New Student: when will you quit?

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
By the way, IQ has been shown to have negligible predictive power. People with high IQs do not tend to succeed more often or at higher levels than others with "normal" IQ's (whatever range you care to use for "normal").
This is true. Many aspects to people and thus society. Mind, Emotion, Physical, Rational, Social. That's my Big 5 and if you address those you address success and whatever else.
 

Buka

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
11,577
Reaction score
8,114
Location
Maui
Okay. That makes you a hobbyist! Or an enthusiast! But I know for a fact that there are what, hundreds of people that have viewed this thread since this conversation has been going? Recognizing the usefuleness of emotions is enriching to everyone though. It's good solid stuff. I am most certain that quick tasks require one with a good relationship to anger, and as you say about hate: uncontrolled bias is also FOCUS and creating a psychology and physiology of something. Having emotions and knowing how to use them and control them is great stuff. Having knowledge of them is great stuff.
There is nothing impeding intellectual achievements on these matters at the very least. I mean intellectual achievement in regards to figuring out how to use emotion of course.
I am also aware of how emotions affect relationships. For every relationship I notice they're stressed and anxious about many things. Whenever I have provided knowledge and direction for emotion that is PHYSICAL, MENTAL, RATIONAL, and SOCIAL their anxiety disappears and they're excited to assert themselves as individuals. Of course what I say has to be basically true and whenever I leave one or another aspect out (say, the social, or the rational) they are hesitant. But if all 4 are there they are excited and assertive! That's how you lead mates.


πŸ‘ πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘Maui is great I've been there once before. Maybe again! Maybe within the next 5 years hahaπŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘
Let me know if you come out again. I have a friend who has a really cool weight gym in his back yard, under a roof covering. And pretty much shares your thoughts on fighting. Go figure.
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
Yeah, he was another little guy. Rickson was not a little guy. Genetics... go figure! :)

As would we all. :)

Point to Diagen is that he's cherry picking attributes and projecting his own specific ideas about what is desirable on everyone else. He wants to be stronger, so he thinks everyone else must also want to be stronger. And he thinks being strongest (not just stronger) is essential to being effective. Which leads him to suggest that everyone must strive to be the strongest, or they are... I don't quite know... not serious?
I'm not cherry picking attributes, even endurance improves with strength gains. The pinnacle attribute as far as the literature is concerned is Power as Pavel Tsatsouline would tell you. This is just fast strength. So sprinting and throwing and kicking would be considered the best thing for a person if they wanted to develop EVERY attribute including endurance, flexibility, work capacity, speed, and strength. Toughness I'm not sure but Power would definitely contribute to that as well.
So I guess everyone wants to become the most Powerful or more powerful? If your friend is great in every measure but Strength then clearly I would be talking about it though. When speaking generally I say "Physicality" and the meaning seems clearly communicated as far as I've read.
I'm surprised there is not ONE DAMN PERSON here that wants to become the best. Not one. Not ONE. And I bet you that there would all of a sudden be more than one person considering it if they met JUST ONE person that wanted to become THE BEST. In every culture, every demographic, people are afraid to set a goal, to achieve, until others are doing it too. They don't bring up topics, they don't argue, unless someone else is doing it too. They require SOMEONE ELSE to say it's important or not before they can believe it too. This is what I try to fight in life!
 

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
6,031
Reaction score
4,663
Location
Lexington, KY
His peekaboo was great and that's because he put his emotion into his TRAINING.

They want to put in 1 year and get amazing physicality and some basic practical technique. You can't do that for anyone without said knowledge. You also can't get that without Emotional Content.
This part I have no argument with. No one becomes a great martial artist, fighter, or athlete without serious passion for what they are doing. Becoming great (or even just pretty good) requires a lot of hard work and you need motivation to do that work. That motivation comes from the emotions.

