As far as evidence on that war this was something that came up at least four years ago and I may have some things jumbled like the archeologist's name. The documentary was still interesting though and the specifics on what the communication break down was about I can't remember. Again note that I have already conceded that I may be wrong and others may be right so it's not like I'm trying to prove a point I'm just stating how I personally feel about it. I'm not trying to sway you to my way of thinking or anything like that. As far as Sun Lu Tang is concerned I would have to study up on his views to be able to answer that all I know about him atm is he was a great baguazhang master and internal master. If I'm talking about the wrong guy though please let me know.
Originally Posted by NJM
He Ping 和平
Well as far as the millions of cops and regular people that disagree you took that piece of my statement out of context the rest of it spoke about nations/civilizations. I am a Pa. State Agent so as a cop I know idiots "fight" in the street however I'd like to think that fools who feel like they have the right to take advantage of people and disrupt social harmony did not inspire the great martial arts that we now study. As far as the many wars started because of small fights yes this is true but many (not all their are always exceptions to the rule) of them where a result of some social educate being broken causing it to be "honorable" to retaliate against a treacherous win. As far as personal challenge matches are concerned, again only in my opinion, that is an ego driven unnecessary thing. You can simply train full contact with another style if the goal is to test your ability if it's so serious that a death waiver be signed then why not make it a (at the time) legal duel to the death? If there are not hard feelings or some need to be superior then why challenge? This is just how I feel about it.
Originally Posted by It is Fake
He Ping 和平
Lotusmaster, here in the styleforms there arent that many posters and readers, perhaps you should post this and start a thread at the ymas section?
You said only a certain type of people fight. You also talked about single combat and challenges. I took nothing out of context as you are weaving in between single and war combat.
Originally Posted by lotusmaster
It may well be but, as usual, you are bringing more to the table. You post vague enough in the beginning then, you slowly move to your point.
As far as personal challenge matches are concerned, again only in my opinion, that is an ego driven unnecessary thing. You can simply train full contact with another style if the goal is to test your ability if it's so serious that a death waiver be signed then why not make it a (at the time) legal duel to the death? If there are not hard feelings or some need to be superior then why challenge? This is just how I feel about it.
You brought up challenges. Many a master, of what you learned, signed death waivers and engaged in said ego driven acts. These are the same people who, preached the philosophy you are now talking about.
Hypocrisy, Catch-22, truth, who knows, they are all dead and we can only interpret what they meant.
No one is telling you to change what you think. I'm challenging your assertions like
It is not the new norm. This is what it was always about. We can argue when it was added but, Masters of old fought. They accepted challenge matches to prove their art worked.
I am used to and accept the new norm of MA being judged by their ability to fight and I have no problem with people feeling that way.
I feel pacifism has done the same thing. I have never said it isn't a good thing to have but, it isn't necessary to fighting or vice versa.
However I feel fighting has taken away from the full range of the Martial Arts. Not just kung-fu but as a whole.
You can be a philosopher without physical fighting.
You can be a fighter without learning philosophy.
I have no problem with anyone doing both. I have a problem with people teaching one side is better than the other.
I also have problem with people saying you need one to learn the other. Or one completely inhibits another.
Both are on equal footing IMO.
Before you say it, I learned most of my honor, respect, loyalty, etc from my parents and by trial and error growing up. All of this was learned before, I entered Martial Arts.
Last edited by It is Fake; 8/25/2008 1:41pm at .
Lotusmaster, glad you started the thread as you were asked.
Please, use paragraphs, the large bulks of text are not good to read. Thank you.
I am also eagerly waiting for some videos of training/sparring from you.
CLICK & WATCH:
I got BULLSHIDO ON TV
"Bruce Lee sucks because I slammed my nuts with nunchucks trying to do that stupid **** back in the day. I still managed to have two kids. I forgive you Bruce."
- by Vorpal
Ever hear of the fallacy of composition? It's a fallacy that confuses an attribute of the part with attributes of the whole. For example:
Tables are made of atoms
Atoms are invisible to the naked eye
Therefore, tables are invisible
Mixing up fights, challenge matches, sparring, and warfare and trying to say that attributes that often fuel one (e.g., ego) in turn must fuel all the others as small fights are part of war-making well is a textbook composition fallacy.
Martial arts emerged for many reasons including military and police reasons (two different and overlapping social roles) for sport, for fitness, as a method of altering consciousness, etc. And often they work together -- one isn't going to get all one can out of the cultivational elements of taiji, for example, without also working on its martial aspects. This is trivially so -- even good taiji cultivationists often present with overdeveloped leg muscles relative to their chests and arms, as they don't push, spar, do heavy weapons forms or otherwise activate the muscles of their upper body to the extent that taiji is designed to make them do.
As far as wu de, it isn't all that hard -- don't start ****, don't brag about **** (gongfu) you don't have, don't be a yutz. Martial virtue isn't the same as personal virtue and isn't meant to be.
I am having a seminar on sept. 21st. I normally don't tape things cause no ones ever asked me to before so I was planning on having equipment there for taping and figured I'd show you that. Hope you can hold out that long.
Originally Posted by Tonuzaba
He Ping 和平
I think I understand you, and if I do you have my most humble apologies. I did not mean to seem as if I believed that my beliefs are any more important than anyone elses. In fact I believe that everyone's belief should be accepted as just that what they believe no more no less. Like I said I'm not trying to sway anyone, just giving you a look at the thinging behind the Golden Lotus system. I know many may not agree and that is their right, I respect everyone and their art and mean no disrespect to you, yours, or your way of thinking.
Originally Posted by It is Fake
Also I would have never questioned where you learned anything. It's not my place nor does it affect me to know who taught you honor, respect, loyalty or anything of the sort. To each his own.
He Ping 和平
This is very interesting. Thank you for teaching me this I will do more research on it in my free time and anything you would like to add to help my better understand the theory would be greatly appreciated.
Originally Posted by Rivington
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO