that Exile, Flying Crane, Xue Sheng and I form a cranky-yet-heroic band known as "The Four Cynical Curmudgeons". We can travel the Intrawebs fighting naivete and squashing innocent enthusiasm wherever it rears its head. We can have cool names like "Feet of Clay" and "Captain Verbosity" and RantGirl (or RantBoy depending).

[chrismay101]

Tellner.

thanks for the replys you must have alot of time to waste! just kidding!

Is a kick just a kick? Is one persons round house kick the same as another persons turning kick?

[Xue Sheng]

I propose that Exile, Flying Crane, Xue Sheng and I form a cranky-yet-heroic band known as "The Four Cynical Curmudgeons". We can travel the Intrawebs fighting naivete and squashing innocent enthusiasm wherever it rears its head. We can have cool names like "Feet of Clay" and "Captain Verbosity" and RantGirl (or RantBoy depending).

I Prefer “Captain Reality” or simply "His High Omnipotent Lord, Master and Evil Wizard of Xuefu”.... actually I prefer the second one over the first

[Bigshadow]

Martial means War or war-like. People who are war-like are warriors. Warriors by and large protect others. Those are "Martial" artists. Then there are those who are in it for themselves. For them it is about "Me". My title, my rank, my trophies, my score, my ego, etc.

Certainly martial artists can, do, and will protect themselves, but they give of themselves as well in times of need. They protect those who cannot protect themselves. They save lives, including the ones that would do them harm, if at all possible. There is a balance between self and others.

Art is another giving endeavor. Artists create things for other's enjoyment. They give of themselves. Music, painting, drawing, flower arranging, etc. These people learn and do these and express themselves through their actions for other's to enjoy life. Again, I go back to Protecting life is what Martial Arts are about.

Things like kicks, punches, weapons, throws, and the myriad of other things that make up an art, is just but a note, a strokes of the brush or pen, or a placement of a flower.

This is what separates a martial artist from a common thug.

[TraditionalTKD]

Difficult to explain. To me, a martial art is an activity that trains the body and mind to express beauty, grace, power, and self expression through actions that could be incorporated as warlike or military.
In that aspect, free fighting in itself is not martial art unless you are training to achieve something other than knocking out the opponent or making a point. If you are training to practice grace, flow, beautiful technique, and rhythm then you are practicing martial art. Art, remember, is something that allows you to achieve self expression. Someone who is able to put all this together is unique in the sense that he/she is readily identifiable and their technique is unique to them.
Form also plays a big part of this. Do we practice form for self defense? Not really. We train in form to help us achieve the actions I described above. In this sense, Bruce Lee's opinions about form were off the mark. Remember, he was a young man when he said that. I know lots of young men who would rather free fight than do form. Form can assist and aid in free fighting, but the two are separate entities. Both assist in the ultimate goal-helping us become martial artists rather than simply fighters.

[IWishToLearn]

I propose that Exile, Flying Crane, Xue Sheng and I form a cranky-yet-heroic band known as "The Four Cynical Curmudgeons". We can travel the Intrawebs fighting naivete and squashing innocent enthusiasm wherever it rears its head. We can have cool names like "Feet of Clay" and "Captain Verbosity" and RantGirl (or RantBoy depending).

LAUGHS! :)

[Flying Crane]

I propose that Exile, Flying Crane, Xue Sheng and I form a cranky-yet-heroic band known as "The Four Cynical Curmudgeons". We can travel the Intrawebs fighting naivete and squashing innocent enthusiasm wherever it rears its head. We can have cool names like "Feet of Clay" and "Captain Verbosity" and RantGirl (or RantBoy depending).


actually, to keep it in the spirit of the Hong Kong kung fu flicks, I think we would have to call ourselves "The Four HEROIC Cynical Curmudgeons."

[Xue Sheng]

actually, to keep it in the spirit of the Hong Kong kung fu flicks, I think we would have to call ourselves "The Four HEROIC Cynical Curmudgeons."

That works for me....just as long as when we talk what we say and what it looks like we are saying are 2 ENTIRELY different things.

[Monadnock]

'Martial Art' is an American term as can be seen by the English letters used to display it on your computer screen. It probably popped up sometime in the states in the early 20th century and referred to whatever Japanese or Okinawan systems had first crossed over the pond.

