Principles vs. Techniques

[Appledog45]

Tai Chi and Qigong, as well as all Chinese martial arts, begin training by copying and repeating techniques. Over time, these techniques become internalized and yield what is known as “gong” — the same word as “gong fu” (kung fu). This kung fu is the ability to express the principles of the art physically with your body.

The biggest mistake beginners make is to focus on the art intellectually and to try and understand or rationalize the principles of the art before being able to express them. It is good to understand what the principles are as a roadmap but no amount of “understanding” makes up for “perception”. It can also cause problems if there is a mistake in understanding because the student will miss or resist the correct training results later.

“If you want what I have, then do what I do.”

This teaching is easy to understand and easy to follow. The teacher says, “If you want what I have, then do what I do.” You must copy the teacher’s techniques diligently, precisely and accurately, trust the teacher and be patient to achieve results. This is difficult to understand in the beginning because it can take years to achieve results. So you must find a teacher who is both knowledgeable and virtuous in his conduct and you must follow him for as long as you can.

What do you think? What is more important? To understand the principles, or to perform the techniques? Are they really two separate things?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Tai Chi and Qigong, as well as all Chinese martial arts, begin training by copying and repeating techniques. Over time, these techniques become internalized and yield what is known as “gong” — the same word as “gong fu” (kung fu). This kung fu is the ability to express the principles of the art physically with your body.

The biggest mistake beginners make is to focus on the art intellectually and to try and understand or rationalize the principles of the art before being able to express them. It is good to understand what the principles are as a roadmap but no amount of “understanding” makes up for “perception”. It can also cause problems if there is a mistake in understanding because the student will miss or resist the correct training results later.

“If you want what I have, then do what I do.”

This teaching is easy to understand and easy to follow. The teacher says, “If you want what I have, then do what I do.” You must copy the teacher’s techniques diligently, precisely and accurately, trust the teacher and be patient to achieve results. This is difficult to understand in the beginning because it can take years to achieve results. So you must find a teacher who is both knowledgeable and virtuous in his conduct and you must follow him for as long as you can.

What do you think? What is more important? To understand the principles, or to perform the techniques? Are they really two separate things?

For me understanding the principle is not possible without understanding how to do the technique. There are many people who can quote principle but aren't able to apply technique. Those who know technique often understand principles even if it's not formally taught as principle.

 

[Wing Woo Gar42]

Tai Chi and Qigong, as well as all Chinese martial arts, begin training by copying and repeating techniques. Over time, these techniques become internalized and yield what is known as “gong” — the same word as “gong fu” (kung fu). This kung fu is the ability to express the principles of the art physically with your body.

The biggest mistake beginners make is to focus on the art intellectually and to try and understand or rationalize the principles of the art before being able to express them. It is good to understand what the principles are as a roadmap but no amount of “understanding” makes up for “perception”. It can also cause problems if there is a mistake in understanding because the student will miss or resist the correct training results later.

“If you want what I have, then do what I do.”

This teaching is easy to understand and easy to follow. The teacher says, “If you want what I have, then do what I do.” You must copy the teacher’s techniques diligently, precisely and accurately, trust the teacher and be patient to achieve results. This is difficult to understand in the beginning because it can take years to achieve results. So you must find a teacher who is both knowledgeable and virtuous in his conduct and you must follow him for as long as you can.

What do you think? What is more important? To understand the principles, or to perform the techniques? Are they really two separate things?

This is a koan. Chicken and egg. Technique without principle lacks grace and cannot reach the heights. Principle without technique is just talk and has no structure. Neither principle nor technique can be manifested without the physical reality of doing the hard work of training both into the body through the exercises. For someone who takes it seriously and “forges the body in the fire of the will” the training will fundamentally change your being over time. Patience, courage, virtuous harmony, and resolution of conflict(The Way)are the guard rails on the road to success.

 

[Wing Woo Gar42]

For me understanding the principle is not possible without understanding how to do the technique. There are many people who can quote principle but aren't able to apply technique. Those who know technique often understand principles even if it's not formally taught as principle.

And I will add executing technique without principle equals poor technique.

 

[Wing Woo Gar42]

Tai Chi and Qigong, as well as all Chinese martial arts, begin training by copying and repeating techniques. Over time, these techniques become internalized and yield what is known as “gong” — the same word as “gong fu” (kung fu). This kung fu is the ability to express the principles of the art physically with your body.

The biggest mistake beginners make is to focus on the art intellectually and to try and understand or rationalize the principles of the art before being able to express them. It is good to understand what the principles are as a roadmap but no amount of “understanding” makes up for “perception”. It can also cause problems if there is a mistake in understanding because the student will miss or resist the correct training results later.