What I (and most of the others participating in this thread) disagree with is your apparent belief that anger, hate and fear are the optimal emotions to drive that hard work and growth. My personal experience and my observations of great fighters I've met indicate otherwise. Furthermore, my experience and observation of many, many people in all walks of life tells me that an overabundance of anger, hate, and fear generally lead to a more miserable life - both for the individuals carrying those emotions and those around them.
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
I know a chap who is a phenomenal fighter, best many of us have ever seen BUT, and this will back up what others have said, while he enjoys competing in MMA he regards it as a hobby, he's had offers from UFC but said no thanks, who does that, right? He doesn't want to be the strongest, he doesn't want to be the best fighter ever. He has a career he gets satisfaction from, he has a family he loves,he has hobbies and pastimes he enjoys, he is a contented man. How many can say that? Anger doesn't play any part in his life beyond the normal bits we all have.
Haha but who wants to be the best at anything?
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
Let me make sure I understand your point here ... no one that you are talking to in this discussion could beat Mike Tyson in his prime, therefore their knowledge, experience, and viewpoints are all worthless and therefore they should just accept whatever argument you are trying to make? Okay ... but if we grant that premise then we also run into the fact that you yourself couldn't beat Mike Tyson in his prime and by the same logic your knowledge, experience, and viewpoints are all worthless and you should just accept whatever arguments everyone else is making. Man, this gets confusing.

Let's back up and see if I can make sense out of your larger argument. It's difficult because you're kind of all over the place, but if we just focus on the mentions of Tyson it seems to come down to something like the following:
1) Premise - Extreme anger is good and healthy and makes you an effective person and fighter.
2) Mike Tyson was an individual with serious anger issues. (Honestly, I'd say serious mental health issues.)
3) Mike Tyson was, for a while, a dominant boxing champion who seemed unbeatable (until he was beaten)
4) QED, Tyson's success as a fighter must have been due to his anger and point #1 has been proven.

You seem to become upset by all the other arguments which have been presented against your premise in point #1, so let's look at your assumptions going into point #4. If we were to accept your thesis, then we should predict the following: a) great fighters in general should be carrying around a boatload of anger and b) Mike Tyson in particular should have been more effective as he grew angrier - kind of like the Hulk.

Do these predictions hold up? Not really. I've met some world champions and they've generally been calm, friendly, happy people. I think @Buka has met a bunch more and he'll probably say the same thing.

How about Tyson? Did his anger reliably make him more effective? I'll point you to Tyson vs Holyfield 1 and 2. Based on his visible behavior, Tyson was angrier than ever before - but he lost both times to the calmer Holyfield. (Before you argue that Tyson was no longer in his "prime", please remember that Holyfield was 4 years older than Tyson.)

It should also be noted that even if Tyson's anger had helped him in the ring, it clearly contributed to his many problems and his general mess of a life outside the ring. So if you're making an argument for constant anger being a healthy attribute, Tyson is probably the wrong example to choose.
"accept whatever arguments you're making" I am just trying to convey my meaning.

Premise is mistaken.

Premise - Emotions lend to different kinds and levels of physicality, as well as mental ability or abilities, thus should be used and generated effectively!
I will help frame the discussion with a new set of premises:

Premise 1 - There is the Mental, Physical, Social, Emotional and Rational.
Premise 2 - Emotions lend themself to each of the 5 differently and asymmetrically, but definitely lend themselves to the Physical.
Premise 3 - There are 5 relevant primitive negative emotions and those are Anger, Hate, Worry, Misery and Fear.
Premise 4 - Negative emotions are to do with the physical and base. Negative emotions essentially are one's physicality.
Premise 5 - Positive emotions are to do with physically transcendent and 'spiritual' things. Positive emotions essentially are one's spirit.
Premise 6 - Negative and Positive emotions are basically ignorant of and do not respect each other.

The misunderstanding is the real issue here. I hope this clarifies.
On your point of negative emotions not being prevalent in fighters: People can generate emotion and use it when they please. I can decide to lounge around or go running. But if I train and run every day I will get better at it! Those who do well generating and using negative emotion will be more effective! If you can literally berserk or Hulk Out you can of course be quite effective in relevant physical measures like strength or speed or intensity!

Premise 7 - Negative emotion tends to create physical structures and are sublimated in these in some sense, sometimes extremely so!
Premise 8 - The latent negative emotion is catalyzed by circumstance. This could be quite strict or loose circumstantial causes - meaning, one could fight only when socially acceptable or whenever they're provoked! But the point is that it may be sublimated and stored and brought out by catalysts and constrained by severe structure and logic [Rational]. This really plays into the "Reason dominates Emotion" trope - because it's true! In true Reason there is no Emotion.
Premise 9 - Directly hurt or controlled by Reason and lashing out is Anger.
Premise 10 - Somewhat hurting and somewhat controlling Reason is Hate and Hate lends itself to Physicality!
Premise 11 - Seeing the self-evident physical we tend to shape our Reasoning to fit such!
Premise 12 - Both Emotion and Physicality generate Physicality though often different.
Premise 13 - Physicality is an absolute DRAIN on Emotion! It consumes it!

