Vices in Martial Arts and Life

**Judah Maccabee** · Posted On: 8/22/2007 11:14pm

Would you care to generalise from this work?

I wouldn't generalize from the Pyecha study alone. But there is an aggregation of studies that I do draw from. These include:

1. Husman, B.F. (1955) Aggression in Boxers and Wrestlers As Measured by Projective Techniques. Research Quarterly 26: 421-425. Husman finds that boxers were less aggressive than wrestlers, X-Country runners, and inactive controls. Also found that boxers were more inwardly aggressive than the others.

2. Finkenberg, M.E. (1990) Effect of Participation in Tae kwon do on College Women's Self-Concept. Perceptual and Motor Skills 71: 891-894. Finkenberg found that women who began TKD had higher prosocial values on self-concept measures than those women in regular fitness classes.

3. Gleser, J.M., Margulies, J.Y., Nyska, M., Porat, S. and Mendelberg, H. (1992) Physical and Psychosocial Benefits of Modified Judo Practice for Blind, Mentally Retarded Children: A Pilot Study. Perceptual and Motor Skill 74: 915-925. Gleser et al found that a modified curriculum of judo had far greater benefits to physical and psychological health than other methods tried beforehand, including sport-specific activities.

These are studies which specifically looked at sports vs. MA, as opposed to studies that look at MA versus previous unsuccessful efforts in other areas.

Can you give me an informed precis?

I assume this means a summary of their study:

Note that I don't wholly agree with the sentiments of this study, yet I respect that it's one of the most scientific studies completed on participation in modern martial arts in relation to antisocial tendencies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...=pubmed_docsum

**DAYoung** · Posted On: 8/22/2007 11:18pm

Originally Posted by Judah Maccabee

I wouldn't generalize from the Pyecha study alone. But there is an aggregation of studies that I do draw from. These include:

1. Husman, B.F. (1955) Aggression in Boxers and Wrestlers As Measured by Projective Techniques. Research Quarterly 26: 421-425. Husman finds that boxers were less aggressive than wrestlers, X-Country runners, and inactive controls. Also found that boxers were more inwardly aggressive than the others.

2. Finkenberg, M.E. (1990) Effect of Participation in Tae kwon do on College Women's Self-Concept. Perceptual and Motor Skills 71: 891-894. Finkenberg found that women who began TKD had higher prosocial values on self-concept measures than those women in regular fitness classes.

3. Gleser, J.M., Margulies, J.Y., Nyska, M., Porat, S. and Mendelberg, H. (1992) Physical and Psychosocial Benefits of Modified Judo Practice for Blind, Mentally Retarded Children: A Pilot Study. Perceptual and Motor Skill 74: 915-925. Gleser et al found that a modified curriculum of judo had far greater benefits to physical and psychological health than other methods tried beforehand, including sport-specific activities.

These are studies which specifically looked at sports vs. MA, as opposed to studies that look at MA versus previous unsuccessful efforts in other areas.

To what extent do the non-longitudinal comparative studies allow for the attractiveness of the pursuits in the first place? In other words, how do they rule out the possibility that TKD, for example, attracts students with prosocial traits, rather than promoting prosocial traits?

I assume this means a summary of their study:

Note that I don't wholly agree with the sentiments of this study, yet I respect that it's one of the most scientific studies completed on participation in modern martial arts in relation to antisocial tendencies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...=pubmed_docsum

Fascinating. What's the difference between those activities that enhanced the antisocial traits, and those that had minimal influence?

**Hedgehogey** · Posted On: 8/22/2007 11:28pm

BJJ has made me an obnoxious, nerdy little **** who can get away with it because I know I won't get my ass kicked. In other words, i'm every social conservative's vision of a kid who didn't get spanked.

**Judah Maccabee** · Posted On: 8/22/2007 11:30pm

Fascinating. What's the difference between those activities that enhance the antisocial traits, and those that had minimal influence?

Well, first, the authors make a valid critique that most of the studies that say "MA training = better people" suffer from construct flaws, such as low sample size or cross-sectional design, which is far less effective than longitudinal design for establishing causation.

Some choice excerpts:

Our main hypothesis is that participation
in one or more of these sports [boxing, weightlifting,
wrestling, and oriental martial arts (karate,
judo, and Tae Kwon Do)] over some time
will have an enhancing effect on antisocial involvement,
also in the presence of possible self-selection
effects.