“If you want what I have, then do what I do.”

This teaching is easy to understand and easy to follow. The teacher says, “If you want what I have, then do what I do.” You must copy the teacher’s techniques diligently, precisely and accurately, trust the teacher and be patient to achieve results. This is difficult to understand in the beginning because it can take years to achieve results. So you must find a teacher who is both knowledgeable and virtuous in his conduct and you must follow him for as long as you can.

What do you think? What is more important? To understand the principles, or to perform the techniques? Are they really two separate things?

We should understand that gung fu just means skillful hard work. You can have good gung fu doing the dishes.

 

[Kung Fu Wang107]

What is more important? To understand the principles, or to perform the techniques? Are they really two separate things?

The 1st principle of the Zimen system is "残 Cruelty". How do you teach your student this principle?

Principle is abstract. Technique is concrete.

For example, the principle "bait". You drop arms to bait for punch. You raise arms to bait for kick.

 

[Kung Fu Wang107]

And I will add executing technique without principle equals poor technique.

Agree! This is a very important point. Even a technique as simple as a punch. You want your punch to be "head on collision" that your opponent moves in toward you. You don't want your punch to be "rear end collision" that your opponent moves away from you.

 

[Appledog45]

The 1st principle of the Zimen system is "残 Cruelty". How do you teach your student this principle?

Principle is abstract. Technique is concrete.

For example, the principle "bait". You drop arms to bait for punch. You raise arms to bait for kick.

We do not. We teach the principle of compassion. For example in Tantui No. 5 we add a break moment between the block and the punch. Similarly in Xingyiquan during pao quan (similar move, for comparison) we add a move to turn the fists before the strike. Both modifications seem to add time in the beginning, like a pause, but after a while you just perform the movement the original way but you have a mental moment to allow yourself to evaluate if you really want to hurt the other person.

Chen Zhonghua talks about this a lot, and it is something I have been thinking about for a long time. "The true master must stop, because if you make the true move the other person is damaged for life."

 

[JowGaWolf]

And I will add executing technique without principle equals poor technique.

Yep. Technique is what we do, good or bad. Principles are the laws that our technique is limited by and guided by. It explains to others how it works.

Question is. Can we create principle before technique?

 

[JowGaWolf]

The 1st principle of the Zimen system is "残 Cruelty". How do you teach your student this principle?

Principle is abstract. Technique is concrete.

For example, the principle "bait". You drop arms to bait for punch. You raise arms to bait for kick.

Concept is abstract. First make assumptions about a technique. Test technique
Identify the principles of that technique.

If principle is abstract then the technique maybe misunderstood.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The 1st principle of the Zimen system is "残 Cruelty". How do you teach your student this principle?

Principle is abstract. Technique is concrete.

For example, the principle "bait". You drop arms to bait for punch. You raise arms to bait for kick.

This sounds closer to strategy because it's broad. It doesn't defined how to do it. Often because there are many ways to accomplish it. There are many ways to be cruel. Many ways to bait. How you do these things isn't important as Justin doing it. If I can make my enemy fear me with cruel words then it would satisfy that strategy.

 

[isshinryuronin1]

It is good to understand what the principles are as a roadmap but no amount of “understanding” makes up for “perception”.

This is a good quote, but I would initially replace "perception" with "execution." Looking at a road map can certainly make getting to your destination easier, but you still have to navigate obstacles, watch out for other cars and have practiced driving skills - in other words, by execution. By the same token, one can get to a destination (eventually) without a map by trial and error, making your own map (discovering the principles) as you go and successfully executing your trip.

I think both these approaches occur concurrently. Karate master, Motobu Choki, used a principle of "husband and wife hands," referring to using both hands as a team. I see principle and execution as something similar - both lending understanding to the other. Regardless of which comes first, they are co-dependent. One without the other is useless.

Here's where "perception" comes in. Understanding the principle is good, but it cannot be truly "perceived" until it is experienced thru its execution. Maybe this is what Appledog was getting at.

 

[Kung Fu Wang107]

This sounds closer to strategy because it's broad.

This is why I like to use the term principle/strategy. Sometime it's difficult to distinguish between each other.

I believe principle/strategy is the best way to learn MA. When teacher teaches you the principle/strategy "use kick to set up punch". You can spend the next 3 years just try to map that into techniques such as:

- groin kick, face punch.
- side kick, spin back fist.
- roundhouse kick, hook punch.
- crescent kick, hammer fist.
- ...

 

[JowGaWolf]

This is why I like to use the term principle/strategy. Sometime it's difficult to distinguish between each other.

