What does it mean to be a Master of something?

[Millennial Martial Artist]

Hey everyone! So in almost any martial art I have come into contact with, through the ranks you eventually reach someone with the title of "Master." However, my instructor brought up a great question in one of our classes. Someone doesn't need the title of "Master" to actually achieve a form of mastership in a trade. He talked about when he was younger, and saw a person in a pizza shop who was so skilled and agile in his work, and took such great pride in it, he was a master of his trade. He then shared one of his old thesis with us to read more on. (If you want to check that out, you can here: Mastership: What it Means to Truly Master Your Trade - A Thesis by Master T. Dillow)
So my question then, is on your opinions: what does it take for someone to be considered a master at something? Is it just a certain level of experience, or does training need to come in with that too? Past that, do you think someone who is a master of anything (not just a martial art) should encompass certain attributes like discipline, humility, loyalty, etc.? What would bridge the gap between a master of martial arts and a master of a trade or skill? Thanks for all of your input!

 

[jobo]

the term is meaningless, any one can call them self's master or require their students to do so, if someone calls you a master of your trade, that's nice, but they may not have the first idea about piza making or plumbing or what ever.

any one who wants to be called master, is definitely lacking in the humility stakes

 

[Bill Mattocks]

In general, the term 'Master' is applied to one by others. I always have some amount of trepidation concerning anyone who applies the term to themselves.

However, different styles may have different methods, and 'master' may just be a title, I don't know.

My own instructor is a 9th Dan, and head of an international organization. With his vast time in karate and level of proficiency, if anyone would be entitled to be called 'Master' or even 'Grandmaster', I would think he would qualify. And indeed, some people do call him that, but not in our dojo. He is simply 'Sensei' to all of us, as he prefers.

 

[oftheherd1]

Since you have made your question so broad, I agree it is hard to quantify. Is being a master electrician equal to some grade of black belt or lower, in a martial art? I don't know because I don't know the rules for being a master electrician. The electrician's trade gets to set their rules. Any martial may decide to consider a certain level of black belt, or even below black belt, as being a master. Most Korean martial arts seem to consider a 4th dan to be a master, and qualified to have his (or her) own school, usually under their grand master and in his GM's kwan. I don't know about any other country's martial arts. All martial arts and all trades or whatever, if they choose to have grades, get to set their own rules for what a "master" is.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

So my question then, is on your opinions: what does it take for someone to be considered a "master at something"?

I think you are talking about "master at something" and not the title of "master", or "grand master". IMO, to master something (such as a technique) in MA, you should meet the following requirements.

You know how to

- apply that technique in different ways.
- counter it.
- counter those counters.
- use other techniques to set up it.
- use it to set up other techniques.
- train it.
- test it.
- enhance it.
- polish it.
- ...

 

[dvcochran]

Hey everyone! So in almost any martial art I have come into contact with, through the ranks you eventually reach someone with the title of "Master." However, my instructor brought up a great question in one of our classes. Someone doesn't need the title of "Master" to actually achieve a form of mastership in a trade. He talked about when he was younger, and saw a person in a pizza shop who was so skilled and agile in his work, and took such great pride in it, he was a master of his trade. He then shared one of his old thesis with us to read more on. (If you want to check that out, you can here: Mastership: What it Means to Truly Master Your Trade - A Thesis by Master T. Dillow)
So my question then, is on your opinions: what does it take for someone to be considered a master at something? Is it just a certain level of experience, or does training need to come in with that too? Past that, do you think someone who is a master of anything (not just a martial art) should encompass certain attributes like discipline, humility, loyalty, etc.? What would bridge the gap between a master of martial arts and a master of a trade or skill? Thanks for all of your input!

