Steve
Mostly Harmless
In the thread What does having a blackbelt mean?many people continue to weigh in on what they believe a black belt signifies. Very interesting discussion.
What I also think is interesting is the disparity between what seems to be the consensus and what I believe is "common knowledge."
What I mean is, the overwhelming consensus on this board seems to be that a black belt doesn't mean more than that the student has learned the basics. Some even went so far as to suggest that a person with limited practical skill could be a black belt, if they possessed other desirable traits such as leadership or dedication.
However, ask the average person on the street, any country, regardless of demographic, the question, "What is a black belt?" What do you think the answer would be? I think that you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would answer other than that a black belt is a martial arts "expert."
I believe there's a huge gap, and so I'm wondering where that gap came from. Has it always been there? Did Kano award black belts for other than demonstrable skill? Did the teachers of other arts as they adopted the belt system in the early 1900's? Are modern MA schools actively contributing to the misunderstanding?
If you study in a school where you believe that the 1st degree/dan black belt is not an indicator of expertise, does your school actively or passively misrepresent the black belt to the public? Is your black belt deferred to by using honorifics? Is there a "black belt club"? Is a 1st dan black belt in your style able to open his/her own school? Would a member of the general public, viewing a demonstration or watching a class, get the impression that the black belt is considered other than an "expert" in the art.
What's the history of the "black belt" in the different styles? Was the black belt the same thing 20 years ago? 30? 50?
What I also think is interesting is the disparity between what seems to be the consensus and what I believe is "common knowledge."
What I mean is, the overwhelming consensus on this board seems to be that a black belt doesn't mean more than that the student has learned the basics. Some even went so far as to suggest that a person with limited practical skill could be a black belt, if they possessed other desirable traits such as leadership or dedication.
However, ask the average person on the street, any country, regardless of demographic, the question, "What is a black belt?" What do you think the answer would be? I think that you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would answer other than that a black belt is a martial arts "expert."
I believe there's a huge gap, and so I'm wondering where that gap came from. Has it always been there? Did Kano award black belts for other than demonstrable skill? Did the teachers of other arts as they adopted the belt system in the early 1900's? Are modern MA schools actively contributing to the misunderstanding?
If you study in a school where you believe that the 1st degree/dan black belt is not an indicator of expertise, does your school actively or passively misrepresent the black belt to the public? Is your black belt deferred to by using honorifics? Is there a "black belt club"? Is a 1st dan black belt in your style able to open his/her own school? Would a member of the general public, viewing a demonstration or watching a class, get the impression that the black belt is considered other than an "expert" in the art.
What's the history of the "black belt" in the different styles? Was the black belt the same thing 20 years ago? 30? 50?