Self-Defense: Superior to fighting?

[joesteph]

I saw whess's post in the General Martial Arts section, "Anachronistic Activities." I viewed it as a tongue-in-cheek examination of what we do in the martial arts.

If we're good fighters, does that make us good at self-defense? Is there a difference between a fighter and someone proficient in self-defense?

I thought of the self-defense JuJitsu classes I'd taken earlier this year, and I remembered there's a YouTube video in which my sensei's teacher is explaining "self-defense" as separate from and superior to "fighting." In the video itself, my sensei (who is a police officer in "real life") is the assailant that has to be dealt with in an RBSD manner. The video is at:

There's a checklist and explanation of the following:

State of Readiness

State of Explosion

State of Control

Interrupt the Vision

Interrupt the Breathing

Interrupt the Balance

The above are not treated as fighting but as self-defense, and there are "ten commandments" that are to be followed:

1. Evaluate the situation

2. Three-foot rule

3. Start in a non-threatening manner

4. Control the focus

5. Motion causes motion

6. Element of surprise

7. Strike from the closest point

8. Change the focus

9. High and low concept

0. Faster forward/Slower backward

It's actually an excellent video regarding self-defense capability as opposed to fighting ability. The demonstrations of each of the commandments get you to realize that there really is a difference between fighting and self-defense, and that there are straightforward ways of preparing for the latter.

Edited September 4, 2009 by joesteph

[bushido_man96]

I think that they are close to the same. I view fighting as what happens in self-defense. I think that many people view fighting as an action, whereas self-defense is a situation that sets up the fight.

For example, not many of us go out looking for a fight. We are peaceful people, by and large, and just want to go about our business. But, as Martial Artists, we train to be able to fight/defend ourselves should the situation arise. I don't want to say that self-defense is a mindset, because I don't think it is. But, we tend to walk around, trying to be aware, and are ready to defend ourselves should we get attacked.

Fighting, therefore, is the physical aspect of self-defense. You can use all of the pre-fight options to attempt to deter the physical part from happening, but once it does, I think that then you are fighting.

Also, I think that fighting lends itself easily to sport, so it is viewed as mutual action between two (or more). But, I think it overlaps into self-defense.

[tallgeese]

I think they get used interchangeably alot. For most cases, that's fine. To me, a fight is what happens when two or more people are attempting to exert control over a physical confrontation. This is, obviously, part of self defense.

Beyond that, I don't worry much about semantics. Which term is used is largely influenced by the venue where you put your physical skills to work in.

[The BB of C]

That was interesting. I'll definitely be going back to that.

I didn't like how he talked down martial arts but at the same time he has a point (to a certain degree). Most karate systems were originally designed to do what he just talked about but a lot of schools turned towards sport as time went on.

[JusticeZero]

Self defense is mostly non-combat stuff. There is a lot of completely justifiable combat that is NOT SELF-DEFENSE that it is completely reasonable to do. Restraining someone from injuring others or themself? Not self-defense. Taking down a Columbine-style attacker? Very possibly not self-defense. Arresting someone? Not self-defense. Most of the "what if" scenarios people pull out in a martial arts class? Not self-defense.

For self defense I like my "levels":

1: Don't be there in the first place.

2: Run away.

3: Make some distance, pass the blame off, make yourself look like an embarrassment to fight. Run away.

4: Remove the immediate threat of injury, go over/through the attacker forcefully enough to deter pursuit. Run away.

There really isn't any #5, as 'removing the immediate threat of injury' can extend up to and including lethal responses; nonetheless, they are only applied in order to facilitate flight. Basically it can be stated as "1: Run away. 2: If 1 fails, do something to facilitate running away. 3: Go to 1." Anything that interferes with the ability to run away - like grappling - is no longer a defensive response.

[bushido_man96]

Those are interesting points, JusticeZero. But I would argue that it sounds more like self-preservation, which is the end result of self-defense. Flight is one way to achieve it, and fight is the other.

[JusticeZero]

The theory there is that while in an adrenalized and unfamiliar situation like a fight, people will not be good judges of force levels and justifiable response. If I keep hammering a loop that repeatedly asks "Can I run away now?" it will mitigate locking into attacking a threat after the threat has ceased to be a threat and thus turning into assault.

[bushido_man96]

Ah, I see where you are going now. Very nice, and very good advise. It is all too easy for a self-defense situation to turn into an assault/battery, and I have seen it several times myself at work.

[MMA_Jim]

I saw whess's post in the General Martial Arts section, "Anachronistic Activities." I viewed it as a tongue-in-cheek examination of what we do in the martial arts.

If we're good fighters, does that make us good at self-defense? Is there a difference between a fighter and someone proficient in self-defense?

Yes, there can be a vast difference between being a fighting and someone proficient in self defense. Self defense can be seen as what leads up to the altercation and how to diffuse the situation, and fighting being the pinnicle of the altercation.

I thought of the self-defense JuJitsu classes I'd taken earlier this year, and I remembered there's a YouTube video in which my sensei's teacher is explaining "self-defense" as separate from and superior to "fighting." In the video itself, my sensei (who is a police officer in "real life") is the assailant that has to be dealt with in an RBSD manner. The video is at:

The video isnt working, but anyways in regards to what your instructors says...

Self defense superior to fighting? Hardly the case. In what context is he referring to? Self defense is mostly dealing with the basic defenses and basic responses of people to get out of the most common situations. I.E. you're training how to defend yourself against an untrained attacker. Thats as simple as martial arts can get.

Fighters, on the other hand, are training for utmost proficientcy in their strength, skill, and technique. Fighters train to fight other fighters who are training in the same thing that they are and with the same passion. A fighter indulges himself (or should indulge himself) in whatever he is doing. A fighter will almost always know significantly more than the self defense instructor- it is usually the fighters themselves who work as self defense instructors on the side

[joesteph]

I thought of the self-defense JuJitsu classes I'd taken earlier this year, and I remembered there's a YouTube video in which my sensei's teacher is explaining "self-defense" as separate from and superior to "fighting." In the video itself, my sensei (who is a police officer in "real life") is the assailant that has to be dealt with in an RBSD manner. The video is at:

The video isnt working . . .

Give it another try, Jim. It worked for me. Might have been a temporary glitch when you accessed. It's an interesting presentation.