Evidence based training vs faith based training.

[Buka]

what if you're in your car and someone who is all raging out gets out and starts heading your way? Wouldn't that be a self defense situation for you? If you're stopped at a light behind other cars, would you stay in your car? Would you get out?

What if you couldn't see both of his hands?

I don't agree that it's ego defense. It may not be entirely rational, but it's not always voluntary. I've seen otherwise very rational people completely lose their cool on the road.

I also don't agree that it's always or even mostly a mutual, voluntary altercation. I've seen plenty of situations (and been involved with a few myself) where one side is genuinely confused and actively seeking to avoid confrontation.

I agree with this. And especially this part - " I've seen otherwise very rational people completely lose their cool on the road."

I've been seeing this for years now. Why do you suppose that is? What is it about being behind the wheel that causes this? I've also noticed it happens more frequently with solo drivers.

 

[FriedRice]

I was just kidding.

me too.

 

[drop bear]

I agree with this. And especially this part - " I've seen otherwise very rational people completely lose their cool on the road."

I've been seeing this for years now. Why do you suppose that is? What is it about being behind the wheel that causes this? I've also noticed it happens more frequently with solo drivers.

You are angry at the car not the person.

 

[Buka]

You are angry at the car not the person.

Hadn't thought of that. Could that be the reason?

And why do I never see a woman in a road rage incident?

 

[drop bear]

Hadn't thought of that. Could that be the reason?

And why do I never see a woman in a road rage incident?

Because girls are made of sugar and spice.

 

[Steve]

Hadn't thought of that. Could that be the reason?

And why do I never see a woman in a road rage incident?

I have, often. Women who drive SUVs and volvos can be very aggressive.

 

[Buka]

I have, often. Women who drive SUVs and volvos can be very aggressive.

So interesting. I've been trying to remember a case of road rage with a gal. (Although, I think the term "Road Rage Woman" could be a great title for a song or album.) If I was asked what brand of vehicle driven by a woman would be less likely to get into a road rage incident than any other - I would have picked Volvo. I'm not even sure why. I have no facts or experience concerning that. Maybe I'm just influenced by commercials or something.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Hey Big Man I think your point neatly sums up the thread.. I would ask you what you think of the idea that some arts or styles by their very way of doing things lend their selves better to empirically verifying whether 1+1=2 ?? Also, do you think in an MA setting that the 1+1 calculation must then be CONTINUALLY verified as true rather than verified once then taken as fact thereon, I am right about that yes??

Likewise some styles or training setups are designed in such a way that a student -specially a new student- have no good route to doubt or disprove or even naysay that what their instructor told them that 1+1=3 because it just is and always has been that way from the inception of the art by awesome authorities who are badass in that style and every body say so.. would you agree??

My point below the talk really is how do you suggest the student, either new or long inculcated, break this indoctrination and find out the truth of their art or style for their selves -like the proof of the pudding- if they have never been given any reason even to QUESTION the false doctrine let alone test it out?? Thank you, Jx

Jenna,

Yes, it is hard for the student to know when is 1+1 = 2 and when is 1+1= 3 or Null Set or what have you.

yes it needs to be tested over and over again.

Not sure if there is a way for the community to be able to accept 2 + 2 = 4 and 1 + 3 = 4 and 4 + 0 = 4 and that 5 + (-1) = 4. the result is the same 4, but lots of ways to get there.

 

[drop bear]

Jenna,

Yes, it is hard for the student to know when is 1+1 = 2 and when is 1+1= 3 or Null Set or what have you.

yes it needs to be tested over and over again.

Not sure if there is a way for the community to be able to accept 2 + 2 = 4 and 1 + 3 = 4 and 4 + 0 = 4 and that 5 + (-1) = 4. the result is the same 4, but lots of ways to get there.

Well that would be the point of evidence based. Not just to cull the stuff that dosent work but to find the stuff that does.