I believe principle/strategy is the best way to learn MA. When teacher teaches you the principle/strategy "use kick to set up punch". You can spend the next 3 years just try to map that into techniques such as:

- groin kick, face punch.
- side kick, spin back fist.
- roundhouse kick, hook punch.
- crescent kick, hammer fist.
- ...

I agree. Both together instead of one. But that probably goes back to teachers who have never used the techniques. it's difficult to know what sets up what without having done it.

Like using kick to set up punch could be me saying back kick sets up jab. But if I've used kick to set up punch then I would have a better example of how to set it up and use the right kick to set the punch.

 

[_Simon_106]

Really great question. To me technique IS the principle manifested. Principles are the fundamentals axioms upon which techniques are built, and understanding that allows freedom of expression of technique. That being said, like @JowGaWolf mentioned, learning the technique is important and crucial in understanding the principle.

Yes it is a bit chicken and egg... both are sort of the same, and it's not somuch that principle comes BEFORE technique in some sort of time-based sequence, but it forms the underpinnings of a system and technique. Sometimes addressing one really helps your understanding of the other.

Yes it can become abstract, but sometimes that's helpful in reorienting one's perception in expressing a technique. I'm certainly making a conscious effort to bridge the two, and seeing the deep connection and how the principle is actually applied through the body

Have enjoyed everyone's thoughts very much, and you've all given me a bunch to ponder on this, thank you

 

[Buka22]

To me, it'a Martial Arts, not Martial Paint By The Numbers.
In striking arts, I don't think people of different sizes and personalities should all move in the same way. Their principles may be the same, but not necessarily their movements.

And definitely not they way they fight.

 

[drop bear107]

This is kind of the kit dale idea. Timing is a principle.

 

[JowGaWolf]

This is kind of the kit dale idea. Timing is a principle.

Thats a difficult one. Principle or strategy or both. I can either sync my timing or affect my opponent's timing. Punch faster = me manipulating my timing. Throwing a feint would be me manipulating my opponent's timing. There are many ways to do this but some techniques have it built in, for example a superman punch or question mark kick.

If it fits both then does that mean that it's a requirement? Or does it make it a principle because bad timing is still timing. Bad timing can still have an effect. Me trying to kick the knee may still land on the leg or it may create an opening for another technique. A punch may miss the nose but still land on the cheek.

I'm not sure where to place timing.

 

[drop bear107]

Thats a difficult one. Principle or strategy or both. I can either sync my timing or affect my opponent's timing. Punch faster = me manipulating my timing. Throwing a feint would be me manipulating my opponent's timing. There are many ways to do this but some techniques have it built in, for example a superman punch or question mark kick.

If it fits both then does that mean that it's a requirement? Or does it make it a principle because bad timing is still timing. Bad timing can still have an effect. Me trying to kick the knee may still land on the leg or it may create an opening for another technique. A punch may miss the nose but still land on the cheek.

I'm not sure where to place timing.

This becomes my issue a bit when people tout whatever deadly technique they will use in the street. That they spend so much time focusing on that. That they ignore the much more important issue of being able to get that technique to work.

So for example.

There is no way a functional move should really look the same when it moves from person to person. That would be prioritising techniques over concept.

 

[isshinryuronin1]

If it fits both then does that mean that it's a requirement? Or does it make it a principle because bad timing is still timing. Bad timing can still have an effect. Me trying to kick the knee may still land on the leg or it may create an opening for another technique. A punch may miss the nose but still land on the cheek.

Action causes reaction. It may not be the reaction you anticipate, but that should be anticipated . Afterall, things seldom go as you expect in a fight. But that's not all bad since ANY reaction by the opponent offers its own opportunities. One of the keys to winning is being able to instantly adapt to changing conditions. Much easier said than done, to be sure. Extensive practice, experience, muscle memory, and an open mental and spiritual attitude is needed as is physical balance to quickly take advantage of a sudden opportunity. IMO, to be able to accomplish this is a goal all martial artists seek.

I'm not sure where to place timing.

Timing by itself, like power, balance, speed or even distance is not a strategy or a principle. These concepts are broader (I'll call them foundational concepts) with each of these things consisting of several principles.

For example, power encompasses the principles of dropping weight, pushing off the rear leg, hip rotation, etc. Balance encompasses the principles of center of gravity, posture, weight distribution, etc. Timing encompasses intercepting the opponent's technique, executing when the opponent is off balance and breaking his rhythm, etc. The way the principles are "manipulated," upon the opponent, as you said, and are expressed in technique, can result in strategy or tactics.

As Simon observed a few post prior, these ideas give us something to ponder, and speaking for myself, help me appreciate the eloquence of MA and lead to further understanding.