Impartiality/lack of bias

[guy b]

I understand that several people here think that it is important to be impartial, to maintain an open mind, and to make sure inbuilt bias is compensated for. This makes sense when confronted with new information you don't understand, and before you have had time to process it.

But I don't understand maintaining such a stance after you have assessed the argument being made. I think that at this point you either agree or you don't, and pussyfooting around this reality is just a form of dishonesty, both with yourself and with everyone else.

In this way "seeing both sides" means either that you just don't understand the argument, that you are concealing your true beliefs, or that you have no opinion either way. In all of these cases, what is the benefit in making a comment? Usually it appears to be done in order to shame someone expressing a strong belief. If this is the aim then why not just be honest and argue the other side?

 

[Danny T]

I understand that several people here think that it is important to be impartial, to maintain an open mind, and to make sure inbuilt bias is compensated for. This makes sense when confronted with new information you don't understand, and before you have had time to process it.

But I don't understand maintaining such a stance after you have assessed the argument being made. I think that at this point you either agree or you don't, and pussyfooting around this reality is just a form of dishonesty, both with yourself and with everyone else.

In this way "seeing both sides" means either that you just don't understand the argument, that you are concealing your true beliefs, or that you have no opinion either way. In all of these cases, what is the benefit in making a comment? Usually it appears to be done in order to shame someone expressing a strong belief. If this is the aim then why not just be honest and argue the other side?

Because I''m not here to argue. Martial Talk is a discussion forum for the friendly discussion of ideas unfortunately there are some who come specifically to argue.
I come to discuss and gain different perspectives not to argue or prove what I do and manner that I do it is the best or most correct way.

 

[guy b]

Because I''m not here to argue. Martial Talk is a discussion forum for the friendly discussion of ideas unfortunately there are some who come specifically to argue.
I come to discuss and gain different perspectives not to argue or prove what I do and manner that I do it is the best or most correct way.

Nor me. But if you don't agree what sense in acting as if it is all good? Even more, what sense in arguing something you don't understand?

Again purposefully "seeing both sides" means either that you just don't understand the argument, that you are concealing your true beliefs, or that you have no opinion either way. In all of these cases, what is the benefit in making a comment?

 

[Anuka]

For me personally, I try to keep in mind that just because it doesn't work for me does not mean it doesn't work at all. I suppose it's a wasted comment at that point, but I'm here because nobody in my day to day life wants to discuss or hear about martial arts. Even if nobody cares or responds, it feels like I'm part of something.

 

[Buka]

I dunno'. Maybe because opinion, understanding and perspective can change with time and experience?

Maybe because you say tomato and I say Bloody Mary? Again I dunno'.

 

[Transk53]

What sense in arguing at all?

 

[Flying Crane]

What sense in arguing at all?

It does become pretty pointless.

At the end of the day, does it really matter if some schmoe on the Internet says something that you think is stupid? im sure that same schmoe feels the same about a lot of the stuff the other guy says. It's a two-way street.

 

[Danny T]

Nor me.

Really???

But if you don't agree what sense in acting as if it is all good?

Why not simply state your thought or opinion and leave it at that? Must every thought or opinion be proven? Ask questions? Certainly. And answer questions presented to the best of your ability and let others absorb and do what they will with it. Does one have to right and the other wrong? It is a discussion forum and a let's see who can make the most propelling argument forum.

Even more, what sense in arguing something you don't understand?

What sense in arguing to begin with. If someone doesn't understand from your perspective so what? Do you understand from their perspective?

Again purposefully "seeing both sides" means either that you just don't understand the argument, that you are concealing your true beliefs, or that you have no opinion either way. In all of these cases, what is the benefit in making a comment?

Again I'm not here to argue or to prove anything I come for discussion and different perspectives.

What do you think of the theory, "there is no right or wrong just the consequence."

 

[geezer]

I have no problem with people holding and expressing strong opinions as long as it is done respectfully. On the other hand, I would advocate a healthy humility, acknowledging that there are things each of us doesn't know, and recognizing that words are an imperfect way to communicate the details of a physical discipline. I would advocate avoiding automatically assuming that the other guy is wrong, as some are prone to do here.

An example would be post 235 in The Need to be Recognized as Superior thread where Guy B quoted Gpseymour and objected to his impartiality regarding Juany's comments on the legal risks involving choke and strangulation holds in police work.

GP cautioned that much of the argument might just be a misunderstanding due to semantics. Guy objected to GP's "impartiality" and used the term "barking mad" to describe Juany's comments. Subsequent posts by Buka and Juany showed that Juany had in fact made some excellent points, and that the terms choke and strangulation are used interchangeably not only in common parlance but in the statutory law in many jurisdictions.

I would suggest that if Guy had been a bit more impartial in this case, the misunderstanding regarding chokes/strangulation holds could have been quickly cleared up and saved a good deal of useless arguing. The fact that immediately after this, Guy started this thread suggests that he still has no idea how arrogantly and abrasively he comes off to many others. A personality trait that's not likely to change. Oh well, I will just follow GPSeymour's lead and try to remain impartial.

 

[Marnetmar]

I don't care about a "personal belief," I care about what's true.

If you're not able or simply refuse to try and make solid case for why your position is correct, or it being correct requires skipping around contradictory points presented to you or somersaulting through five mental gymnastics courses, or keep to changing the criteria when you're proven wrong, why should what you have to say be taken seriously?

 

[guy b]

Subsequent posts by Buka and Juany showed that Juany had in fact made some excellent points, and that the terms choke and strangulation are used interchangeably not only in common parlance but in the statutory law in many jurisdictions.

Juany changed his argument about 5 times during the course of that discussion because he didn't know what he was talking about but was unwilling to admit it, He finally came up with the fact that the law in America apparently knows about as much about chokes and strangles as Juany does, i.e. nothing.

This is dishonest and completely pointless argument. You seem to be of the opinion that allowing people who are wrong to feel as if they are right is a good thing. It is not. It isn't polite, it is just cowardly and evasive.

 

[guy b]

I don't care about a "personal belief," I care about what's true.

If you're not able or simply refuse to try and make solid case for why your position is correct, or it being correct requires skipping around contradictory points presented to you or somersaulting through five mental gymnastics courses, or keep to changing the criteria when you're proven wrong, why should what you have to say be taken seriously?

I agree

 

[guy b]

Why not simply state your thought or opinion and leave it at that? Must every thought or opinion be proven? Ask questions? Certainly. And answer questions presented to the best of your ability and let others absorb and do what they will with it. Does one have to right and the other wrong?

When someone is blatantly wrong, acting as if you didn't see it is a kind of dishonesty.

If someone doesn't understand from your perspective so what? Do you understand from their perspective?

Not everything is relative.

What do you think of the theory, "there is no right or wrong just the consequence.

It sounds ludicrous to me.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In MA, most of the time, there is no right or wrong but trade off.

Which one is more important?

- speed, or power?
- hard, or soft?
- front door entry, or side door entry?
- striking, or grappling?
- push, or pull?
- straight line, or circle?
- protect center from inside out, or protect center from outside in?
- ...

I try to stay away from questions such as "which MA style is the best?" Because no matter what your opinion may be, you will get into argument. IMO, to raise your blood pressure for online discussion is "stupid".

 

[KPM]

This is dishonest and completely pointless argument. You seem to be of the opinion that allowing people who are wrong to feel as if they are right is a good thing. It is not. It isn't polite, it is just cowardly and evasive.

But your attitude that you need to correct everyone you feel is wrong about VT puts you at odds with EVERYONE outside of the WSLVT lineage because you are convinced that WSL is the only lineage that has Ip Man's "real" Wing Chun. So where does that leave you? That leaves you to turn nearly every discussion topic into a pointless argument. Don't you see that? It is not your job to educate the entire Wing Chun world on how wonderful WSLVT is and how wrong everyone else is about what they do. That is the arrogance that Geezer is referring to.

 

[Kickboxer101]

Of course everyone is going to be biased in their own way to their own style doesn't mean they still can't respect others opinions and not have to call people out on it

 

[guy b]

I accept that not many people here are interested in WSL VT. The reason for debate is not to educate or convince anyone who is not interested, it is to explore questions which are interesting and to provide material for people who are interested. The kind of fear of confrontation and avoidance of genuine argument and disagreement which some here demonstrate is an example of ego taking control, and is the most destructive form of arrogance, especially in martial arts or any other physical activity.

 

[Danny T]

When someone is blatantly wrong, acting as if you didn't see it is a kind of dishonesty.

Wrong...from whose perspective?

Not everything is relative.

It is relative to what one knows or perceives. If I am speaking English and you are speaking French there is going to be a lot of differences. So who is correct.

It sounds ludicrous to me.

There are many different perspectives and lots of gray. What in your WC that right and only right 100% of the time.

 

[KPM]

I accept that not many people here are interested in WSL VT. The reason for debate is not to educate or convince anyone who is not interested, it is to explore questions which are interesting and to provide material for people who are interested. The kind of fear of confrontation and avoidance of genuine argument and disagreement which some here demonstrate is an example of ego taking control, and is the most destructive form of arrogance, especially in martial arts or any other physical activity.

Complete and total BS! You regularly ask people questions about THEIR Wing Chun to look for differences with WSLVT and then attempt to argue that those differences you see are somehow wrong. Your ego does not allow you to let someone have their own opinion, but leads you to go after what you see as "wrong." You have not openly shared information in the past when asked directly, so that puts into question the idea that you want to "explore questions which are interesting." The most "destructive form of arrogance" is being convinced that you are right and everyone that sees things differently must be wrong. THAT is at the center of nearly every thread that you have participated in that becomes an argument. Yet you continue to not see that and want to blame it all on others. Amazing! You even started an entire thread that reeks so badly of hypocrisy that I'd almost think it was satire if I didn't know better!

 

[Anuka]

The kind of fear of confrontation and avoidance of genuine argument and disagreement which some here demonstrate is an example of ego taking control, and is the most destructive form of arrogance, especially in martial arts or any other physical activity.

I believe acceping other's beliefs is a sign of humility rather than arrogance.