The fact that you are a yellow and asking the question shows you are heads up about things. I may see some of your question from a different perspective. I am an older guy being in MA since 1984. I owned a dojang in my hometown for over 10 years. I have been in engineering nearly all of my adult life. For several years my work required a great deal of travel, to 48 states, Canada, Mexico, and Malaysia. I made it a point to visit as many MA schools as possible, regardless of style, training at over 200 different schools. Sidebar: I am 6th Dan WTF #5902311, 1st Dan Kali, and green sash Kung Fu. NOT bragging, for informational purposes only. I still train and teach. I never seek or am seldom call Master. I am very blessed to still workout with my 84 year old Grand Master Seoung Eui Shin. His list of published paperwork and accomplishments is very long. So, from the MA perspective I have experienced enough to have seen some very, very good and bad schools. I think it is imperative to be certified and credentialed as an instructor. That does NOT mean it is necessary to throw around the title Master. Frankly it is done way too often in MA when it is not deserved. If an instructor feels they have to throw around a title to be respected something is missing. Sure regale your accomplishments if they are valid, you earned it. But often "accomplishments" are self-satisfying and have little depth. Did it help someone else, did it change a circumstance?
In the professional working world (mine anyway) yes longevity is important but proven success and credentials are absolutely a must to survive. There is some structure but the depth and breadth of requirements to do various jobs is massive. That said, I am thoughtful how I present myself. I let my credentials and accomplishments speak for themselves and only occasionally is it necessary to crow about myself. However, in North America, in many skilled jobs the term Master is used to define a level of expertise requiring OTJ training and time. I use it often to ensure I have, at least by contract, qualified people for a given job. You see it heavily in Union environments.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The fact that you are a yellow and asking the question shows you are heads up about things. I may see some of your question from a different perspective. I am an older guy being in MA since 1984. I owned a dojang in my hometown for over 10 years. I have been in engineering nearly all of my adult life. For several years my work required a great deal of travel, to 48 states, Canada, Mexico, and Malaysia. I made it a point to visit as many MA schools as possible, regardless of style, training at over 200 different schools. Sidebar: I am 6th Dan WTF #5902311, 1st Dan Kali, and green sash Kung Fu. NOT bragging, for informational purposes only. I still train and teach. I never seek or am seldom call Master. I am very blessed to still workout with my 84 year old Grand Master Seoung Eui Shin. His list of published paperwork and accomplishments is very long. So, from the MA perspective I have experienced enough to have seen some very, very good and bad schools. I think it is imperative to be certified and credentialed as an instructor. That does NOT mean it is necessary to throw around the title Master. Frankly it is done way too often in MA when it is not deserved. If an instructor feels they have to throw around a title to be respected something is missing. Sure regale your accomplishments if they are valid, you earned it. But often "accomplishments" are self-satisfying and have little depth. Did it help someone else, did it change a circumstance?
In the professional working world (mine anyway) yes longevity is important but proven success and credentials are absolutely a must to survive. There is some structure but the depth and breadth of requirements to do various jobs is massive. That said, I am thoughtful how I present myself. I let my credentials and accomplishments speak for themselves and only occasionally is it necessary to crow about myself. However, in North America, in many skilled jobs the term Master is used to define a level of expertise requiring OTJ training and time. I use it often to ensure I have, at least by contract, qualified people for a given job. You see it heavily in Union environments.

Just to clarify, the yellow belt in his profile just signifies his number of posts on here, not his actual rank in any art.

It also says you are a white belt, despite actually being a 6th dan.

 

[Elbowgrease]

I like to think that mastery is a pursuit, not a destination. It is a path that doesn't end until you die. My sifu and his used to say only dead people deserve to be called master.
Kind of an extreme view, but I don't think it's without merit. I've only had one experience with a person who claimed to be a master, and it was not a positive one.
In a less extreme view, I think that if a person demonstrates a thorough understanding of and dedication to the principles of their skill, whatever that happens to be, and others think of them as master, then so be it. Mastery as something that is beyond just proficient.
But then there are masters of trades, and masters degrees, and those are different things.

 

[Paul_D]

Past that, do you think someone who is a master of anything (not just a martial art) should encompass certain attributes like discipline, humility

Well I would say that discipline is a given as without it you would never reach that rank.

Humility is a less straight forward matter as it can vary culturally. From what I can gather, referring to yourself as a Master or Grandmaster in the US is done so without ego. But it's not something that is generally done in the UK as it comes across as very egotistical, and if someone ever introduced themselves as Master I would walk off the mat as I wouldn't be able to take them seriously.

Your instructor putting Master next to his name on his thesis for example, probably doesn't even register to you as anything out of the ordinary, but to me it comes across as very egotistical to refer to yourself in that way. I'm not saying he is doing that of course, I'm just pointing out the cultural differences.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Well I would say that discipline is a given as without it you would never reach that rank.

Humility is a less straight forward matter as it can vary culturally. From what I can gather, referring to yourself as a Master or Grandmaster in the US is done so without ego. But it's not something that is generally done in the UK as it comes across as very egotistical, and if someone ever introduced themselves as Master I would walk off the mat as I wouldn't be able to take them seriously.

Your instructor putting Master next to his name on his thesis for example, probably doesn't even register to you as anything out of the ordinary, but to me it comes across as very egotistical to refer to yourself in that way. I'm not saying he is doing that of course, I'm just pointing out the cultural differences.

In some ways it's the same as calling yourself sensei or sifu whatever. Or, depending on the style, it's your qualification. For instance, if someone's writing a thesis and they're a PhD in X, they'll include PhD at the end of their name. It's not a bragging thing, it's just informing the readers 'this is who I am and these are my qualifications' when they read it.

Edit: I did kind of chuckle when seeing a thesis on mastership by a master, but I think that's just an unfortunate coincidence here.

 

[Balrog]

Hey everyone! So in almost any martial art I have come into contact with, through the ranks you eventually reach someone with the title of "Master." However, my instructor brought up a great question in one of our classes. Someone doesn't need the title of "Master" to actually achieve a form of mastership in a trade. He talked about when he was younger, and saw a person in a pizza shop who was so skilled and agile in his work, and took such great pride in it, he was a master of his trade. He then shared one of his old thesis with us to read more on. (If you want to check that out, you can here: Mastership: What it Means to Truly Master Your Trade - A Thesis by Master T. Dillow)
So my question then, is on your opinions: what does it take for someone to be considered a master at something? Is it just a certain level of experience, or does training need to come in with that too? Past that, do you think someone who is a master of anything (not just a martial art) should encompass certain attributes like discipline, humility, loyalty, etc.? What would bridge the gap between a master of martial arts and a master of a trade or skill? Thanks for all of your input!

