Taylor

This post was originally published as an article in a dedicated KarateForums.com Articles section, which is no longer online. After the section was closed, this article was most to the most appropriate forum in our community. As martial artists, it is beneficial to learn to study not only our martial art, but the nature of conflict itself. In studying conflict, we study victory, defeat, and the means by which a defeat and victory occurs. The means by which victory and defeat occur are rarely separate from the way a conflict unfolds. When we study conflict, we will note that any actual confrontation has a process by which that conflict unfolds. Two nations don't go to war at a whim, but there are motivations, agendas and a process by which a nation decides if war is an appropriate decision. Calculations are made about benefits and costs, calculations about enemy forces and the chances of victory. Preparations for war take time, as well as justifying the war to the populace and plans must be implemented. Errors in these steps create complications in victory and can even lead to defeat. The process by which an individual enters a physical conflict, are not so different. Some individuals are unaware of this process within themselves, but this doesn't mean the process doesn't occur. In fact, a lack of a conscious use of this process is often what may lead a person to a defeat. In studying martial arts, we also are learning how to guarantee victory or defeat in conflict. The nation that trains their military but doesn't calculate the cost of a war to the nation is akin to a martial artist who enters a fight without considering the consequences of either victory or defeat, including legal. The nation that trains their military but doesn't calculate their enemy's strength is akin to the martial artist who doesn't size up his opponent. The nation that trains their military but doesn't consider the means and strategy by which they will achieve victory is akin to the martial artist to trains for a vague idea of a fight without studying the cause of a fight and the means by which a fight is entered. Therefore, in order to study conflict and learn to think strategically about conflict, we must look into the process by which conflict unfolds as much as the techniques that we can use in order to more effectively attain victory. We hear many interesting stories about martial artists and their fights. They are entertaining, but we rarely ask a very important question, "Why did that person attack you?" The martial artist who claims, "no reason," is clinging to ignorance. The martial artist may not be aware of the reason, but this does not mean that a reason does not exist, merely that the reason is unknown. As martial artists, I do not believe it is appropriate to be satisfied to remain ignorant in this regard. Studying technique but never examining how conflict arises and unfolds is training for one-half of the means to victory. Technique is only one element in martial art training, strategy is a huge dimension to training. This is why we must be willing and able to examine the causes of conflict and the way conflict unfolds to truly contemplate strategy. Some time ago, I got jumped by two homeless guys outside of my apartment. I lived in a bad area, and one of them was carrying a long metal bar he clearly intended to use to beat me to death. I stood next to one of the wooden pillars in the hallway next to my door and waited for them to come. This effectively reduced his ability to swing the bar sideways, because I could simply step next to the pillar. All he could do is thrust it at me, and since it didn't have a point, it was a good place to stand to negate his attack. This also reduced the other guy's ability to come after me, he had to run around the side of the building to get me, effectively giving me time to get the metal bar out of his hands before the other guy got to me. It worked, and with the application of some simple techniques, I got the bar and they ran away. Now, reading this, you may thing, "Good tactical decision," and in that situation, yes, and thank God! But, I'd made a tactical error earlier that week. You see, if we ask the question I proposed earlier, "Why did they attack you?," my tactical error is as clear as day. I'd woken up one morning, hearing them through my window talk about how they stole money from the ashtray of my pickup. They broke the back window latch to do so, and I was more angry about that than at the change they stole. The tactical error I made was when I confronted them about it later, yelling at them for taking my money, since they saw me around all the time, and I usually gave them money. I figured they owed me more