Poor sense of philosophy and history

OP
R

Rumy73

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
588
Reaction score
10
Location
Washington, DC
You state that it is a martial artist's duty to take on an academic approach to historical investigation, which I also disagree with. As an instructor, I stress the moral and ethical standards and responsibilities that come with learning martial arts. I also intermingle history lessons from time to time, but not often in class. However, I would never suggest to any of my students that if they want to become a REAL martial artist they must devote ardent time to academic research on martial arts history. Would they benefit from it? Maybe.. . Is it necessary? No. This is not the perfect analogy, but here it is anyhow. I know how to shoot a gun. I spend time practicing to become proficient with its use, and I know the moral and ethical responsibilities of using it. Do I devote academic research on the history of firearms? No, I do not.

Your closing statement is downright silly. History teaches us that we are part of something larger than ourselves. It also teaches us lessons about conflict. The best instructors encourage students to dig deeper. However, most instructors, while they may be physically proficient and throw in an anecdotal story, skip the discussion of philosophy and history to the detriment of students. The real message of the martial arts/sports in modern America is about getting the next belt or trophy. So why bother to hang signs on the wall about "temperance," "justice," "self control," "honor," and "respect"? It is simply lip service if it is not truly made part of the curriculum.
 
OP
R

Rumy73

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
588
Reaction score
10
Location
Washington, DC
The three examples you use are for Soldiers. Not martial arts. While there are some overlapping between the two, they are distinctly different. We both have backgrounds with the Moo Duk Kwan. The Moo Duk Kwan's code is a modernization of the Code of the Hwarang.


  1. Be loyal to your country.
  2. Obey your parents.
  3. Respect elders and teachers.
  4. Trust in your friends.
  5. Never kill anything.

The Hwarang were a special "officer" rank, if you will. They studied martial arts, poetry, politics, philosophy, etc.. . However, the poetry, politics, and philosophy weren't part of their martial arts training. They were all parts that created a great soldier.

That said, I still teach the philosophical component, but I don't require my students to do book reports or anything.. .

We have a different understanding of martial arts. Martial stems from the word Mars, referring to war. Martial arts are the tools of war.
 

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
216
Location
USA
The real message of the martial arts/sports in modern America is about getting the next belt or trophy. So why bother to hang signs on the wall about "temperance," "justice," "self control," "honor," and "respect"? It is simply lip service if it is not truly made part of the curriculum.


This has not been my experience. I also have no such signs in my dojang.
 

Xue Sheng

All weight is underside
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
34,275
Reaction score
9,392
Location
North American Tectonic Plate
Were Greek hoplites not expected to be citizen soldiers? Fathers? Philosophers? Yes, they were. Were samurai not expected to expertly wield both a sword in battle and a pen for poetry? Were Cherokee braves not expected to guard the tribe, but to be guardians of justice? How many examples would you like? If you would like an excellent text on how the arts of warriors were for a reserved elite, please consult John Keegan's A History of Warfare.

So now to make your case of martial artist and the state of martial arts today you are referring to Greek hoplites, samurai and Cherokee braves....

So you are talking Greeks, Samurai and Cherokee and there for feel that covers all others martial artists....for the record…it doesn't. I have not read John Keegan's book, but I will take a look at it. But I have read many others and I suggest you do a little more study on things Chinese history, military and martial arts and you will find that they were not expected to be citizen soldiers, Fathers, Philosophers, They were not expected to expertly wield both a sword in battle and a pen for poetry. They not expected to guard the tribe, and not expected to be guardians of justice.

As for martial artist specifically…nope they were not expected to be citizen soldiers, Fathers, Philosophers, They were not expected to expertly wield both a sword in battle and a pen for poetry. They not expected to guard the tribe, and not expected to be guardians of justice either.

How many examples would you like?

Well since that is only 3 examples from millions…more than 3 would be nice

And since you are talking soldiers now…ok then how about the Romans, Egyptians, Gauls, Goths, Mongols, Vikings, Persians, Celts, Mohawk, Cossacks, Apache, Mayan, Aztec, medieval knights, etc.
 

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
216
Location
USA
We have a different understanding of martial arts. Martial stems from the word Mars, referring to war. Martial arts are the tools of war.

I think you hit the nail on the head right there. They are tools. I am not training soldiers, officers, cammandos, etc. in my dojang, although I've had many students go on to LE and the armed forces. As a general rule of thumb the primary purpose of traditional martial arts was for use in combat or war. But it was part of their training, not the all encompassing end result. I admit that I do teach a modern martial art, with Do as part of the name, and therefore I do put focus on personal development. I just argue that it was not the original intent of most traditional martial arts. Ask those MTer's that study the Koryu arts... .

My students do achieve personal growth through training in martial arts, but I do not spend class time lecturing on history lessons. This is not to say I don't use teaching moments, focusing on the moral, ethical, philosophical, and sometimes even historical aspects of my martial art. However, I cannot sacrifice the precious little time I have my students in class on lecture, it takes away from their physical training.
 

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
216
Location
USA
Gichen Funakoshi Sensei's art: Shotokan Karate-Do, a relatively modern martial art. Late 1800's-early 1900's. Again, I am not arguing against your assertion that some martial arts combine the idea of personal development with combat training. I am arguing that it was NOT the sole purpose of martial arts in general, particularly older martial arts.
 

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
216
Location
USA
Since you have offered a few that do support your premise, allow me to point out more ancient arts that have no correlation with personal growth/spiritual development/philosophical development, etc.. .

8 century B.C. arts like boxing, wrestling, and pankration were popular due to the popularity of the Olympics.

Many martial arts in China, had no aspect of personal development until the late Ming to early Qing dynasties (16th -17th century AD). This changed because of the martial arts training by monks at Shoalin temples had become part of monastic life to such an extent that new Buddhist lore was created around it.
 

Xue Sheng

All weight is underside
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
34,275
Reaction score
9,392
Location
North American Tectonic Plate
“The ultimate aim of karate lies not in victory nor defeat, but in the perfection of the character of its participants ”
― Gichin Funakoshi

Whenever you cross swords with an enemy you must not think of cutting him either strongly or weakly; just think of cutting and killing him. Be intent solely on killing the enemy. Do not try to cut strongly and, of course, do not think of cutting weakly. You should only be concerned with killing the enemy.- Miyamoto Musashi
 

Xue Sheng

All weight is underside
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
34,275
Reaction score
9,392
Location
North American Tectonic Plate
Rumy

You want to teach these aspects of martial arts that is great but you do need a lot more research in order to truly teach what you claim to want to teach. But saying that you are "disappointed at the lack of scholarly and philosophical development in many of those who post here" and that your "thesis that the martials have devolved into merely a method of fighting" and then going about basing it on the little history you know and limited knowledge of the cultures the arts you are lumping together come from and using one book, that in my opinion is wrong, insulting and way off base. Additionally it shows that you did not "take an academic approach to historical investigation" since you appear to know so little of it.

Now I do feel that martial artists should know more of the history of the styles they train, heck I start a style I research the heck out of it, but I do not think that is a requirement or makes someone less of a martial artist or teacher if they do not.

I also agree that there are a lot of schools out there issuing belts to gain students and money with little interest in the actual martial art they claim to teach or the students they claim to teach and take money from. And those that do this I do feel are very bad for martial arts and those that train with them

You want to make your martial art better or help make someone else’s martial art better by stretching heart and soul as much as his body that is wonderful but do it based on the facts and the reality of the history of those arts and do it without belittling others along the way and you will be much more believable and come across as much more sincere.

Last words; it appears you are looking more at the Philosophy of “do” arts and a lot of that comes from Zen Buddhism and a bit from Shinto as well, maybe you should look into that as well, for more reasons than just the understanding of “do”.
 
OP
R

Rumy73

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
588
Reaction score
10
Location
Washington, DC
Rumy

You want to teach these aspects of martial arts that is great but you do need a lot more research in order to truly teach what you claim to want to teach. But saying that you are "disappointed at the lack of scholarly and philosophical development in many of those who post here" and that your "thesis that the martials have devolved into merely a method of fighting" and then going about basing it on the little history you know and limited knowledge of the cultures the arts you are lumping together come from and using one book, that in my opinion is wrong, insulting and way off base. Additionally it shows that you did not "take an academic approach to historical investigation" since you appear to know so little of it.

Now I do feel that martial artists should know more of the history of the styles they train, heck I start a style I research the heck out of it, but I do not think that is a requirement or makes someone less of a martial artist or teacher if they do not.

I also agree that there are a lot of schools out there issuing belts to gain students and money with little interest in the actual martial art they claim to teach or the students they claim to teach and take money from. And those that do this I do feel are very bad for martial arts and those that train with them

You want to make your martial art better or help make someone else’s martial art better by stretching heart and soul as much as his body that is wonderful but do it based on the facts and the reality of the history of those arts and do it without belittling others along the way and you will be much more believable and come across as much more sincere.

Last words; it appears you are looking more at the Philosophy of “do” arts and a lot of that comes from Zen Buddhism and a bit from Shinto as well, maybe you should look into that as well, for more reasons than just the understanding of “do”.

Actually, what facts do you have save your opinions of Chinese martial arts? None so right back at you.
 
OP
R

Rumy73

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
588
Reaction score
10
Location
Washington, DC
Rumy

You want to teach these aspects of martial arts that is great but you do need a lot more research in order to truly teach what you claim to want to teach. But saying that you are "disappointed at the lack of scholarly and philosophical development in many of those who post here" and that your "thesis that the martials have devolved into merely a method of fighting" and then going about basing it on the little history you know and limited knowledge of the cultures the arts you are lumping together come from and using one book, that in my opinion is wrong, insulting and way off base. Additionally it shows that you did not "take an academic approach to historical investigation" since you appear to know so little of it.

Now I do feel that martial artists should know more of the history of the styles they train, heck I start a style I research the heck out of it, but I do not think that is a requirement or makes someone less of a martial artist or teacher if they do not.

I also agree that there are a lot of schools out there issuing belts to gain students and money with little interest in the actual martial art they claim to teach or the students they claim to teach and take money from. And those that do this I do feel are very bad for martial arts and those that train with them

You want to make your martial art better or help make someone else’s martial art better by stretching heart and soul as much as his body that is wonderful but do it based on the facts and the reality of the history of those arts and do it without belittling others along the way and you will be much more believable and come across as much more sincere.

Last words; it appears you are looking more at the Philosophy of “do” arts and a lot of that comes from Zen Buddhism and a bit from Shinto as well, maybe you should look into that as well, for more reasons than just the understanding of “do”.

Actually, what facts do you have save your opinions of Chinese martial arts? None so right back at you. I also will pray for you, as your hostility is sad.
 

Xue Sheng

All weight is underside
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
34,275
Reaction score
9,392
Location
North American Tectonic Plate
Actually, what facts do you have save your opinions of Chinese martial arts? None so right back at you. I also will pray for you, as your hostility is sad.

There is no hostility here at all, you have even misread me (twice now) and sadly you missed the point entirely in favor of arrogance, ego and the need to be right. Your thesis is flawed and your judgments are based in arrogance and your entire premise is historically inaccurate and I can say that with certainty based on real study.

As for my opinion, I could give you all the titles I have read on the subject in Chinese Martial Art, East Asian culture, religion and history all the way back to my college days (actually the first real good book I read on this was years before around the mid 70s), I have more than one bookshelf full on these topics and I have actually read them, so I am fairly sure my “opinion” is based much more in fact than yours since mine is based on verifiable historical fact, combine that with over 40 years in MA and over 20 in CMA I find I actually have a fairly good grasp on subject and the historical facts of it....but I will not waste my time here any longer because you would not listen since you are already convinced you are right... and that is truly sad because there is a lot of knowledge here on MT you could learn from, I have read some amazing things here from many people.

It most certainly does appear your knowledge on the "thesis" you put forth is based on a little internet checking, hearsay form friends, wuxia stories and reading one book.

And please, don't pray for me, it is not necessary, I am fine, you would do better spending some time in introspection and meditation on self, you need it more than I.
 
OP
R

Rumy73

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
588
Reaction score
10
Location
Washington, DC
There is no hostility here at all, you have even misread me (twice now) and sadly you missed the point entirely in favor of arrogance, ego and the need to be right. Your thesis is flawed and your judgments are based in arrogance and your entire premise is historically inaccurate and I can say that with certainty based on real study.

As for my opinion, I could give you all the titles I have read on the subject in Chinese Martial Art, East Asian culture, religion and history all the way back to my college days (actually the first real good book I read on this was years before around the mid 70s), I have more than one bookshelf full on these topics and I have actually read them, so I am fairly sure my “opinion” is based much more in fact than yours since mine is based on verifiable historical fact, combine that with over 40 years in MA and over 20 in CMA I find I actually have a fairly good grasp on subject and the historical facts of it....but I will not waste my time here any longer because you would not listen since you are already convinced you are right... and that is truly sad because there is a lot of knowledge here on MT you could learn from, I have read some amazing things here from many people.

It most certainly does appear your knowledge on the "thesis" you put forth is based on a little internet checking, hearsay form friends, wuxia stories and reading one book.

And please, don't pray for me, it is not necessary, I am fine, you would do better spending some time in introspection and meditation on self, you need it more than I.

Lol. So I did hit a nerve after all. Pax.
 
OP
R

Rumy73

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
588
Reaction score
10
Location
Washington, DC
Rather than derailing this conversation, I've started another thread: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...ow-much-history-and-or-philosphy-do-you-teach

I'm curious Rumy73, how much time do you feel is adequate to spend on the history, philosophy in class compared to the physical training?

Dr. Rush, I would say it can be as simple as talking about a philosophical point that underpins excellence - for argument's sake, let us use "positive intent" as an example. Ask them to briefly meditate on the intention of his or her actions and moves. Ground the thought in a common drill, such as roundhouse partner kicking, but stressing them to see it through the lens of positive intent. For advanced students, I would suggest a short reading selection about the theme.
 

jks9199

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
23,473
Reaction score
3,795
Location
Northern VA
Dr. Rush, I would say it can be as simple as talking about a philosophical point that underpins excellence - for argument's sake, let us use "positive intent" as an example. Ask them to briefly meditate on the intention of his or her actions and moves. Ground the thought in a common drill, such as roundhouse partner kicking, but stressing them to see it through the lens of positive intent. For advanced students, I would suggest a short reading selection about the theme.

Why? I do discuss some philosophy or moral principles with my students, when appropriate. But I hope that the better lesson in that comes in how I teach, in how I live, and in how I work. Because ideas that never make it to actions are as beneficial as a castle made of and in the clouds...
 

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
216
Location
USA
Why? I do discuss some philosophy or moral principles with my students, when appropriate. But I hope that the better lesson in that comes in how I teach, in how I live, and in how I work. Because ideas that never make it to actions are as beneficial as a castle made of and in the clouds...

I remember hearing from one of my teachers when I was young, that, "I can talk about <insert lesson>, and you may remember it, I can show you <insert lesson>, and you have a better chance at remembering, but you can experience <insert lesson> and you will never forget." In my understanding, it is the Zen way of teaching. Leading the student to finding the answer/experiencing the lesson on their own. This limits the necessity of lengthy talks/meditation/etc on many levels, IMHO.
 
OP
R

Rumy73

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
588
Reaction score
10
Location
Washington, DC
I remember hearing from one of my teachers when I was young, that, "I can talk about <insert lesson>, and you may remember it, I can show you <insert lesson>, and you have a better chance at remembering, but you can experience <insert lesson> and you will never forget." In my understanding, it is the Zen way of teaching. Leading the student to finding the answer/experiencing the lesson on their own. This limits the necessity of lengthy talks/meditation/etc on many levels, IMHO.


I agree and disagree with this teaching style. A teacher should spark the imagination of students and serve to orient his/her direction; however, it is up to the student to make the journey. Omitting this step reduces the teacher to a trainer.
 

Latest Discussions

Top