It's a lot but here it is.
 
Last edited:

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,355
Reaction score
4,645
Location
England
"accept whatever arguments you're making" I am just trying to convey my meaning.

Premise is mistaken.

Premise - Emotions lend to different kinds and levels of physicality, as well as mental ability or abilities, thus should be used and generated effectively!
I will help frame the discussion with a new set of premises:

Premise 1 - There is the Mental, Physical, Social, Emotional and Rational.
Premise 2 - Emotions lend themself to each of the 5 differently and asymmetrically, but definitely lend themselves to the Physical.
Premise 3 - There are 5 relevant primitive negative emotions and those are Anger, Hate, Worry, Misery and Fear.
Premise 4 - Negative emotions are to do with the physical and base. Negative emotions essentially are one's physicality.
Premise 5 - Positive emotions are to do with physically transcendent and 'spiritual' things. Positive emotions essentially are one's spirit.
Premise 6 - Negative and Positive emotions are basically ignorant of and do not respect each other.

The misunderstanding is the real issue here. I hope this clarifies.
On your point of negative emotions not being prevalent in fighters: People can generate emotion and use it when they please. I can decide to lounge around or go running. But if I train and run every day I will get better at it! Those who do well generating and using negative emotion will be more effective! If you can literally berserk or Hulk Out you can of course be quite effective in relevant physical measures like strength or speed or intensity!

Premise 7 - Negative emotion tends to create physical structures and are sublimated in these in some sense, sometimes extremely so!
Premise 8 - The latent negative emotion is catalyzed by circumstance. This could be quite strict or loose circumstantial causes - meaning, one could fight only when socially acceptable or whenever they're provoked! But the point is that it may be sublimated and stored and brought out by catalysts and constrained by severe structure and logic [Rational]. This really plays into the "Reason dominates Emotion" trope - because it's true! In true Reason there is no Emotion.
Premise 9 - Directly hurt or controlled by Reason and lashing out is Anger.
Premise 10 - Somewhat hurting and somewhat controlling Reason is Hate and Hate lends itself to Physicality!
Premise 11 - Seeing the self-evident physical we tend to shape our Reasoning to fit such!
Premise 12 - Both Emotion and Physicality generate Physicality though often different.
Premise 13 - Physicality is an absolute DRAIN on Emotion! It consumes it!

It's a lot but here it is.

That is one hell of a word salad.

I have a friend who was a world kick boxing champion, you really need to contact him, he can help you. One of the things he treats is anger issues.
garyturner.co.uk
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
"accept whatever arguments you're making" I am just trying to convey my meaning.

Premise is mistaken.

Premise - Emotions lend to different kinds and levels of physicality, as well as mental ability or abilities, thus should be used and generated effectively!
I will help frame the discussion with a new set of premises:

Premise 1 - There is the Mental, Physical, Social, Emotional and Rational.
Premise 2 - Emotions lend themself to each of the 5 differently and asymmetrically, but definitely lend themselves to the Physical.
Premise 3 - There are 5 relevant primitive negative emotions and those are Anger, Hate, Worry, Misery and Fear.
Premise 4 - Negative emotions are to do with the physical and base. Negative emotions essentially are one's physicality.
Premise 5 - Positive emotions are to do with physically transcendent and 'spiritual' things. Positive emotions essentially are one's spirit.
Premise 6 - Negative and Positive emotions are basically ignorant of and do not respect each other.

The misunderstanding is the real issue here. I hope this clarifies.
On your point of negative emotions not being prevalent in fighters: People can generate emotion and use it when they please. I can decide to lounge around or go running. But if I train and run every day I will get better at it! Those who do well generating and using negative emotion will be more effective! If you can literally berserk or Hulk Out you can of course be quite effective in relevant physical measures like strength or speed or intensity!

Premise 7 - Negative emotion tends to create physical structures and are sublimated in these in some sense, sometimes extremely so!
Premise 8 - The latent negative emotion is catalyzed by circumstance. This could be quite strict or loose circumstantial causes - meaning, one could fight only when socially acceptable or whenever they're provoked! But the point is that it may be sublimated and stored and brought out by catalysts and constrained by severe structure and logic [Rational]. This really plays into the "Reason dominates Emotion" trope - because it's true! In true Reason there is no Emotion.
Premise 9 - Directly hurt or controlled by Reason and lashing out is Anger.
Premise 10 - Somewhat hurting and somewhat controlling Reason is Hate and Hate lends itself to Physicality!
Premise 11 - Seeing the self-evident physical we tend to shape our Reasoning to fit such!
Premise 12 - Both Emotion and Physicality generate Physicality though often different.
Premise 13 - Physicality is an absolute DRAIN on Emotion! It consumes it!

It's a lot but here it is.
Not seen the argument chain, but thats the conculusion for all 13 premises?
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
Not seen the argument chain, but thats the conculusion for all 13 premises?
I'll let anyone reading engage with the premises and come up with their own thoughts on the matter. It's to contribute to discussion, as has been my intention this whole time. If you disagree with one or more premises be my guest and dig in.

That is one hell of a word salad.

I have a friend who was a world kick boxing champion, you really need to contact him, he can help you. One of the things he treats is anger issues.
garyturner.co.uk

The issue is you can't step outside of your own mental framework to engage with the premises (and concepts). If you can't mentally engage with the topic just step out.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,355
Reaction score
4,645
Location
England
I'll let anyone reading engage with the premises and come up with their own thoughts on the matter. It's to contribute to discussion, as has been my intention this whole time. If you disagree with one or more premises be my guest and dig in.



The issue is you can't step outside of your own mental framework to engage with the premises (and concepts). If you can't mentally engage with the topic just step out.

Your two statements here, contradict each other, so far everyone who has disagreed with you had been insulted by you, even if they just ask a question you insult them. The possibility you are wrong seems to have never occurred to you.
You called one guy "mofo", you've thrown insults around like confetti as well as misogynist insults in a show of arrogance that is breath taking.

So I'll reiterate, show your research, cite your sources and present it properly otherwise all this is just your opinion, nothing more.
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
I'll let anyone reading engage with the premises and come up with their own thoughts on the matter. It's to contribute to discussion, as has been my intention this whole time. If you disagree with one or more premises be my guest and dig in.
Was just clarifying, as you are meant to have a conclusion from premises, its fine if none is present, just odd for how arguing is meant to happen. Your meant to pay down your premise then conclusion based on the premise.

I have little vested intrest in this, just picked up on that and wanted to ask.
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
Your two statements here, contradict each other, so far everyone who has disagreed with you had been insulted by you, even if they just ask a question you insult them. The possibility you are wrong seems to have never occurred to you.
You called one guy "mofo", you've thrown insults around like confetti as well as misogynist insults in a show of arrogance that is breath taking.

So I'll reiterate, show your research, cite your sources and present it properly otherwise all this is just your opinion, nothing more.

lol I've been insulted too. You just take the taunts, rhetoric, and explicit or implicit emotional content for granted because you consider it your "group". Us vs Them cognitive bias/ blindness. You protect the social dynamic you exist in best you can and that's your tunnel vision. I stated a fact about the general difference between men and women that would require more effort on my part to communicate with you and you are still swaying from it. Mofo is colloqially used and pretty much never insulting because it's a funny thing to say, if you want to insult someone you sound it out not say "mofo". However you try and slice and dice the conversation it isn't going to work -- nothing is relevant but the damn topic and all of this better relate to it. Whether it's my "opinion" or not, you can choose to create knowledge and insight by exerting your damn mind until it EMERGES greater with some perspective or just do nothing and not discuss anything or exert your Mind at all. Literally anyone can look for literature online on whatever topic and develop a MISTAKEN perspective or NONE AT ALL. If you want PERSPECTIVE then do the Mental work. I am here to get everyone to do the MENTAL work. This all relates to direct, relatable experience. If you need RESEARCH to figure all of this out maybe you're not alive? Haha! ffs. It's a complex and interconnected reality that I've invited and pushed everyone to discuss, that no pinhole study is going to bring insight on. That's a fact. It is what it is.

I invite anyone to discuss the premises I've laid out and read the following for some elaborations:

[Premise 13 - Physical drains Emotional.]
Premise 14 - Social drains Physical.
Premise 15 - Reason drains Social.
Premise 16 - Mental drains Reason.
Premise 17 - Emotion drains Mental.
Premise 18 - Emotion harms or controls Social.
Premise 19 - Social harms or controls Mental.
Premise 20 - Mental harms or controls Physical.
Premise 21 - Physical harms or controls Reason.
Premise 22 - Reason harms or controls Emotion.
Premise 23 - Humans are Social.