consideration than that. A better tactical decision would have been to assess what I wanted and conceive a plan to achieve that aim. What I wanted was for them to stop stealing from my car, but since they were homeless and alcoholic, they had nothing to lose and wouldn't stop unless forced to do so. Confronting them was a huge tactical error, since it allowed them to arm themselves and prepare a strategy on their terms. I should have looked at the situation more soberly and developed a strategy to achieve my aim. Perhaps I could have set a trap for them that would end with them getting arrested, since this was the only thing that would stop them from stealing from me. Then I also wouldn't have been directly implicated by them as the cause for them being arrested. I also could have parked my car far away from the apartment building. Perhaps I could have thought of several things, but instead I completely unconsciously created the cause of a conflict without even realizing it, thus leaving to chance the conditions of the conflict and it's unfoldment. Thank God they weren't real martial artists, or they would have used the advantage I gave them to put me at a disadvantage, and thus more concretely assure their victory! In contemplating strategy, then, we can see how critical it is to examine our interactions in a fundamental way. Many times, I have heard martial artists claim that certain conflicts were "unavoidable" and yet they tend to get into a lot of fights. When hanging out with them in public places for a while, it becomes apparent that these particular individuals were very rude to people they didn't know, almost without knowing it. Posture, tone of voice, attitude, interpretations of events in these people all created a persona that simply drew conflict like a magnet. All of this must be mastered by the true martial artist if he is willing to fully devote himself to the capacity to have victory in a conflict. Personality can be a weapon, when properly wielded. Not only can a charming demeanor disarm most situations, but can disarm a person who persists in trying to fight, creating a powerful opportunity for initiative. Therefore, it is a strategic flaw to believe that our personality is "set in stone" or that we are "this" or "that," for who and what we are is actually quite malleable, and we will find that it changes constantly when in different environments and moods, anyway. Therefore, mastery of this creates an entirely new level of training. In order to examine the depths of the nature of conflict and the means to more consistently attain victory, a martial artist must eventually learn to devote the entirety of his being to this effort. All of his self, not merely his hands and arms, must be a well-honed weapon for achieving victory. In this pursuit, one begins to find that the cause of conflict exists primarily in oneself. Certainly, many in this world pursue conflict, and those who pursue conflict may seek it out and it may seem "random" when it comes to us without notice, but perhaps we can examine the situation and discover if it was our own lack of self-mastery that led to our "surprise." Perhaps much conflict is avoidable, or at least capable of being seen ahead of time to some degree. A person chooses to start a fight, even if the reasons, the where and the when are unknown to the person, this may yet be discernable to the martial artist. Eye contact at the wrong time, body language that conveys a certain message, all of these can communicate subtle cues that either draw a person seeking a conflict to one self, or deflect a person away. Conflict may not be as "random" as we tell ourselves. A principle of randomness still exists in this world that may not be avoidable, yet I would submit that much of what we call "random" regarding the causes of conflict in our lives, when we really look into it, is actually the product of our own unconsciousness, and we could have taken measures that involved our own self-mastery to at least be aware of and prepare for a conflict in a more conscious way. If we are martial artists and claim to be "surprised" by an enemy, then I would submit that in most cases we have failed in our strategic preparations and, if we survive the ensuing conflict, should examine our strategic error in order to find the means to avoid that mistake in the future. Strategy is the examination of the causes and unfolding of conflict in order to determine and direct the unfolding in the most advantageous way. Controlling and identifying these causes, and being able to move and direct the unfolding of the conflict is primarily the work of self-mastery. Studying this, we can move our martial arts training to an entirely new level.