Today it's a term we use to lump together the practice of Karate, Judo, Kempo, system-of-the-month, what-have-you. When you look at the different martial systems of the world, it would be best to look at them from their own languages to better understand where they come from.

Read up on a little of Dave Lowry's works if you are interested in the closest Japanese tranlation of 'martial arts'...being Bu Jutsu. You'll find that looking at the meaning of Bu Jutsu, Mr. Lowry has separated Karate from being a Martial Art to a system of self defense.

But this has little to do with Karate's effectiveness and more to do with consistent and accurate terminology. To the original post, I think in America, Martial Art has come to mean a system of armed or unarmed fighting designed for self defense and we use it to describe almost all systems here today. (Look at MMA).

There's always going to be shades of gray and people who will say, well, so-and-so-art really isn't a martial art. I'm one of them. You just have to get the right context to see where they are coming from. For the most part, unless you are talking to a hoplologist or serious practitioner of some classical system, Martial Art will get the point of what you do across to almost any non-practitioner in the US. When speaking to each other, we should be more precise.

[kingkong89]

being a true martial artist takes time, like anything else there is a lot of learning involved but the most important thing to learn is RESPECT, without it someone who can do all these amazing moves is not a true martial artist.

[tellner]

To see the answers to your post, take a look at the last couple dozen letters on this thread. I'm afraid your assertion doesn't cut much ice when examined closely or historically...

[exile]

actually, to keep it in the spirit of the Hong Kong kung fu flicks, I think we would have to call ourselves "The Four HEROIC Cynical Curmudgeons."

Works for me!! ... And definitely, let's keep HEROIC in capital letters, eh? :lol:

[Xue Sheng]

"Four HEROIC Cynical Curmudgeons."

Now in my signature.. Thanks

[Flying Crane]

"Four HEROIC Cynical Curmudgeons."

Now in my signature.. Thanks

I like that. I think I'll have to add it to mine as well. Good move.

[Flying Crane]

Done!

[exile]

I like that. I think I'll have to add it to mine as well. Good move.

Well, if it's good enough for you guys.... :)

[Langenschwert]

To me, a Martial Art is a systemized method of combat, nothing more or less. The systemization is an attempt to make the essentially chaotic nature of combat more predictable, thereby increasing the combatant's chances of victory. It was born when the first hominid figured out to bash in a rival's head with a rock. :) This thread has already mentioned the etymology of the term as the "Arts of War". The first written usage of the term "Martial Art" in the English language is a 17th Century Rapier manual entitled Pallas Armata, which refers to the "noble Martial Art of fencing". Prior to this, combat arts were known in the West as the "Arts of Mars" (the Roman God of War). So not only are koryu jiu-jutsu, FMA, and Italian Rapier all Martial Arts, so is archery, firearms use, or for that matter (my favourite example), piloting a fighter jet in combat. It's just a matter of the machine you're using to perform the Martial Art, whether merely the body or a weapon. A sword is after all, a machine with one moving part. Anybody who's seen pistol expert Todd Jarett would be hard pressed to not call him a Martial Artist of the highest calibre. :)

Best regards,

-Mark

[tellner]

Xue Sheng, Flying Crane, Exile:

If you guys photos of yourselves or representative images I'd like to make an appropriate piece of artwork. Your martial tradition wouldn't be amiss either. PM or email, please. Also, if you want to go by a particular secret identity like "Colonel Bombast" or "Knouter of Deceased Equids" that would help.

[JBrainard]

actually, to keep it in the spirit of the Hong Kong kung fu flicks, I think we would have to call ourselves "The Four HEROIC Cynical Curmudgeons."

With respect to Hong Kong kung fu flicks, I would have suggested "The Four Cynical Curmudgeons of Death."
But this is only a most humble suggestion, as I would NEVER tell "The Four" how to do anything, as they are omnipotent and could squash my insignificant intelect with but a stern look...

[terryl965]

Maybe this has been said maybe not but a bottle of whiskey and a couple cases of beer and who knows what can be consider an Art

[Xue Sheng]

With respect to Hong Kong kung fu flicks, I would have suggested "The Four Cynical Curmudgeons of Death."
But this is only a most humble suggestion, as I would NEVER tell "The Four" how to do anything, as they are omnipotent and could squash my insignificant intelect with but a stern look...

