King of Fighters Posted May 7, 2003 Share Posted May 7, 2003 Well, here is a scientific property about martial arts that I came up with while playing soul calibur. 1. One countries heritage cannot support the creation of multipal arts. A country in its self can only have 1 art and a numeration of styles and lineage. This cannot be denied. While recreation of an art is basically what ones country has done to make several different styles. This explains the my theory of a founding country only being able to maintain and support a single art and generate a numeration of types, methods, and values that have been recreated for the purpose of the user and environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of Fighters Posted May 7, 2003 Author Share Posted May 7, 2003 well....what do you think? Is it a good theory or is it crap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBN Doug Posted May 7, 2003 Share Posted May 7, 2003 Well, being a chemist, you'll have to give me some supporting facts that back up your theory. If you just pulled the idea out of the air, then it's not really a "theory". Therefore, what do you base your theory on? Kuk Sool Won - 4th danEvil triumphs when good men do nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombstone Posted May 7, 2003 Share Posted May 7, 2003 soul caliber? A martial arts theory based on a game? Anyways, I don't really support your theory. I don't understand it very good either. A country should only have one art? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kchenault Posted May 7, 2003 Share Posted May 7, 2003 I disagree. Japan has Karate, Judo, and Aikido. Three very different arts with very different techniques and styles. One is grappling, one is a hard striking art, and the other is re-direction of an opponent to his misfortune. Not plausible at all. Sorry. Ken ChenaultTFT - It does a body good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paolung Posted May 7, 2003 Share Posted May 7, 2003 no offense, but when your theory is applied to china... it completely falls apart, unless i'm misunderstanding it. consider that china has at the very least hundreds of systems of gungfu... these are certainly not all the same and many are not even related. "gungfu" is not a distinct "style" of martial arts, contrary to what many think... any more than 'karate' is a distinct style (you have american kenpo, shotokan, isshin-rhu, etc). even in the many sub-variants of a general system (such as the varying types of jiu-jitsu), you have quite a diverse set of options, so i don't really see your theory in practice... "It is not how much you know but how well you have mastered what you've learnt. When making an assessment of one's martial arts training one should measure the depth rather than the length". - MASTER "General" D. Lacey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karate_woman Posted May 7, 2003 Share Posted May 7, 2003 Also, as you travel around the world, how do you explain the integration of techniques from other countries, resulting in forming new styles? This is not a new phenomenon. Also where does archery fit into your theory? When you look into it, forms of archery were used all over the world, each adapted to the local people and what was available, but I haven't heard of a country or even continent that relied soley on archery as its martial art. The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. -Lao-Tse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of Fighters Posted May 7, 2003 Author Share Posted May 7, 2003 good idea ksn doug, i should put some stuff into it that will support my theory, actually bellow I have some ideas that sepport my theory, they are inside where i am answering back to everyone. No Tombstone it has nothing to do with soul calibur, i just thought it up while playing soul calibur (which is the best 3d fighting game to date). Im not trying to say that each country has only one martial art. What I was trying to say was that each country has one art that been recreated through out history. Every art that has been created in a country is really just a style, variation, or evolution of the grandfather art. Kchenault, judo and aikido are both based on Juijutsu and have many of the same things in them because both jiggaro kaino and who ever created aikido (cant remember his name) were juijutsu masters. Karate they say comes from kung fu and juijutsu. My theory (which is still in the refinment process) states that judo and aikido would be styles of juijutsu, and karate would be a mixture style of juijutsu and kung fu. Paolong, My theory still applies to china. See when budhidharma came to china and created the first form of shaolin kung fu, other monks added their own ideas and made different styles to suit different purposes. These few original styles were taught and people added their own methods and philosiphies to them and made new styles. So it shows that every form of kung fu/gung fu is really based on that first art and every form is really a style of it (although over time the changes have been so drastic that you couldnt tell) Karate woman, I cant answer your question/statement about archery because i know absolutly nothing about archery. well, i hope this has better explained my theory, any more coments/ questions/additions to my theory would be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G95champ Posted May 8, 2003 Share Posted May 8, 2003 So how do you accound for North and South Korea that did not split till the 1950's. Or in fact was under control of Japan or China for much of its history. What about Greece who has been controled by the Romans, Turks, British, over the years. What about the USA who's very existance is a mix of people from every nation? Arts are tied to countries but you can't say one art to one country that would be like saying Shakesphere only wrote one book. (General George S. Patton Jr.) "It's the unconquerable soul of man, and not the nature of the weapon he uses, that ensures victory." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of Fighters Posted May 8, 2003 Author Share Posted May 8, 2003 G95champ. i dont see how korea not splitting until the 50 effects anything in my theory. The controll of japan and china in korea greatly does though. It only means though that their martial arts were effiected by japanses beliefs. The original korean art im sure was Tae kyon (i may be wrong though). This art started the developing of korean arts meaning all korean styles would be based on these techniques. When japan had controll of korea it would also effect the art because japanese ideas would be added into the style. But still the korean art we see today would be based on tae kyon, some of the past teachers beliefs and changes that they made, and some japanese ideas. This still means that this art is still a version/style of tae kyon and a japanese art (lets say jui jutsu as an example). I dont know very much about roman/greek/turk history so i cant respond to that part. First off western countries like america and canada, do not really have their own martial arts except for maybe martial arts that native north americans created. The only arts that we (and great brittian) have are ours are wrestling, boxing and kickboxing. Boxing and wrestling both originated in greece though and were brought here and refined hundreds of years ago. Kickboxing was just created by karate practioners who wanted more freedom so they made kickboxing, which just uses karate kicks and boxing punches. So my point here is that western countries dont have thier own martial arts but use everyone elses (which isnt a bad thing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts