PDA

View Full Version : While discussing MMA versus TMA I was quoted this...



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

Pandinha
9/14/2006 2:50pm,
An important issue with MA-Therapy in a psychological context is the distinction between a therapeutic approach and a martial approach to the lessons. With the evolution of martial arts into combat systems Krav Maga and combat sports (Kickboxing, Submission Wrestling, MMA), many instructors and organizations teach only martial/combative techniques with little (if any) attention to philosophical or societal issues. In other words, students may only be taught how to fight without lessons in the proper context for applying these techniques, something that is emphasized in more traditional martial art curriculums. Hypothetically, if these philosophical/societal teachings were one of the specific therapeutic factors in martial arts study, studying an art without these teachings would be of little therapeutic benefit (and arguably, detrimental to psychological health) (Reynes, 2002). Additionally, if not properly informed, a patient undergoing MA-Therapy may erroneously believe they are acquiring martial proficiency when in fact, the curriculum they are learning is unsuitable for self-defense or competitive needs.

The bit in bold points it out...



I think it was written by a TMA apologists myself. I'm going to take it to my MA board and see what ruckus it will start.




What do you think?

DerAuslander
9/14/2006 2:56pm,
So...the martial arts are evolving into something that can be used in combat? lol...

The last sentence, "Additionally, if not properly informed, a patient undergoing MA-Therapy may erroneously believe they are acquiring martial proficiency when in fact, the curriculum they are learning is unsuitable for self-defense or competitive needs." is a bonus, however.

What is MA-Therapy, and what is this paragraph taken from?

VikingPower
9/14/2006 3:08pm,
The whole "Martial arts need philosophy" rule is just because of the Eastern way of thinking. We're Western. Boxing has never had any philosophy behind it, and it's been around a lot longer than a lot of other martial arts has.

dweidman
9/14/2006 3:26pm,
The whole "Martial arts need philosophy" rule is just because of the Eastern way of thinking. We're Western. Boxing has never had any philosophy behind it, and it's been around a lot longer than a lot of other martial arts has.

Do you consider Boxing a "combat system"?

The point being made -- if I am reading things correctly -- is that application of your skillz outside of the competition curcuit leads to problems if you don't place moral / ethical boundaries around the use / misuse of force.

I am not sure reality bears that "combat sports" are really devoid of such discussions - which would make the point of his article rather, well, pointless.

-Daniel Weidman
Bujinkan TenChiJin Guy...

VikingPower
9/14/2006 3:45pm,
Do you consider Boxing a "combat system"?

Now is where we can have fun with things. Do you mean boxing of today, or boxing from before? Boxing back during the London Prize Ring rules had much more to it then than boxing has now. Not only were various hand strikes allowed (since it was bare-knuckle, a popular one was actually "the chopper", a hammerfist they would use on the back of their opponent's skulls) but throws and stand-up wrestling were also allowed. Sir Richard Francis Bacon used a throw from boxing during his pilgrimage to Mecca (it was known as a cross-buttocks throw that day) against an Arab. Boxing was one of the major self-defense systems utilized for many many years.

So if boxing can change and lose a few things over its timespan, certainly other martial arts can as well.

And as an after-thought: what exactly classifies as a combat system?

GoldenJonas
9/14/2006 3:56pm,
The paragraph is asinine. It assumes that all MMA practitioners are Neanderthalic half-wits who leave class screaming "HULK SMASH!!! HULK SMASH!!!!" With absolutely no recognition that they must assimilate themselves into civilized, law abiding, society.

The fact of the matter is, that your typical TMA to d34dly LARPer has a false sense of confidence as to his/her ability and is much more dangerous than your MMA guy who regularly gets knocked around and knows EXACTLY how good his skills are and knows EXACTLY what a good cross to the face, Thai kick to the leg, or rear naked choke can do to a fellow human being. Thus, the MMA guy/girl has an appreciation for just how d34dly he/she is where as the TMA guy/girl is force fed what his sifu spewing.

An asshole is an asshole, regardless of whether they train MMA or TMA. However, at least in MMA you can try and knock the asshole out of someone.

Airman Kai
9/14/2006 4:00pm,
What do you think?
Oh.. let me see if I understand this correctly...

TMA teaches the children to be good little boys and girls, and to only use your ultimate karate skillz to defend youself from child molesters (who OBVIOUSLY stand no chance against a 9 year old BB).

MMA, however, doesn't teach the difference about the right time to use your skills. Therefore, we can only assume that anybody who has studied only MMA are erratic and dangerous time bombs waiting to armbar people at the smallest offense?

How about :5no: .

The truth of the matter, to me at least, is just the opposite. TMA schools tend to foster unrealistic self-anlyization of one's skill level or martial effectiveness. Despite the constant "Use your powers only for good" rhetoric, things won't work as planned. Little Johnny thinks that his Kung Fu will repel bullies and crack fiends alike, but we all know this isn't the case. Johnny does NOT know that this isn't the case, however.

MMA, being fundamentaly rooted in reality, will foster a sense of realistic solutions to combative problems (i.e. run from dirty old man who offers you candy, or beat the **** out of that kid hitting your sibling).

Truth be told, though, I think kids should fight at school. It builds character :boxing:

dweidman
9/14/2006 4:02pm,
Now is where we can have fun with things. Do you mean boxing of today, or boxing from before? Boxing back during the London Prize Ring rules had much more to it then than boxing has now. ..

I am aware of boxing history:

my post from a week ago here (http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1217225&highlight=boxing#post1217225)


Even more to the point about the brutal potential of "boxing":

"Gouge and Bite, Pull Hair and Scratch:" The Social Significance of Fighting in the Southern Backcountry (http://ejmas.com/jmanly/articles/2001/jmanlyart_gorn_0401.htm)

We are in agreement on this:

Enjoy the read if you haven't seen it before...

-Daniel Weidman
Bujinkan TenChiJin Guy...

alex
9/14/2006 4:06pm,
i agree, the amount of assholes ive met who do TMA is horrifically higher than those ive met who do combat sports. which is quite logical when you think about it, since people find it easy to be experts on something they *think* they know a lot about. such as my expertise on lesbian sex

Tom Kagan
9/14/2006 4:08pm,
We're Western. Boxing has never had any philosophy behind it, and it's been around a lot longer than a lot of other martial arts has.


Well, since the Greeks thought the gods on Olympus boxed and developed boxing as sport in order to bring themselves closer to their gods, you've got the lack of a philosophical component quite wrong there.

But, if you want to fast forward to "modern" boxing, it was developed as a "civilized" way to settle disputes that didn't require your pissed off neighbor to settle them by sticking you with a shiv while you were taking out the trash, so tthe lack of a philosophical component is wrong here, too.

And fast forward a little more, you've got a sport for entertainment purposes. Regardless of the culture you are in, the specifics of a particular method of entertainment still stems from philosophical underpinnings.


From my perspective, if you want to just stick to commitment and the will to prevail and improve, there is still a philisophical component to boxing training. However, anything further in the realm of philosophy I see as an inevitable byproduct, not a mandatory ingredient. You don't need to train it; it just happens. From that perspective, such byproducts are kind of like **** being a byproduct of eating food. People have to eat. Therefore, you have to eventually take a ****.

Now you can doing something with this philosophical byproduct just as you can pick up your **** and throw it at your neighbor. But most civilized people prefer to reduce the chances of being stuck with a shiv in retaliation by privately flushing their **** down the toilet.

Teh El Macho
9/14/2006 4:16pm,
An important issue with MA-Therapy in a psychological context is ... What, what, what????? In the name of Lord Xenu, what the **** in MA-Therapy????????

*** EDIT ***I've heard of aerobics therapy, dance therapy, yoga therapy, weightlifting therapy... but MA therapy?????


Do you consider Boxing a "combat system"?What kind of question is that? Anyways, the answer is yes.


The point being made -- if I am reading things correctly -- is that application of your skillz outside of the competition curcuit leads to problems if you don't place moral / ethical boundaries around the use / misuse of force.That's not the point being made. The point the author is trying to push between the lines is that MA teachings need to include some moral/philosophical, and they raise the "misuse of force" boogeyman argument to push their agenda.

Yes, there are moral/ethical problems in the missuse of force, but that's is the responsibility of the adult practioner to know that, not on the MA instructor to tell him so.

The responsibility to use my skills and strenght (or lack thereof) within a moral context and within the law is my responsibility, mine, and mine only. The knowledge required to come up to that conclusion is mine and mine alone. The acquisition of the necessary knowledge to know what's right or wrong is mine and mine alone.

If I'm ever in a need to be reminded by my instructor on how I should behave and my responsibility to society when it comes to use force, then I'm a fucking, pathetic, delusional, weak-minded and potentially dangerious inept sociopath, incapable of functioning or communicating with other members of the human race.

It is not the responsibility of a MA instructor to tell me the difference of what's moral and immoral, what's justified or unjustified. And since it is not his responsibility, by logic one must conclude then, that such teachings are not core, fundamental part of martial arts.

sidran
9/14/2006 4:22pm,
I don't think this pertains to TMAs (or any MA, really) as you would commonly see them (correct me if I'm wrong). I do remember seeing a pamphlet at the doctor's about some sort of karate therapy kind of program. The emphasis of the program itself apparently is on the movements and meditation and whatnot, and is there as a way to have fun, relieve stress, and other things to help with any psychological trouble you are dealing with and need therapy for. No where did I see in the pamphlet anything about "teh d24dly" or even any reference to fighting of any kind at all. It exists solely for its mental benefits.

Things like that (which I believe the quote refers to) I don't have a problem with, because, from what I understand, it doesn't advocate itself as a method of combat, and it actually would do some good for those who need something like that.

anothymaxass
9/14/2006 4:26pm,
This is alll Retardo Moltanban. In 25 years I have never given a phylosophy class in my gym.

Guess what, if you are a sociopath going in you will be one going out. rant over.

If you are a 88 pound weakling, chances are you will be a 110 pound weakling at the end of it.

Now roid rage is another issue..........................

Tom Kagan
9/14/2006 4:27pm,
If I'm ever in a need to be reminded by my instructor on how I should behave and my responsibility to society when it comes to use force, then I'm a fucking, pathetic, delusional, weak-minded and potentially dangerious inept sociopath, incapable of functioning or communicating with other members of the human race.

I know what you are getting at. But everyone needs a little reminder on a few things now and then - though not this, specifically. Still, what if you are an 8 year old Judoka? It is not soley the parents responsibility to teach their children well. It's a tired cliche, but it really does take a village...


It is not the responsibility of a MA instructor to tell me the difference of what's moral and immoral, what's justified or unjustified. And since it is not his responsibility, by logic one must conclude then, that such teachings are not core, fundamental part of martial arts.

Again, I know what you are getting at. But, regardless of method, instructors always have a responsibility. DIs teach their recruits to kill. But, already a moral, and thus philosophical, component is present because the military manages to turn people into killers without creating very many psychopaths in the process. This feat is purely due to a desired byproduct of the methodology's philosophical underpinnings. Again, it's not done so much as an integral component. But it still happens.

Tom Kagan
9/14/2006 4:31pm,
Guess what, if you are a sociopath going in you will be one going out. rant over.

While there probably is a genetic predisposition, sociopaths can be made, not just born.


Think about the origins of the word "compete" It comes from "competere": to seek TOGETHER.

Oh, so "RANT ON!" dude! :smile:

GIJoe6186
9/14/2006 4:32pm,
Why do people need to learn philosophy from martial arts? Didnt your dad teach you right from wrong? I cant count how many times my old instructor in TMA would go over right and wrong and morals. I was like WTF? Here, a 20 year old kid is teaching 40 year old men how to behave? Because he has a BB? What a load of ****.

My dad beat me when I did something wrong. I dont need to here it again in my martial arts class, because they teach commie **** anyway. The Eastern philosophy is very different from ours, I dont like it at all.

I pay money to learn to fight not to be better.

Oh wait, I just got out of my BJJ class. They taught us hip throw to armbar. MUST USE, CANT RESTRAIN, KILL CHILDREN!!!!!