Well, I think my generalization was certainly a generalization. I mean, I've actually worked with criminals and trained with a lot of people who worked in the Prison system, including Folsom Prison, so my generalization isn't completely unfounded, but you're right, it's a generalization. There are a lot of intelligent sociopathic criminals.

Thanks for that tallgese and Bushido. Very helpful... I remember a bunch of guys a number of years ago in my martial arts studio working on inventing some of these kinds of techniques, and I asked them, "have you ever fired a gun?" "No," they said. "Have you received training from someone that has survived these techniques who can testify to you that they work?" "No," they said. "Then don't teach these techniques in this school anymore!" People like to do some weird things in the martial arts world sometimes and try to sell it. It's scary. I've heard that Krav Maga has actually been used on the battlefield with Israili Soldiers, so those are some techniques I think can be recommended with a clear conscience.

How's this for a dangerous generalization: Some events don't have a cause. Each interaction between two individuals has an entire set of causes attached to it which are original and distinct, from walking out the door in the morning to the moment the desire to interact to the moment an interaction begins. Two people don't just teleport from nowhere into a spot and suddenly started fighting each other for no reason. In the most 'random' of circumstance, two people need to at least engage a chain of events that leads them to a particular place at a particular time to be able to be in the same place at the same time. Then there is the factor that puts at least one of these individuals in a psychological state of mind to WANT to fight at that particular moment. An adult can't get to be an adult if they walk around their enitre lives fighting the first person they see all the time. There is a cause that makes the individual choose to fight this person and not that person. What that cause is varies according to the particular individual, the time and place. So, now we're moving back from the general into particulars. So, yes, I suppose I was generalizing, but since we were talking inside a generalization, it's hard to be particular. Let's go back to a particular scenario: I don't see how the original poster didn't notice some big bubba walking up to him in a mood. You're not going to call that a moment of mindlessness? You're going to excuse that and enable that weakness in a fellow warrior? Forget that, I like the guy, so I'm going to reflect the truth to my brother: You spaced out man, try to be more conscious. Not that I'm perfect, but you did ask, and this is a battlefield and we are warriors. I think anyone would have admit that if he had been remained aware of his environment, he would have seen the big bubba walking up to him, seen from the body language that this guy was in a mood and looking for trouble, and got back into his car, locked the door and got on the cell phone to 911 or drove away or waited until bubba went away. But he spaced out. No big deal, happens to the best of us, but I'm not going to call it "good technique", either. BTW, on that note, I appreciate your challenges to my position on this point, Bushido. You don't run into someone who can approach a position in such a thoughtful, yet intense way, yet remain emotionally centered in the process. I'd like to know where you train and who your Sensei is.

I wonder if there are any military or law enforcement officers in here who could weigh in that received explicit training for this, or if they already did, I'd like to know who, because those are the people whose opinion I'm interested in on this point. Honestly guys, working with firearms is an entirely different skill set than martial arts, and while related, I know there is an entire range of curriculum that many military and law enforcement officers receive on this point that is time tested and worth hearing. This is a dangerous topic to theorize on.

Win the local Daiymo's favor by destroying his enemy. I'm going to set his enemy up to commit a faux paux against me, then fight him in a duel for honor, which will win me the Daiymo's support and allow me to usurp the officials in my local province and install my own students in their place and thus give me the political position to destroy the competing dojo and his students without any fear of reprisals from the local government... oh, shoot, this is the 21'st century, darn! I guess I just have to try to get in better shape.

Meeting Myself : Beyond Spirit of the Empty Hand by Stan Schmidt Is that the one? I got the title off of Amazon. Sounds good, I should give it a read.

No problem. I'd just recommend this conversation be taken up with one's Sensei rather than here.

I used to resent how Master Kim made me do some stupid 'impractial' technique over and over again. But later, that training came out in some unexpected ways, saving my behind, usually. I didn't resent him after that, I tell you! Sometimes tradition should be changed, but sometimes there are reasons that methods have remained the same for so many years. I don't think it's good to so quickly discount the intelligence of our predecessors. Certainly, evolving an art is a good thing, but many attempts at this in modern times have downgraded excellent things by too quickly changing methodology just because we don't UNDERSTAND why. We credit our modern thinking too much. We aren't necessarily more 'enlightened' just because we have better technology. Sometimes the 'why' didn't get passed down for some reason. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I think we honor our predecessors by thinking long and hard for many years about the why behind something BEFORE changing it. In many traditions, you can't change an art's methods and curriculum too much unless you reach the high master rank. I think there is a lot of intelligence and wisdom behind this policy. Some things simply don't seem very practical but are VERY practical, actually, but you have to experience it. That's why a lot of martial arts instructors will listen to your arguments, smile and say, "Okay, 20 more repetitions." In most cases this isn't a punishment for disobedience, but an attempt to give you the answer. Do you notice how in modern times we are addicted to having an answer we can intellectualize? But in martial arts training, don't you notice how you learn a different kind of thinking, not so linear, not so 'heady' not always as 'logical', but once you see it and feel it in action, it makes perfect sense? You can't always intellectualize it to someone else, either, if you notice. A person can easily argue you down with words, even though you've seen it in action. You might really KNOW because you experienced it, but someone else will have their intellectual ideas about it and tell you you're full of crap. So this is where I think forms is headed. Forms teach you many important things. If you don't want to practice them, don't. But there's a lot in them, practically speaking. Does it have to be something you can intellectualize to be 'practical'? You guys make some pretty darn good cases against their practice, and I don't think I can verbalize why you're wrong in a way you wouldn't negate, but let me ask you this, do you negate your Sensei also? If so, why? Why not do what your Sensei says and let the form do the speaking? This is how martial art 'instruction' has communicated it's points from time immemorable. 'Reasons' were discovered, not intellectualized so much, and there is great intelligence and wisdom in that. Practice them diligently for 15 more years and then argue this point... but by then I think the forms will have done the job of making the point.