Fighting elements
are central in three of the examined sports, boxing,
wrestling, and martial arts. Training in fight sports
implies acquisition of aggressive behaviour repertoires,
and according to social learning theory,
combat experience may enhance both fighting skills
and aggressive behaviour. Enactive learning and
also exposure to aggressive role models during
training may contribute to an enhancement of
aggressive behaviours in the training situation as well as in other settings, due to generalisation
(Bandura, 1973). Another possible influence noted
by several authors (e.g., Nixon, 1997; Rees et al.,
1990) is the effect of ‘macho’ athletic subcultures on
violent and aggressive behaviour, and this aspect
may be relevant both in training with weights and in
fight sports

The negative effects in boys seemed to stem from both the practice of
power sports itself and from repeated contact with ‘macho’ attitudes, norms, and ideals.

Possible mechanisms.

The associations between
the power sports on the one hand, and the Violence
Scale on the other, may be understood in light of
social learning principles. Boxing and wrestling in
particular are rather violent sports, and combined
effects of enactive learning, violent role models, and
acceptance/reinforcement of violent and aggressive
behaviour from coaches and peers (and maybe parents)
may contribute to altered practice outside the
sports settings also.

As mentioned, some of our results indicate that
also less specific learning processes very likely were
operative. The relationship between weightlifting and
violence was quite pronounced. The reason may be
that this activity, with a focus on muscles and
physical strength, and the other power sports activities
are associated with subcultures where ‘macho’
ideals and beliefs in the value of toughness (Nixon,
1997) may be quite prevalent. Also, the consistent
relationships between power sports and the index of
non-violent antisocial behaviour underscore the
influence of prevailing attitudes and ideals held in
the training milieu on behaviours other than those
acquired and directly practised in the training situation.
It is beyond the scope of the present article to attempt
detailed explanations of the mechanisms involved
in the documented relationships. It should be
noted, however, that a number of additional analyses
have been performed in order to take possible
confounding or nuisance variables into account.

Overall, these analyses showed that the reported
effects of power sport participation could not be explained
as a consequence of alcohol or drug use,
gang membership, or stage of pubertal development.

**Uri Shatil** · Posted On: 8/23/2007 12:15am

I have to say, this is some great argument that I greatly enjoy reading. Keep up the good work.

But I won't prevent myself from answering the original question in a self-involved way and ignoring the argument (I'll pitch in later). I wrestled in high school, I help coach a wrestling team, and I can tell you some of my observations.

First of all, everyone on the wrestling team must learn, at some point, to trust the others, because of the nature of the sport. A great deal of trust is involved. You must trust the person you're wrestling that they won't hurt you. You must trust that if you accidentally hurt them, they truly forgive you. You must trust that they are actually trying and resisting with all their might, and not just letting you win; people in tournaments will never let you win.

You learn humility. I know that in my experience wrestling, and now in BJJ, I've been beaten, and every time I'm beaten I'm reminded that not only am I not the best, but I am facing someone better than myself. That's real humility.

You learn discipline. Lots of discipline. I know I did, anyway. Someone commanding you to do army crawls down and back four times, and making you run twenty sprints because you disobey the command, really shows you that you are not in command. Having to push as hard as you can in the last period, even though you've been wrestling for five and a half minutes, and you feel like you can't physically let out that sprawl because you're too tired but you do it anyway because you have to is discipline.

But it's not all good. Aggression is a vice that I find too often in the wrestling team. Every goddamn time a fight breaks out at the highschool, I pray to myself that nobody on the team is involved. But even though only 5% of the boys in the highschool, and an even smaller number of the girls, are on the team, about 50% of the fights involve team members. The other 50% mostly involve weed and money. Every time the head coach has to talk to the team member, it kills him. You'd think that it would give them an outlet to channel their aggression. I know that when I was in highschool, I loved the fact that I actually got to use and test my skills. But for some reason, it increases the chances of fighting.

I've thought about why. Is it because the nature of the sport increases aggression? I doubt it. THe only sensible conclusion I've been able to draw is that it gives you a sense of superiority if you are more skilled than your opponent. It takes away the fear that he'll beat you. Call it rashness. It's devastating. The school has talked of punishing the team every time a member gets in a fight. Cutting budget, forcing us to raise the tuition, and it's bad enough, since enough kids already are on partial scholarships that we might not have the funds to augment. I don't know what it is, but the skill to fight comes with the urge to fight, and some people get in unnecessary fights to satisfy that urge. It's tragic, really. It's a goddamn shame.

**DAYoung** · Posted On: 8/23/2007 12:55am

Steve's summary

So it's primarily the social milieu of the arts that inclines the participants towards aggressive behaviour?

**DAYoung** · Posted On: 8/23/2007 1:02am

Originally Posted by Uri Shatil

First of all, everyone on the wrestling team must learn, at some point, to trust the others, because of the nature of the sport. A great deal of trust is involved. You must trust the person you're wrestling that they won't hurt you. You must trust that if you accidentally hurt them, they truly forgive you. You must trust that they are actually trying and resisting with all their might, and not just letting you win; people in tournaments will never let you win.

