I had debated with myself whether to post this in the Kenpo area or with General Martial Arts. I decided the subject is applicable to a broader range, so I'll post this to the General area.
As some of you already know, the kenpo studio closed down and I had to make transition to yet another studio. The instructors with the current studio carried over the material from the previous one and then over the course of the past year, started modifying some techniques.
Of course, an instructor can change his teaching materials however he wishes--that is his choice and his right. It is his school.
I started observing a pattern of modifications and this pattern is what is causing me to consider more about my self defense goals (at least as how they are for me).
His modifications are taking out the more lethal moves (or as some other martial artists here may say this way, a form of watering down or sanitizing). Finally, I decided to ask the two instructors why just to clarify for myself their intent with changing.
One said that the certain moves were removed becaise they're "evil". They do more harm than good. (Mind you, this is an adult's class, not children's class.) The other instructor said it is for liability reasons the changes were made. It is a "moral" change.
My response to my instructors was "there are evil people out there in the world."
<Rant On>
Evil? Moral? When did martial arts moves take upon an evil or moral aspect?
I do believe, ideally, that martial artists should have morals and have a sense of what is right and wrong. They, hopefully, will know of ways to avoid trouble and reduce confrontation. A martial artist will fight if the need arises and if there is no other way possible to avoid the situation.
In today's world, liability is a very real issue, especially with a "sue-happy" mentality. I can understand the concern there.
Yet I can't help but think, are not adults capable of deciding whether or not to use certain methods, techniques, or moves when a potential confrontation happens that may very well be a matter of life and death? Is it fair to change things by "withholding" knowledge simply because some moves are "evil" or "less moral"?
The reality is there ARE evil people out there with no regard for the life of others and would not care much about the morals of society. Thankfully, there aren't too many, but they do exist and we cannot always predict when or who may come into our lives.
On a related subject, not too long ago, a person commented that Judo may be safer--there are no strikes. I beg to differ. There are throws, holds, and takedowns with Judo that could be lethal (and thus fall under the definition of being "evil".
) [Evidently the person isn't aware that Judo does indeed have strikes in later stages of learning, but I digress.]
Personally, I don't think any physical move with any martial art is "evil" or "moral". I think this is all within the intent of the person making these moves.
<Rant Off>
Any thought or observation to share?
- Ceicei
As some of you already know, the kenpo studio closed down and I had to make transition to yet another studio. The instructors with the current studio carried over the material from the previous one and then over the course of the past year, started modifying some techniques.
Of course, an instructor can change his teaching materials however he wishes--that is his choice and his right. It is his school.
I started observing a pattern of modifications and this pattern is what is causing me to consider more about my self defense goals (at least as how they are for me).
His modifications are taking out the more lethal moves (or as some other martial artists here may say this way, a form of watering down or sanitizing). Finally, I decided to ask the two instructors why just to clarify for myself their intent with changing.
One said that the certain moves were removed becaise they're "evil". They do more harm than good. (Mind you, this is an adult's class, not children's class.) The other instructor said it is for liability reasons the changes were made. It is a "moral" change.
My response to my instructors was "there are evil people out there in the world."
<Rant On>
Evil? Moral? When did martial arts moves take upon an evil or moral aspect?
I do believe, ideally, that martial artists should have morals and have a sense of what is right and wrong. They, hopefully, will know of ways to avoid trouble and reduce confrontation. A martial artist will fight if the need arises and if there is no other way possible to avoid the situation.
In today's world, liability is a very real issue, especially with a "sue-happy" mentality. I can understand the concern there.
Yet I can't help but think, are not adults capable of deciding whether or not to use certain methods, techniques, or moves when a potential confrontation happens that may very well be a matter of life and death? Is it fair to change things by "withholding" knowledge simply because some moves are "evil" or "less moral"?
The reality is there ARE evil people out there with no regard for the life of others and would not care much about the morals of society. Thankfully, there aren't too many, but they do exist and we cannot always predict when or who may come into our lives.
On a related subject, not too long ago, a person commented that Judo may be safer--there are no strikes. I beg to differ. There are throws, holds, and takedowns with Judo that could be lethal (and thus fall under the definition of being "evil".
) [Evidently the person isn't aware that Judo does indeed have strikes in later stages of learning, but I digress.]Personally, I don't think any physical move with any martial art is "evil" or "moral". I think this is all within the intent of the person making these moves.
<Rant Off>
Any thought or observation to share?
- Ceicei
