Oral tradition Vs. Modern Research

[Grandmaster Yue men quan]

Was wondering what everyone that has been taught from oral traditions thinks about modern research videos writing etc. The difference they create and teaching methodology change. When I was young we had teachers that would take you and drill you to remember every word that was spoken until you got it right and in order. Then when you would get that part right you would learn the next part over and over until you got it all and you knew this. Than you started the next part. In martial arts we did the same along with body knowlege we would be taught forms in sections and have to be able to do the section correctly before moving to the next section. Until we learned the whole. With videos and books and modern research I have noticed that you can learn this stuff much faster but the depth of level is much more face value. What is your take on this?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Was wondering what everyone that has been taught from oral traditions thinks about modern research videos writing etc. The difference they create and teaching methodology change. When I was young we had teachers that would take you and drill you to remember every word that was spoken until you got it right and in order. Then when you would get that part right you would learn the next part over and over until you got it all and you knew this. Than you started the next part. In martial arts we did the same along with body knowlege we would be taught forms in sections and have to be able to do the section correctly before moving to the next section. Until we learned the whole. With videos and books and modern research I have noticed that you can learn this stuff much faster but the depth of level is much more face value. What is your take on this?

There's a trade-off in both directions. We're talking about internal storage (brain) versus external storage (books, videos, etc.).

Depending solely upon internal storage means a very long (relatively speaking) learning curve. It means more mistakes when away from the instructor, so more bad habits to correct later. It requires a level of understanding to retain the information correctly.

Depending solely upon external storage means a shorter learning curve, but with less understanding at the point of consistent repeatability.

The right answer is probably a good combination of the two. Provide external storage, but require use of the internal storage. So, my students still have to be able to name all the techniques they are testing. The names are memory hooks for them, to access the procedural memory for the technique. They are also expected to know some terms that are unusual, including some Japanese words used in place of English alternatives. This is also to give them a memory hook to certain concepts.

I point students to useful videos. I plan to make a few of my own at some point when I have a proper training partner to make some with. I provide them with historical information in their student manual and on the website. I expect them to be able to discuss the important points of all of this external information, so they aren't simply using it as a repository for later access, but as a training tool to dig deeper into the art.

 

[granfire]

without context info, the data is useless.

if you don't make lateral connections, it will be unclear if the move is a block, or an attack, or how to connect, or make best use of it.

some things have to be drilled and memorized.
Like Latin grammar.

but most things lose value when stripped of context, be it historical events, or forms.

 

[DanT]

-I don't like too much discussion of theory, I like to keep it simple (this is your centreline, defend it. This is outside of the opponents arms, be here). Nice and simple, short and sweet.

-I once saw a 5 h seminar from a Sifu. Instead of spending 2 minutes talking about some theory, and then training for the remaining 4 h and 58m, the people had some discussion about some theory Mumbo jumbo for 4 hours.

-At the end of the day it's the pad work, sparring, Heavy Bag Work, partner drills, etc that will save you. Yes theory has its place, but if you can have the deepest understanding of centre line theory and I can still knock you out what's the point? If you can do what the theory says to do without knowing the theory, then that's almost good enough in my opinion.

-you don't need a PHD in chemistry to learn to make bread. Same thing with martial arts.

 

[oaktree]

Something are better left orally as secret, others are better taught through pain compliance to understand concept and technique. Videos, books are good refreshers, or great to explore your art more.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

-I don't like too much discussion of theory, I like to keep it simple (this is your centreline, defend it. This is outside of the opponents arms, be here). Nice and simple, short and sweet.

-I once saw a 5 h seminar from a Sifu. Instead of spending 2 minutes talking about some theory, and then training for the remaining 4 h and 58m, the people had some discussion about some theory Mumbo jumbo for 4 hours.

-At the end of the day it's the pad work, sparring, Heavy Bag Work, partner drills, etc that will save you. Yes theory has its place, but if you can have the deepest understanding of centre line theory and I can still knock you out what's the point? If you can do what the theory says to do without knowing the theory, then that's almost good enough in my opinion.

-you don't need a PHD in chemistry to learn to make bread. Same thing with martial arts.