I know Master Dillow and I had read his paper before. It's a really good explanation.

To me, earning the title of Master Instructor meant that I had reached a certain level of proficiency in teaching and in technique, but more importantly, it meant that I had gotten to be a really good student. And that's what we are. We're students. We're all trying to learn and make ourselves better and help others learn and make themselves better.

 

[drop bear]

it is still pretty much for me if you are the head of a style.

 

[oftheherd1]

it is still pretty much for me if you are the head of a style.

In the Korean tradition that I have observed, if you are the head of a kwan, you are more likely going to be a Grand Master. That also means that you will have been recognized by other GM of you status, usually by some agreed upon and demonstrated expertise, and some testing.

 

[pgsmith]

Well I would say that discipline is a given as without it you would never reach that rank.

Humility is a less straight forward matter as it can vary culturally. From what I can gather, referring to yourself as a Master or Grandmaster in the US is done so without ego. But it's not something that is generally done in the UK as it comes across as very egotistical, and if someone ever introduced themselves as Master I would walk off the mat as I wouldn't be able to take them seriously.

Your instructor putting Master next to his name on his thesis for example, probably doesn't even register to you as anything out of the ordinary, but to me it comes across as very egotistical to refer to yourself in that way. I'm not saying he is doing that of course, I'm just pointing out the cultural differences.

It is not a US and UK thing Paul, it is more of a Japanese thing. A great many schools that started from Japanese arts no longer have direct ties to Japan. At the heart of Japanese culture is a certain level of humility. So, in the arts that are more closely tied to their Japanese roots, you won't hear the instructor refer to themselves as sensei or master, you won't see anyone referring to themselves as renshi, hanshi, or shihan, even though these are all teaching ranks that most Japanese schools bestow on their instructors when they reach a high enough level. Occasionally, you will see someone list their qualifications on official documentation, but they'll never refer to themselves that way.

I think a lot of it comes in when people try too hard to sell the art they've created. That's been my experience anyway.

 

[Steve]

I read two questions in the OP.

1: What is a master? My opinion is that a master level martial artist is someone who has moved beyond applying the art, and into an area of evaluation and innovation. He/she has reached a point where the techniques and philosophies are being applied in new ways. This would correlate to the synthesis and evaluation levels of expertise in Bloom's taxonomy. Some clues of whether you are a master level martial artists are an expert among experts. Ian Abernathy is a guy who seems to have a lot of credibility. He has created a lot of material that is used by other high level martial artists. I'd say he meets this criteria.

Master is also a title, and it can literally mean whatever you want. So, if it's a rank or an honorific, it means exactly what the institution thinks it means. no more or less.

2: What is similar or different about a master tradesman and a master in a martial art? Well, I think that in trades, the term indicates the level of independence. Here's an interesting article that Google provided on the differences between a master level and journeyman level electrician. You can get a sense of how that might apply to a martial artist, I think.

Differences Between a Journeyman & a Master Electrician

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

To me, a master is a person who has some "door guarding skill" that he can do better than most of the people on earth. I have heard teachers said, "If you have learned ... and ..., you can leave. I don't have any more to teach you after that." I like that kind of honest attitude.

When GM Man Lao-Ming's "get off the bus through the back door" failed on his opponent, GM Man declared retirement that day. Even a master, he may be just good in few things.

 

[dvcochran]

Just to clarify, the yellow belt in his profile just signifies his number of posts on here, not his actual rank in any art.

It also says you are a white belt, despite actually being a 6th dan.

No harm, no foul. I do not understand to member titles so I will answer to just about anything.

 

[dvcochran]

No harm, no foul. I do not understand to member titles so I will answer to just about anything.

 

[dvcochran]

In some ways it's the same as calling yourself sensei or sifu whatever. Or, depending on the style, it's your qualification. For instance, if someone's writing a thesis and they're a PhD in X, they'll include PhD at the end of their name. It's not a bragging thing, it's just informing the readers 'this is who I am and these are my qualifications' when they read it.

Edit: I did kind of chuckle when seeing a thesis on mastership by a master, but I think that's just an unfortunate coincidence here.

I do not disagree however, the credentials of a professor or master electrician are more defined and traceable. Unfortunately, any Joe can call themselves a 9th degree BB and if they can pull it off, the truth may not come to the surface for some time.

 

[pgsmith]

Unfortunately, any Joe can call themselves a 9th degree BB and if they can pull it off, the truth may not come to the surface for some time.

If they've created their own art, then they can call themselves whatever rank they wish in that art. However, if a person calls themselves an 8th or 9th degree in a legitimate martial art, then it is pretty simple in this modern age to verify those credentials. it was a lot harder to verify back before the internet.