Don't make me look sternly upon you :mst: :uhyeah:

[JBrainard]

Don't make me look sternly upon you :mst: :uhyeah:

:lfao:
Sorry, I can't keep a strait face to save my life :)

[exile]

The first written usage of the term "Martial Art" in the English language is a 17th Century Rapier manual entitled Pallas Armata, which refers to the "noble Martial Art of fencing".

Very interesting, Mark... I've wondered from time to time just where the phrase originated. It has a kind of archaic feel to it... thanks for the info!


Xue Sheng, Flying Crane, Exile:

If you guys photos of yourselves or representative images I'd like to make an appropriate piece of artwork. Your martial tradition wouldn't be amiss either. PM or email, please. Also, if you want to go by a particular secret identity like "Colonel Bombast" or "Knouter of Deceased Equids" that would help.

Todd, I'll see what I can find. For some reason, the only secret identities I've been able to come up with are monikers like `Thorkill Skullsplitter' and other Vikingish names for people who were unquestionably homocidal psychopaths in the 12th c. or thereabouts, so I probably need to rethink the possibilities... but thanks for the invitation; will let you know once something a little less horrifying comes to mind! My martial traidition is Song Moo Kwan TKD.


With respect to Hong Kong kung fu flicks, I would have suggested "The Four Cynical Curmudgeons of Death."
But this is only a most humble suggestion, as I would NEVER tell "The Four" how to do anything, as they are omnipotent and could squash my insignificant intelect with but a stern look...

Actually, JB, I prefer to think of us as the Four Heroic Cynical Curmudgeons of Terminally Accurate Argumentation... but `Death' is shorter and the result is pretty much the same, eh ? :EG:

Guys, let's go find that Free French garrison... I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship! :)

[Flying Crane]

For some reason, the only secret identities I've been able to come up with are monikers like `Thorkill Skullsplitter' and other Vikingish names for people who were unquestionably homocidal psychopaths in the 12th c. or thereabouts, so I probably need to rethink the possibilities... but thanks for the invitation; will let you know once something a little less horrifying comes to mind! My martial traidition is Song Moo Kwan TKD.



Hmmm... I was sort of thinking of something like Checker of Reality, or Smasher of Myths...

since Man Who Walks With No Shadow Under The Moon has already been taken...

[Xue Sheng]

I just don't know... there are so many possibilities

- Captain Pentothal the Truth Finder
- Lord Axiom the Truth Keeper
- Mr Misanthropic the Displeased
- Ace Acrimonious the Captious
- Ace Aporetic the Incredulous

[exile]

How about...

Fiend of Rationality?
The Ockham's Razor Slasher?

or... just flat-out stealing...

The Living Tribunal?

[Langenschwert]

How about...

The Ockham's Razor Slasher?


I like this one. I have visions of someone slashing up invalid syllogisms and circular arguments using a sharpened Categorical Imperative. :)

Best regards,

-Mark

[Cirdan]

Four HEROIC Cynical Curmudgeons, I salute you. Never seen so much common sense in one thread before. And a Pox upon the spreaders of Myths! :highfive:

[Xue Sheng]

The Ockham's Razor Slasher


DAMN!!!

How did I miss that one. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif

[tradrockrat]

sooooo.....


what is this thread about again????? lol

[exile]

I like this one. I have visions of someone slashing up invalid syllogisms and circular arguments using a sharpened Categorical Imperative. :)

Best regards,

-Mark

Thanks, Mark... it makes you look twice at those innocent-looking logicians in their charcoal-grey sweater vests, cordoroy trousers and tweed jackets, eh? You wonder what kinds of things they fantasize about splitting besides hairs... :EG:


DAMN!!!

How did I miss that one. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif

Hehe... who knows what lurid analytic fantasies were seething in Rudolf Carnap's and Kurt Gödel's subconscious... as I was just saying to Mark, those guys are... like... too quiet!.


sooooo.....


what is this thread about again????? lol

Danged if I can remember... I think the question was, what makes someone a martial artist. My own feeling is, be guided by what the parts of the noun phrase `martial artist' mean and how they're put together. We know that `martial' derives from Mars, the Roman god of war and armed combat generally. Martial literally refers to combat or `warrior-like', according to one definition. `Arts' refer to skills generally: the domestic arts, the `arts of peace', language arts, culinary arts, you name it. So `martial arts' refers to combat skills. The suffix -ist shows up in examples like

violin+ist = violinist (one who performs on the violin)
solo+ist = soloist (one who performs a solo)
psychiatry + ist = psychiatrist (one who practices psychiatry)
dogma + ist = dogma(t)ist (one who `performs' or produces dogma)
.
.
.

