Treebranch Posted April 13, 2003 Share Posted April 13, 2003 SevenStar and I finally agree on something, this is a break through, Thanks. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle-san Posted April 13, 2003 Share Posted April 13, 2003 Yeah, I agree. Many teachers do that. I think that's a big problem in the MA today - there are too many secrets. People try to protect knowledge to make themselves look more knowledgable, but they do so at the cost of limiting their students. principles behind techniques you are doing is basic knowledge that you should be taught. It's those principles that will allow you to apply the techniques in sparring and combat. That's not exactly anything new. Many teachers of swordsmanship in feudal Japan promoted their system based on "secrets" that were nothing more than a bit of dexterity applied to a basic move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnifinite Posted April 14, 2003 Share Posted April 14, 2003 I think secrets were even more of a problem in the past. It wasn't just a matter of ego then... it was also refraining from teaching someone enough to kill you later if they were so inclined. 1st Dan HapkidoColored belts in Kempo and Jujitsu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjanurse Posted April 14, 2003 Share Posted April 14, 2003 An art can remain "traditional" yet adapt to the changing society around it. Afterall some arts were born out of adaptation of the enviroment for self preservation. The original form or way of the art does not have to be lost as things are added to curriculum or changes made to make it more effective. And, even if ideas change, traditions don't have to. "A Black Belt is only the beginning."Heidi-A student of the artsTae Kwon Do,Shotokan,Ju Jitsu,Modern Arnishttp://the100info.tumblr.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenStar Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 they can, but how many do... From what I've seen, most chinese styles and really traditional japanese styles seem reluctant to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaju_influenced Posted April 15, 2003 Author Share Posted April 15, 2003 I agree with ninja there is a good saying to back this from taichi "the stiff branch will snap in the wind but the blade of grass will yeild to live another day" however i have found its also because of the teacher why some styles are binded to there tradition, they seem not to have room for understanding that life is ever changing and denie the fact that they must move with this change. Bruce said every true MA's is trying to acheive the goal of one soul natural element:water! beacuse of its adaptability to anything "now water can flow or it can crash be water my friend"-Bruce Lee- "Sweat more in the dojo,bleed less in the street"Kajukenbo fighters axiom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treebranch Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 Nicely written Kaju, I agree. the roots of the tree are based in tradition, and the branches over time adapt to it's environment. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGKK_Karateka Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 An interesting thread that highlights the many interpretations and definitions of what is a TMA. I thought some dictionary definitions might be of interest in this debate (sourced from http://dictionary.reference.com/). Traditional: Observant of tradition; attached to old customs; old-fashioned Or Pertaining to time-honoured orthodox doctrines In my opinion the first definition of “Traditional” would be what TMA get criticised for (clinging to traditions because they have always been clung too, more faith than science, etc). The second definition is "more on message" with reasoning that a TMA was originally developed to work. Orthodox: Adhering to the accepted or traditional and established faith, especially in religion Or Sound in opinion or doctrine In my opinion the first definition of Orthodox (and most entries in any dictionary) are more relevant to faith and religion. Whereas the second appears to be much more relevant to a debate on laws and logic especially when combined with the definition of doctrine being "A rule or principle, especially when established by precedent" My two cents.... Much criticism directed at TMA is based on poor training methods that is a historical legacy of the "modernisation" of karate in the first half of the 20th Century (big classes, drilling to numbers, follow the leader, etc) and ignorance. Sometimes clinging on to old customs or old-fashioned views for no reason can hide the loss of valuable knowledge. My approach to TMA is to cut out the "faith" and look for the "principals" that can be established and applied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treebranch Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 Semantics aside, you'd have nothing to build upon if it wasn't for tradition, nothing to compare and contrast. Traditional or Purist Martial Arts that don't leave room for growth are unrealist, just like most religions. None the less very well said AGGK_Karateka. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts