Black Belt's 'MA Myths' and more fun

[MEGA JESUS-SAMA]

Actually, the Model T analogy was originally suggested by JFS USA;

So? You're the one who made the analogy.

but regardless, why are legitimate TMAs any less historically or culturally significant than classic cars?

A Model T is actually an artifcat from its time. Modern TMA aren't artifacts left by warrior monks, they're combative systems that have (hopefully) changed over time. What you're suggesting is similar to brining back the old Monarchies because they're historically significant, even though it's a shitty form of government.

Further, surely no-one is suggesting that all martial arts should remain as they have always been. I'm just pointing out that it doesn't make much sense to call Bullshido on those martial artists who see greater value in preserving antique systems for their own sake than in training to win in the octagon or in a street fight. There's room for both perspectives and more besides.

The best way to preserve a tradition is to expand it to meet new challanges. The original practioners probably intended for it to be like that anyway.

[DdlR]

So? You're the one who made the analogy.

No, I extended the analogy that JFS USA made.

A Model T is actually an artifcat from its time. Modern TMA aren't artifacts left by warrior monks, they're combative systems that have (hopefully) changed over time. What you're suggesting is similar to brining back the old Monarchies because they're historically significant, even though it's a shitty form of government.

The Model T also changed over time; see http://www.modelt.org/tcars.html for all the significant changes that were made to the design over thirty years. All of them are considered to be valuable antiques today.

The best way to preserve a tradition is to expand it to meet new challanges. The original practioners probably intended for it to be like that anyway.

That's the interesting cultural tension between the desire to preserve tradition, against the desire to improve upon tradition. Some people like to do the former, some the latter; some people are comfortable with both in different areas. The problems arise when either side becomes evangelical and starts saying, "this is the true way", or "this is the way it has to be", and mocking the other. I think that happens because people sometimes lose perspective and start applying their own values to the other side, without realizing that the values of the other side are neither better nor worse, they're just different.

[MEGA JESUS-SAMA]

No, I extended the analogy that JFS USA made.

You didn't do anything to his analogy. You made your own using the same examples.

The Model T also changed over time; see http://www.modelt.org/tcars.html for all the significant changes that were made to the design over thirty years. All of them are considered to be valuable antiques today.

Wrong change over time. Unless you can find a martial artist from the 1200s, then we don't have anyone practicing a martial art that's come to us from the 1200s.

That's the interesting cultural tension between the desire to preserve tradition, against the desire to improve upon tradition. Some people like to do the former, some the latter; some people are comfortable with both in different areas. The problems arise when either side becomes evangelical and starts saying, "this is the true way", or "this is the way it has to be", and mocking the other. I think that happens because people sometimes lose perspective and start applying their own values to the other side, without realizing that the values of the other side are neither better nor worse, they're just different.

If you're going to let the art stagnate because it's traditional, then it's just a tradition and shouldn't even be classified as a martial art anymore.

[DdlR]

Wrong change over time. Unless you can find a martial artist from the 1200s, then we don't have anyone practicing a martial art that's come to us from the 1200s.

If you're going to let the art stagnate because it's traditional, then it's just a tradition and shouldn't even be classified as a martial art anymore.

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I think it becomes a semantic argument at that point.

[I aint punchy!?]

The danger is that once a MA practitioner ceases to focus on maximising the combat effectiveness of the style that they are training in, then the meaning of the movements that they are seeking to learn becomes lost. A MA practitioner that focuses on the idea of maximising combat effectiveness in the patterns of movements they learn has the possibility of understanding the intent of the person who invented those movements. A MA practitioner who instead aims to 'look good' for whatever reason, will be operating at crossed purposes to the inventor of the movements, and so will never learn them properly.

This can perhaps be seen most clearly in the degeneration of Tai Chi, which nowadays ill informed people don't even consider to be a martial art...


As for bowing in martial arts.... this seems to be a general phenomenon in all combat sports in some way or another. Either a bow, a hand shake, hitting each others gloves etc etc. Its a way of saying to the person that you might well hurt that you thank them for the opportunity to practice on them.

[MEGA JESUS-SAMA]

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I think it becomes a semantic argument at that point.

What opinion?

[DdlR]

What should or should not be classified as a martial art. The previous poster pointed out that some people do not consider Tai Chi Chuan to be a martial art, a position that he obviously disagrees with; then there's capoeira, which is simultaneously a martial art, sport, exercise system, dance and cultural ritual, among other things. It raises the semantic question of "what is a martial art?"

[MEGA JESUS-SAMA]

That was a joke, because everything I say is an unquestionable fact.

[DdlR]

I bow three times in your direction.

[Gezere]

What should or should not be classified as a martial art. The previous poster pointed out that some people do not consider Tai Chi Chuan to be a martial art, a position that he obviously disagrees with; then there's capoeira, which is simultaneously a martial art, sport, exercise system, dance and cultural ritual, among other things. It raises the semantic question of "what is a martial art?"

Both Taijiquan and Capoeria were founded as MA, meaning there sole purpose was bringing harm to another person. What we have now is far removed from what it originally was.

So to answer your question:

A Martial Art is a SKILL(Art) that deals with WAR/COMBAT (Martial). Now the real question is how effective the skill is at dealing with it.