So it's pretty clear, given this morphological pattern, that `martial artist' = [martial art]+ist will yield a denotation of `one who practices [martial art(s)] = `one who practices combat arts.' There was a thread a week or two ago in which someboy produced a citation of the first use of the term in English, something a few hundred years back on dueling—a manual, I think it was—Mark, was that you?

It follows that, just by applying a bit of logic, we're led to conclude that the term `martial artist' means nothing more or less than one who performs, practices, or is, to a certain degree, proficient in, combat skills. There is an implication that an art is not a disconnected set of randomly related skills but rather a set of systematically connected skills and techniques, so from that, it would follow that a martial artist is one who has practical knowledge of a systematic (or `codified') set of combat skills and techniques. And that's what pretty much all the dictionary definitions I've consulted have consisted of.

Dictionary makers—lexicographers—are not in the business of prescribing usage; they're trained as linguists and figure their business is to provide the definition of words on the basis of the apparent social consensus which holds among native speakers of that language. And so the claim is that `one who has practical knowledge of a systematic (or `codified') set of combat skills and techniques' reflects the common core of the various uses to which people put the term `martial artist'. I think that this is exactly right, factually speaking: if you tell a given person off the street, Y, that someone else, X, is a martial artist, Y will pretty much understand that X is a practitioner of a codified combat system, very likely of Asian origin, and that s/he is therefore probably a good fighter. And people who have experience in the martial arts themselves will have a similar understanding. They will not conclude from the fact that you've described X as a marital artist that s/he's a saint, or even a very good person, or a particularly virtuous person, or noble, or generous in battle, or all that high chivalric fluff that's part and parcel of the absurd mystification of the martial arts in North America. They'll conclude that X has reasonably good command of certain fighting techniques and may wonder which kind, but they will not conclude that X is anything more, or less, than that.

Now if you want to ask, how should martial artists live? How should they behave?—well, that's a different question entirely. Obviously we'd prefer that MAists were sober-minded, peace-loving people who didn't get into unncecessary fights and who respected their fellows. But we'd prefer that to be the case with violinists, soloists, psychiatrists and dogmatists also, eh? :wink1:

[tellner]

Peaceful dogmatists who avoid conflict? Exile, you've been in the rare books section of the library too long. The mold on the pages is screwing up your sense of reality :)

[exile]

Peaceful dogmatists who avoid conflict? Exile, you've been in the rare books section of the library too long. The mold on the pages is screwing up your sense of reality :)

Well, I'm just saying that that's what we'd prefer—we sure ain' gonna get it. For that matter, I'm not sure that we can expect much peaceful behavior from soloists, and certainly not from psychiatrists! But we can hope and dream, eh?....:D

[Cryozombie]

Guys there is WAY too much discussion on this subject.

What makes a Martial Art?

It has to be MMA.

Everything else is just LARPing.

Just ask any of the MMA guys here.

:2xbird::2xbird:

[tellner]

LARPing? What's that?

[Cirdan]

LARP = Live Action Role Playing. Don`t ask. Been a heavy RPG`er myself but LARP is taking it too far methinks.

[Langenschwert]

Thanks, Mark... it makes you look twice at those innocent-looking logicians in their charcoal-grey sweater vests, cordoroy trousers and tweed jackets, eh? You wonder what kinds of things they fantasize about splitting besides hairs... :EG:

Indeed. If we don't nip those things in the bud, we'll be fighting bad philosophy on our Kantian doorsteps. We'll be so broken we'll be reading Heidegger to cheer ourselves up. False logic makes work for idle hands and all that.


So it's pretty clear, given this morphological pattern, that `martial artist' = [martial art]+ist will yield a denotation of `one who practices [martial art(s)] = `one who practices combat arts.' There was a thread a week or two ago in which someboy produced a citation of the first use of the term in English, something a few hundred years back on dueling—a manual, I think it was—Mark, was that you?

Yup. Also I think that "Art" isn't really being used in the sense of "fine art" like music or sculpture, but more analagous to the word craft. So more like an Artisan than an Artist.


It follows that, just by applying a bit of logic, we're led to conclude that the term `martial artist' means nothing more or less than one who performs, practices, or is, to a certain degree, proficient in, combat skills. There is an implication that an art is not a disconnected set of randomly related skills but rather a set of systematically connected skills and techniques, so from that, it would follow that a martial artist is one who has practical knowledge of a systematic (or `codified') set of combat skills and techniques. And that's what pretty much all the dictionary definitions I've consulted have consisted of.

Makes sense to me.


Now if you want to ask, how should martial artists live? How should they behave?—well, that's a different question entirely. Obviously we'd prefer that MAists were sober-minded, peace-loving people who didn't get into unncecessary fights and who respected their fellows. But we'd prefer that to be the case with violinists, soloists, psychiatrists and dogmatists also, eh? :wink1:

Given that jazz musicians used to solve artistic problems with knives and firearms on stage (I've never had to), I don't think soloists tend to be peaceful, either. ;) Don't start a fight with a violinist. They're paranoid about their hands, so they're likely to hit you with a music stand. Or they're packing heat to protect their million dollar violin! :)

For me, I think an MAist should avoid combat when it's desireable, and not flinch from it when necessary. Don't start a fight, but be prepared to finish it. Above all, be a good person. It doesn't matter if you're an MAist or not, really. Be a good person, a good citizen, and a good ambassdor of the art. What more could anyone ask for?

Best regards,

-Mark

[exile]

Indeed. If we don't nip those things in the bud, we'll be fighting bad philosophy on our Kantian doorsteps. We'll be so broken we'll be reading Heidegger to cheer ourselves up. False logic makes work for idle hands and all that.

...and we just Kant let that happen! :D (... but really... reading Being and Time to cheer yourself up??? That's too surreal...)



Yup. Also I think that "Art" isn't really being used in the sense of "fine art" like music or sculpture, but more analagous to the word craft. So more like an Artisan than an Artist.

Exactly. Culinary arts, domestic arts, that sort of thing.



Given that jazz musicians used to solve artistic problems with knives and firearms on stage (I've never had to), I don't think soloists tend to be peaceful, either. ;) Don't start a fight with a violinist. They're paranoid about their hands, so they're likely to hit you with a music stand. Or they're packing heat to protect their million dollar violin! :)

Right. Cellists are bad too. And trombonists... just playing the trombone is an act of violence...



For me, I think an MAist should avoid combat when it's desireable, and not flinch from it when necessary. Don't start a fight, but be prepared to finish it. Above all, be a good person. It doesn't matter if you're an MAist or not, really. Be a good person, a good citizen, and a good ambassdor of the art. What more could anyone ask for?

Best regards,

-Mark

Total, complete agreement, Mark!

[Last Fearner]

Maybe this has been said maybe not but a bottle of whiskey and a couple cases of beer and who knows what can be consider an Art

My God, Master Stoker! This is perhaps one of the most brilliant, insightful, and truthful comments anyone has made here in the history of Martial Talk!!! It's too bad that most people will brush right past it, not understand it, or worse, will have such a lack of wisdom that they will actually disagree with it.

I have respected many of your posts and input here at MT, but never so much as right now!

:bow:

CM D.J. Eisenhart
______________________
Last Fearner

[Langenschwert]

...and we just Kant let that happen! :D (... but really... reading Being and Time to cheer yourself up??? That's too surreal...)

Even reading a synopsis of Being and Time was enough to depress me for a week. So I could go read J.S. Mill to make myself feel smart, and then read Kant to remind myself of all the things that Mill (and Bentham, I suppose) just didn't get. :)


Right. Cellists are bad too. And trombonists... just playing the trombone is an act of violence...

So a trombonist is a Martial Artist. Go fig! :D But cellists tend to be hot. ;) As an aside, a friend of mine used to know a guy who would tote around a cello case full of candy canes, and the guy didn't play cello. So perhaps it's the cello case that makes cellists odd, not the cello itself. Food for thought.

Best regards,

-Mark

[Last Fearner]

So what exactly makes a martial art?



G

e

s

t

a

l

t

[exile]

G

e

s

t

a

l

t

Took a while to see that as a whole, but eventually.... :D