You learn humility. I know that in my experience wrestling, and now in BJJ, I've been beaten, and every time I'm beaten I'm reminded that not only am I not the best, but I am facing someone better than myself. That's real humility.

You learn discipline. Lots of discipline. I know I did, anyway. Someone commanding you to do army crawls down and back four times, and making you run twenty sprints because you disobey the command, really shows you that you are not in command. Having to push as hard as you can in the last period, even though you've been wrestling for five and a half minutes, and you feel like you can't physically let out that sprawl because you're too tired but you do it anyway because you have to is discipline.

To what extent do your virtues - discipline, humility, trust - continue off the mat?

But it's not all good. Aggression is a vice that I find too often in the wrestling team. Every goddamn time a fight breaks out at the highschool, I pray to myself that nobody on the team is involved. But even though only 5% of the boys in the highschool, and an even smaller number of the girls, are on the team, about 50% of the fights involve team members. The other 50% mostly involve weed and money. Every time the head coach has to talk to the team member, it kills him. You'd think that it would give them an outlet to channel their aggression. I know that when I was in highschool, I loved the fact that I actually got to use and test my skills. But for some reason, it increases the chances of fighting.

I've thought about why. Is it because the nature of the sport increases aggression? I doubt it. THe only sensible conclusion I've been able to draw is that it gives you a sense of superiority if you are more skilled than your opponent. It takes away the fear that he'll beat you. Call it rashness. It's devastating. The school has talked of punishing the team every time a member gets in a fight. Cutting budget, forcing us to raise the tuition, and it's bad enough, since enough kids already are on partial scholarships that we might not have the funds to augment. I don't know what it is, but the skill to fight comes with the urge to fight, and some people get in unnecessary fights to satisfy that urge. It's tragic, really. It's a goddamn shame.

Why does the absence of fear lead to violence? Does this imply that the only thing stopping many kids from fighting is fear of losing? If so, don't they clearly lack the requisite virtues associated with non-violence? And if this is the case, why? Why didn't they learn it?

**Uri Shatil** · Posted On: 8/23/2007 2:16am

It's not so much that there's no fear of you losing. It's the power that comes with th ability to fight. Wrestling is trained as a sport, and we don't learn virtues. It's not up to Coach Carver to teach student Bill Webber (made up name) not to get in fights. It's up to Mr. and Mrs. Webber. And getting into a fight almost always means that you're off the team. We do tell kids not to get in fights, we do tell them that there will be repercussions if they do, but ultimately we can't build character in them. They have to do it themselves.

But it's the power that gets them into fights. They become headstrong. They have the power to kick someone's ass, and when that someone gets them angry they use it.

Yes, of course humility extends off the mat! Arrogance is quickly put down. I've seen kids come in thinking that they're the greatest at everything, and by the time they leave they're put in their place. Trust is definitely something that I had to learn. At my first wrestling practice, I was all touchy, afraid I would get too close to my partner, throw him too hard. Five years later, I could trust someone grappling me who I'd never met before. And I definately, definately learned discipline. Physical discipline, as well as mental. My coach would make us run fifteen sprints if he saw us lying down.

Of course these virtues extend off of the mat. It's character building.

But, to answer your question, they didn't learn the virtues because you can't teach a virtue. You can teach what a certain virtue is, what it means to have it, and why it is a good trait, but ultimately you can not instill a virtue in anyone.

Furthermore, wrestling is not a style of fighting. It's a combat sport, but it is farther removed from a fight than most other fight sports. MMA, BJJ, Kickboxing, and maybe even boxing are closer to a real fight then wrestling. I didn't learn how to fight in high school. I learned how to wrestle. It took me until a few months ago, when I join Bullshido, to realize that I might also have learned how to fight.

PS But in my case, my dad taught good discipline, and plenty of my character comes from that. And the fact that I have an older brother who'd beat my ass if I did something stupid. Really, character building is up to parents, not coaches.

**DAYoung** · Posted On: 8/23/2007 3:26am

Okay. It's just that you said 'The only sensible conclusion I've been able to draw is that it gives you a sense of superiority if you are more skilled than your opponent. It takes away the fear that he'll beat you.' This is why I asked about fear and virtue.

By the way, you can't teach moral virtue (like you can other non-moral virtues), but you can demonstrate it, and learn it. Perhaps you weren't implying otherwise.

**DAYoung** · Posted On: 8/23/2007 6:10am

Originally Posted by Hedgehogey

BJJ has made me an obnoxious, nerdy little **** who can get away with it because I know I won't get my ass kicked. In other words, i'm every social conservative's vision of a kid who didn't get spanked.

So...you weren't obnoxious before BJJ? Seriousy? I mean, you've had only a short time to practice?

I'm impressed.