But you do need to have some information. Someone who only ever cooks by recipe will have a limited ability to vary the recipe. Those who understand the (very basic) chemistry involved will have more options. Those who memorize a few recipes will be able to create more variations on the fly. Same thing with martial arts.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Was wondering what everyone that has been taught from oral traditions thinks about modern research videos writing etc. The difference they create and teaching methodology change. When I was young we had teachers that would take you and drill you to remember every word that was spoken until you got it right and in order. Then when you would get that part right you would learn the next part over and over until you got it all and you knew this. Than you started the next part. In martial arts we did the same along with body knowlege we would be taught forms in sections and have to be able to do the section correctly before moving to the next section. Until we learned the whole. With videos and books and modern research I have noticed that you can learn this stuff much faster but the depth of level is much more face value. What is your take on this?

There is a lady who teaches Oral History, or Historical Story telling (something like that) in college. I don't remember her name or where she teaches. All I remember is that oral traditions had a value and place in our lives because it requires interaction between the story teller and the audience. She said that interaction is something you can't get by books or videos. This is probably the same reason why some people prefer taking a class in person vs a class online, or just learning from books.

Learning from a book or video may be faster, but you can only learn what is in the book or in the video. If you have a question, it may or may not be answered by what is in the book or in the video. The biggest problem with oral traditions is that it loses accuracy over time, simply because more information is added and information that is thought to be out of date is removed. For example, how to build a pyramid. A lot of that was probably passed down orally, when it became obsolete to build a period so did the information on how to build one. Now we sit here wondering how it was done.

 

[JowGaWolf]

you don't need a PHD in chemistry to learn to make bread.

Depends if you are making bread by hand or machine. You may not need a PHD to run the machine that makes bread but I'm sure the person who made the machine has one, or they found someone that had one. If you are creating a martial art system that actually works then you would need more knowledge to create it than those who would train it after you make it.

 

[Jenna]

There is a lady who teaches Oral History, or Historical Story telling (something like that) in college. I don't remember her name or where she teaches. All I remember is that oral traditions had a value and place in our lives because it requires interaction between the story teller and the audience. She said that interaction is something you can't get by books or videos. This is probably the same reason why some people prefer taking a class in person vs a class online, or just learning from books.

Learning from a book or video may be faster, but you can only learn what is in the book or in the video. If you have a question, it may or may not be answered by what is in the book or in the video. The biggest problem with oral traditions is that it loses accuracy over time, simply because more information is added and information that is thought to be out of date is removed. For example, how to build a pyramid. A lot of that was probably passed down orally, when it became obsolete to build a period so did the information on how to build one. Now we sit here wondering how it was done.

I think for me the idea of spoken traditions is exactly this which I see as benefit.. that they do not have a definitive "accuracy" rather the community who utilise the tradition add or remove information to suit their particular needs. I think this system can work for MA where it is used in a practical rather than sterile dojo-only setting, yes??

Maybe book/video media the message is fixed per the narrative of one (or few) people.. Can this ever contain all of the nuances and practical learnings within an art that is utilised in any practical sense in specific environments??

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There is a lady who teaches Oral History, or Historical Story telling (something like that) in college. I don't remember her name or where she teaches. All I remember is that oral traditions had a value and place in our lives because it requires interaction between the story teller and the audience. She said that interaction is something you can't get by books or videos. This is probably the same reason why some people prefer taking a class in person vs a class online, or just learning from books.

Learning from a book or video may be faster, but you can only learn what is in the book or in the video. If you have a question, it may or may not be answered by what is in the book or in the video. The biggest problem with oral traditions is that it loses accuracy over time, simply because more information is added and information that is thought to be out of date is removed. For example, how to build a pyramid. A lot of that was probably passed down orally, when it became obsolete to build a period so did the information on how to build one. Now we sit here wondering how it was done.

Learning from a book or video isn't actually faster, in general. The research I've seen shows it is a faster way to transmit small bits of information (a specific procedure, for instance), because it's a consistent storage medium and can be accessed again. It normally takes longer to gain full learning from non-interactive transmission like this (assuming equal quality of delivery). The real value is the combination of storage and convenience (and lower cost, but that's a business issue, not a learning issue).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think for me the idea of spoken traditions is exactly this which I see as benefit.. that they do not have a definitive "accuracy" rather the community who utilise the tradition add or remove information to suit their particular needs. I think this system can work for MA where it is used in a practical rather than sterile dojo-only setting, yes??

Maybe book/video media the message is fixed per the narrative of one (or few) people.. Can this ever contain all of the nuances and practical learnings within an art that is utilised in any practical sense in specific environments??