Yes.

This is an issue that many people have confused and lost their lives in prison as a result. A District Attorney in the United States can decided to press manslaughter charges for ANY death, which are not murder charges, even if lethal force is used for the purposes of 'self-defense' and even if the opponent is carrying a weapon and you are not. There are many standards that play into 'self-defense' which differs in each state and sometimes county, and the distinction between 'self-defense' and manslaughter actually has a lot of grey areas. The police are required to DILIGENTLY investigate 'wrongful' death, and even if the police are on your side, this kind of situation can end up blowing up in your face. Be careful, my brothers.

In Tae Kuk Mu Sul joint locks are a HUGE part of the training, but ever since my knee injury, and I attempted to pursue this aspect of the art further, I found that there was something lacking in the practical applicaton of them (I was a bouncer for two years, so I had a lot of opportunities to practice). I also trained with a guy at that time who was a prison guard at Folsom prison, and he made the same determination. Sometimes they worked, sometimes they didn't, and sometimes they "half-worked." Given, we worked with joint locks for hours and hours every week and I was a second degree black belt and he a first at the time. He had 7-10 years experience, I had 10-13 years. Even though our technique was very strong, comparatively, there was something missing in the training that made the techniques less effective. So this is why I switched to the Aikido dojo I'm training in now. The key is body dynamics and timing. Body dynamics and timing is the most important key to the effectiveness of joint-locks in a real fight, and this is an extremely subtle skill to learn. As many observed in relationship to Aikido, that's "the idea" in Aikido, however, unfortunately many Aikido dojos also miss this point as well. I searched a long time to find my current dojo, and I had enough practical experience to know what to look for by the time I went looking. I see a lot of Aikido schools that claim to be "martial" and they do weird, unrealisitc resistance to grabbing that never happens in actual physical confrontations. This creates an illusion of competence, but rarely applicable, from what I've seen. Other Aikido dojos become more spiritual and less martial, more like a dance class. The mistake we made in Tae Kuk Mu Sul is that we trained with static energy the whole time. If you want to really master joint locks you have to train in how to deal with diverse energetic approaches. You start with an opponent grabbing your wrist in joint-lock training not because this scenerio is necessarily realistic, but because it is the best way to learn to determine and connect to the energy that is approaching you. By energy, I don't mean anything "froofy," I simply mean: Static, dynamic, moving through your center, moving off to the side of your center, moving into you tentatively, moving into you strongly, moving away from you, and so on and so forth. Ultimately you have to learn to apply the joint lock that matches the energy of the opponent, and you have to learn to time it perfectly. So, practically speaking, if you want close to 100% effectiveness with joint locks, you have to train this way... and that applies to whether you want to break or control (though control is admittedly harder).

I haven't seen it, but NPR gave it a favorable review... yet they claimed that a lot of the acting was bad, and the plot was dull and predictable, so I couldn't figure out why the reviewer gave it a favorable review.

Broken Nose 3X Broken Fingers 4X Knee popped out of joint 2X But the worst was a torn medial colateral ligament (knee injury) from which I never fully recovered. Just can't do flying kicks anymore. Oh well!

I've seen some pretty good practitioners who pulled off a high kick in a fight, but it's unnecessarily dangerous, ragardless of what kinds of pants you're wearing. I'm 5'7" and was able to kick a 6'5" person in the head without jumping in my prime, but I never tried in a fight. Never. Heck, I rarely went above the knees, and NEVER even tried above the waist. Why risk it?