How can we know what hurts or controls? Consider what greatly disrupts the other and what CONTENT is lacking. Everyone can "switch gears" but you just have to understand that there is a logic to this and it is basically true. Anyone can switch from being more Mental to more Physical. Duh! But when more Mental, one is not very Physical or Social with ease. It is like trying to juggle or multi-task, or walk in two different directions. Sure you can go forward, sure you can go back, sure you can do one after the other, but at the same time? Some things are just naturally difficult.

Emotion greatly disrupts the Social, the Social tends to lack Emotional and Mental content, and positive/ negative emotions are blunted or Physical. Humor tends to be Physical humor or Rational (perhaps lack of). Things talked about tend to be Physical. Everything is Rationalized or framed with Reason (which decreases Emotion). This one seems a bit more obvious as people are Social.
Every change in emotion changes the social dynamic. Hence people demand for emotional 'balance' to trivialize it. If every push in one direction is stopped for the sake of "balance" you prevent runaway emotion.

The Social greatly disrupts the Mental, Mental tends to lack Physical and Social content. It's well known that every bit of socialization is extremely distracting to Mental types, as Socializing is very disrupting to any 'deep' Mental process. Every bit of Mind, Mentality, Mindset, Mind-Body has to be built up and specially protected. It's the weak point in humans so messing with people's Mind is a big attack vector. In Mind types the Social is blunted or Rationalized (see Premise 15). Some things are Emotionalized to hurt or decrease the Social (hence you get accusations of having a Slave Morality, being Sheep, being Socially Engineered by mainstream media and the Education System, having no independent mind, being a conformist, et cetera et cetera) but often there's a focus on Rationalization as humans do so already (being Social afterall), it supports Mental types, and they are human so it hurts both ways to use too much Emotion. Mental types tend to have a lot of punchy opinions and are generally adept at Reason[ing] with interests in the Mind, Psychology, Cryptids, Unknowns, Conspiracies, Cults, Religion, Psychics, Fringe Research/ Science, Evil Societies, AI, Computer Science, that sort of stuff. Mental types are very stressed and very used to stress; a Mental type person is contrary to their human Social nature. Often quite isolated.
Every change in social changes the mental dynamic. Hence mental types demand social 'balance' to trivialize it. If you have everything social or society going in one direction STOPPED for the sake of "balance" or truth or somesuch you prevent runaway society/ social reality.

Mental greatly disrupts Physical, Physical tends to lack Mental and Rational Content. Reasoning tends to go back to the drawing board, Mind adapts and is an opportunist. The Physical types are disrupted by Mental but generally speaking are protected by the Social, though the Social tends to drain them. Psychological warfare is stressful to them. Illusions are stressful. Philosophy or highly conceptual stuff is stressful. Rational stuff gets dogged or ignored, they have no interest.
Every change in mental changes the physical dynamic. Hence physical types demand mental 'balance' to trivialize it. If you have everything mental or mentality going in one direction STOPPED for the sake of "balance" or sanity or somesuch you prevent runaway mentality, mindset or mental reality.

Physical greatly disrupts Reason, Reason tends to lack Emotional and Mental Content. Rational types tend to avoid the Physical due to how disruptive it is. Due to Social being drained by Rational, you see they tend to group up and form hobbyist or special interest groups. The least "baby'd" are quite solid and have a definite character, but this always tends to be protective of others as once again they draw from Social. They may take every Physical exertion or bit of Physical reality deadly serious because it is their kryptonite. Their Reason may disappear, they may become lost. OCD is more of a Reason thing but suggests weakness or loss of Reason and is being fought for or protected. Emotional Content is definitely lacking in Reason, a la Pure Reason. Emotional anything may be considered weakness and self-destructive (everyone here being human and Social afterall) or quite unhinged. Since Reason protects Social, such types are used to questioning someone's reasoning and sanity -- this is to question their ability to protect themselves and self-interest; this also permits them to hide behind 'concern' as they may claim that your 'interests are at heart' with whatever they do when using Reason. Reason has more to do with controlling Emotion than it does Physical reality, as not everyone is in STEM but everyone is trying to keep some Social fabric together and to manage, deflect and/or control some people's emotions.
Every change in physical changes the rational dynamic. Hence rational types demand physical 'balance' to trivialize it. If you have everything physical or physicality going in one direction STOPPED for the sake of "balance" or somesuch you prevent runaway physicality, physical exertion or physical reality.

Reason greatly disrupts Emotion, Emotion tends to lack Rational and Social Content. Emotion types tend to avoid Reason due to how disruptive it is. Emotion draws from Mental and creates Physical -- this should help one concieve of what it is. It is necessary as a fighter to use Emotion as it is the link between Mental and Physical. One does not require wild emotion but great great great emotional strength, speed, power and intelligence. Being a bit philosophical helps. Emotion types confront others quite readily -- they will not back down due to some Social consequences, and Physical consequences aren't too consequential in most every situation. A broken tooth is a broken tooth but no one dies afterall. People often call others EMOTIONAL but often mean that they are emotionally weak. For others that are emotionally strong they may just call AGGRESSIVE or ANTAGONISTIC or a BRUTE, in general they can say a hundred things Social about someone Emotionally Strong and they all kind of crumble away. Emotion types are direct, giving no 'face'. They will not pull their words or be too diplomatic or tactful. They are used to and create stress, seeing as humans are Social and Emotion disrupts and 'hurts' that. Emotion types are real power players. Logical reasoning tends to bind them or hurt them, OR take the pressure off them because they are under their own pressure. Thus 'losing' can be a sort of win for them. Emotion itself loses or must fight quite a bit against Reason to get anywhere and grow.
Every change in rational changes the emotional dynamic. Hence emotional types demand reason be 'balanced' to trivialize it. If you have every bit of reason or reasoning going in one direction STOPPED for the sake of 'balance' or the big picture or somesuch you prevent runaway reasoning, reason, or rational reality.

Hope this was useful to some of you.
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
Was just clarifying, as you are meant to have a conclusion from premises, its fine if none is present, just odd for how arguing is meant to happen. Your meant to pay down your premise then conclusion based on the premise.

I have little vested intrest in this, just picked up on that and wanted to ask.
Laying down premises and letting others engage with them is more discussion or the preliminary to argument as people naturally have their own point of view on what I've posited. Many productive discourses construct themselves in this way. I can take the pressure off to create clarity and a cohesive discussion. Cheers.
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
Well all excellence is decided by the competition but I haven't met anyone here that thinks they can beat Mike Tyson in a fight, MMA kind of fight even. His training is not a secret and it boils down to physical prowess of which there is a GREAT mental component but I'm not getting much engagement on that matter, and then a specific technique to avoid punches mostly -- but he was TOUGH.
So everyone here that has "decades of training" loses to a guy with maybe 5 - 8 years of training and no one is interested in how they can learn by example.
You yourself need to drop the nonsense and learn. You think you know better like everyone else here, hence the severe lack of engagement with the topic and all attention directed at my character and personal ability. None of you have anything to teach me. If I want to learn some specific techniques I can quite literally google it. What separates the best from not-the-best is not technique even, it's plain and simple.

I will continue to confront you and everyone else's need to have authority, I won't let anyone try and limit my potential. You all limit your own potential even what in the hell is the point. Absolutely unnecessary.
I'd like to bring up the first line of this post once more: "Well all excellence is decided by the competition"
Everyone knows you can't hand to hand win against a Gorilla. If you have no interest in being the best human competitor you are a hobbyist, but true martial artists think about being top of the animal kingdom as well. That's essentialism.

You may do some math problems and think you're good, but there are actual mathematicians. One is not a mathematician because they did some Calculus in high school and college. One is not a mathematician if they do not know basic set theory or the foundations of geometry (Hilbert or at least Euclid), or some category theory, algebra (number theory included), so on and so forth. In other words you do not have the essential character and SPIRIT of some title you seek to obtain without EMBODYING it. If you don't have the essential character or spirit of a Martial Artist without seeking to EMBODY it. If it is not top priority how the hell does it mean anything to say you are a martial artist? I can do some addition and multiplication on paper and say I'm a mathematician! I can learn basic algebra and some geometry in school and say I'm an experienced and established mathematician! Now mathematics isn't even competitive in nature, but MARTIAL ARTS is. So meeting and rising above competition is in the spirit and essence of Martial Arts. If you are not competitive and seek to rise above others you can hardly call yourself a Martial Artist.