I think the strengths and weaknesses apply both to practical arts (I'll lump together those intended for defensive combat and open sport combat) and to those that are more esoteric (trained for fitness, just fun, very restrictive ruleset competition, etc.). In all those cases, the static nature of the printed word (and a bit less so the electronic versions) means new variations may not show in these offline storage media. At the same time, these offline storage media allow for easy sharing of information between groups. Thus, a group in the US can exchange information quite easily with a group in Europe dealing with the same art. The biggest issue with oral transmission is that it is subject to interpretation at each generation of retransmission. So, many years later, we are hearing teaching that is purported to be exactly what the founder of a system taught. If it was transmitted orally, there is very nearly zero chance (given the fallacy of human memory) of any of it being exactly as he/she taught it. This leads to arguments between lines of an art over whose version of the art is the "legitimate" teaching of the founder. And that's just a distraction. Rather than trying to reproduce exactly what that founder taught, they should always be seeking to produce the best version of the art they can, and that should not look exactly like the founder's.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Learning from a book or video isn't actually faster, in general.

You can only learn what is in the book, you can't "pick the books brain" with questions. Some things are easier and faster to learn in person, but that all depends on how good of a teacher I am and my ability to connect. One of that natural complaints of a college student is having a teacher they don't understand because that teacher failed to make the connection.

I had teacher in college with a heavy Indian accent and I failed her class simply because much of my effort was spent trying to understand what she was saying and not actually learn what she was trying to say. I've had teachers who spoke clearly, and were still just horrible teachers.

The learning from the book or video being faster is not a one size fits all. Technical books tend to be full of filler.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You can only learn what is in the book, you can't "pick the books brain" with questions. Some things are easier and faster to learn in person, but that all depends on how good of a teacher I am and my ability to connect. One of that natural complaints of a college student is having a teacher they don't understand because that teacher failed to make the connection.

I had teacher in college with a heavy Indian accent and I failed her class simply because much of my effort was spent trying to understand what she was saying and not actually learn what she was trying to say. I've had teachers who spoke clearly, and were still just horrible teachers.

The learning from the book or video being faster is not a one size fits all. Technical books tend to be full of filler.

I did add the caveat of equally effective delivery in all media. That accent would have killed a video module almost as quickly (you could at least have listened again). If you teach a module of information to a live group without allowing them to ask questions, and record that session, people will generally learn about the same speed from the live and the recorded versions. If you are good at reading the reactions of your students and adjusting subtly to their needs, the live group will learn faster. If you are confusing and talk fast, the folks using the recording will probably learn faster (again, they can replay).

 

[Jut]

I did add the caveat of equally effective delivery in all media. That accent would have killed a video module almost as quickly (you could at least have listened again). If you teach a module of information to a live group without allowing them to ask questions, and record that session, people will generally learn about the same speed from the live and the recorded versions. If you are good at reading the reactions of your students and adjusting subtly to their needs, the live group will learn faster. If you are confusing and talk fast, the folks using the recording will probably learn faster (again, they can replay).

Perhaps it's because I'm older, although I place a lot of weight on Modern research, I've always gravitated toward 'Oral'. just sayin..

 

[Jenna]

I think the strengths and weaknesses apply both to practical arts (I'll lump together those intended for defensive combat and open sport combat) and to those that are more esoteric (trained for fitness, just fun, very restrictive ruleset competition, etc.). In all those cases, the static nature of the printed word (and a bit less so the electronic versions) means new variations may not show in these offline storage media. At the same time, these offline storage media allow for easy sharing of information between groups. Thus, a group in the US can exchange information quite easily with a group in Europe dealing with the same art. The biggest issue with oral transmission is that it is subject to interpretation at each generation of retransmission. So, many years later, we are hearing teaching that is purported to be exactly what the founder of a system taught. If it was transmitted orally, there is very nearly zero chance (given the fallacy of human memory) of any of it being exactly as he/she taught it. This leads to arguments between lines of an art over whose version of the art is the "legitimate" teaching of the founder. And that's just a distraction. Rather than trying to reproduce exactly what that founder taught, they should always be seeking to produce the best version of the art they can, and that should not look exactly like the founder's.

Agree and also I see arguments arise mostly of ego and seldom utility.. like if it work in the environment then where is the sense in debate over whose narrative is more original? Lineage do not confer legitimacy.. only what empirically proven to work confer legitimacy.. Anyway is what you have already said I think

For me technique is context dependent where context can be the user or the culture or the threat and so for me technique is best borne on the word of spoken tradition.. Why? Cos is pliant to fit the community of users who employ it yes??? And whereas the hard copies are just that.. become immutable dogmas you would agree no?? I value your view.. is lush with balance xo