Hence, True Martial Artists want to beat up Gorillas. πŸ‘
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
Let me know if you come out again. I have a friend who has a really cool weight gym in his back yard, under a roof covering. And pretty much shares your thoughts on fighting. Go figure.
πŸ‘ πŸ‘ Will do. Thanks for the invitation. πŸ‘πŸ‘
 

Diagen

Blue Belt
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
207
Reaction score
136
I'd like to bring up the first line of this post once more: "Well all excellence is decided by the competition"
Everyone knows you can't hand to hand win against a Gorilla. If you have no interest in being the best human competitor you are a hobbyist, but true martial artists think about being top of the animal kingdom as well. That's essentialism.

You may do some math problems and think you're good, but there are actual mathematicians. One is not a mathematician because they did some Calculus in high school and college. One is not a mathematician if they do not know basic set theory or the foundations of geometry (Hilbert or at least Euclid), or some category theory, algebra (number theory included), so on and so forth. In other words you do not have the essential character and SPIRIT of some title you seek to obtain without EMBODYING it. If you don't have the essential character or spirit of a Martial Artist without seeking to EMBODY it. If it is not top priority how the hell does it mean anything to say you are a martial artist? I can do some addition and multiplication on paper and say I'm a mathematician! I can learn basic algebra and some geometry in school and say I'm an experienced and established mathematician! Now mathematics isn't even competitive in nature, but MARTIAL ARTS is. So meeting and rising above competition is in the spirit and essence of Martial Arts. If you are not competitive and seek to rise above others you can hardly call yourself a Martial Artist.

Hence, True Martial Artists want to beat up Gorillas. πŸ‘

How this relates to the topic: No one wants to learn from and train with people that don't want to beat up Gorillas. If you are unwilling to become the best you are not a true martial artist! One wants to train with the best! Simple.
Worst still is that everyone says it's impossible! No one wants to train for 10 years and still lose to a Gorilla! One must have the Goal, the Spirit and the Essence for True Character, for True Martial Arts to become a True Martial Artist!
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,355
Reaction score
4,645
Location
England
How this relates to the topic: No one wants to learn from and train with people that don't want to beat up Gorillas. If you are unwilling to become the best you are not a true martial artist! One wants to train with the best! Simple.
Worst still is that everyone says it's impossible! No one wants to train for 10 years and still lose to a Gorilla! One must have the Goal, the Spirit and the Essence for True Character, for True Martial Arts to become a True Martial Artist!

You do know that gorillas are actually quite peaceful, intelligent creatures who do not fight for the sake of fighting. They will fight only as a last resort in defence.
To want to beat up animals is actually very sick, there's a name for people like that. Your analogies are as poor as your theories.

You aren't a martial artist, you don't train, you aren't talking from any experience why are you here trying to lecture martial artists and fighters?
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
You do know that gorillas are actually quite peaceful, intelligent creatures who do not fight for the sake of fighting. They will fight only as a last resort in defence.
Depends on the species, i can almost gurantee you that they do social fighting, every animal does that. And i can gurnatee you, if you do something it doesnt like, it will hit you, intetionally or other wise. Or one protecting it will hit you.

Animals arent really "peaceful", the either opt to attack as their main form of defence, or run, or opt to attack some, run from others. There inability to claw you to death, doesnt mean they are "peaceful" it means they arent a preadtory species to you. (to be fair, their ability to claw you doesnt mean they are preadtory to you,just they can kill you)

No vested intrest, its just biology time now apparntly.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,355
Reaction score
4,645
Location
England
Depends on the species, i can almost gurantee you that they do social fighting, every animal does that. And i can gurnatee you, if you do something it doesnt like, it will hit you, intetionally or other wise. Or one protecting it will hit you.

Animals arent really "peaceful", the either opt to attack as their main form of defence, or run, or opt to attack some, run from others. There inability to claw you to death, doesnt mean they are "peaceful" it means they arent a preadtory species to you. (to be fair, their ability to claw you doesnt mean they are preadtory to you,just they can kill you)

No vested intrest, its just biology time now apparntly.
And you are now a zoologist? No, not every animal does 'social' figbring and I did say gorillas will fight defensively. You need to read what Shawn Lehman, professor of anthropology at the University of Toronto and is on the board of directors of the Jane Goodell Institute says about gorillas. It's what I did before posting to make sure I had my facts right.

I did also say 'quite peaceful' like the majority of creatures, most animals won't fight unless there's no choice because the consequences of injury are often starvation through being unable to feed or hunt, infections, weakness, leaving them vulnerable etc.ing

If animals fight they do it for a reason, only man fights for the pleasure of fighting.
 
Top