What is?
Just like the Religious concept of 'God', philosophy has the core concept of seeking the truth, often phrased as 'What is?'.
Again, just as religions have their different beliefs on what 'God' is, philosophers often struggle to agree on theories of reality. Renne Descrates was one of the major figure heads in modern philosophy; as well as a keen researcher in the theory of ''Criterion''. Basically put, the criterions of beliefs are the reasons behind the reasoning, and something the phiolosophers have always been divided on; and probably always will.
Like every philosopher before him, and most certainly every philosopher after him, Descrates was constantly in search of the truth. However, an opinion I have considered is this:
'How can there be differing opinions of what really is?' And the truth is, there can't be. Sure, there are always difference in opinions; but if someone is trying to conclude something so subjective as the concept of reality, surely there is only one answer? Afterall, if it wasn't percieved as something that CAN be concluded, what would be the point in arguing for or against it?
So then, it becomes apparent that such a subjective topic cannot be concluded, explained, summarised or rationalised by any one individual comment or theory. In order for reality to be reality (in philosophers' terms), it must be un-questionable beyond scope. Ironically, if this were so, reality would no longer be a concept; instead it would become a scientific path where mathematics and physics would conclude formulae around it; thus becoming a learned subject.
Some say that reality is anything that has proven material as evidence. For example, the chemical composites and bonds of a substance like carbon. However, something with the same origin (diamond/graphite) appear completely different in both physical appearance and structure.
This simple comparison can be seen as parallel to our own mental models of reality and our experience with reality. Both come from the mind, yet are completely different in most cases.
To further my own theory that reality cannot be explained soley on individual learnings, take this example into consideration.
In reality (according to my own thoughts), it would be impossible to lift a 1ookg weight in a squat. However, according to the reality of a trained weight lifter, it would be quite feasable to lift that kind of weight with relative ease. So, whose reality is correct? We are both correct in assuming individual performance, but in terms of reality as a whole; we are wrong.
To conlude that point: Neither model of reality is in-correct, yet neither is correct.
Therefore, anything that can be individually questioned within the human mind cannot (and should not) try to be summarised by philosophers.
Seem obvious? Of course it is. Simplifying a subject to this degree can allow one to rationalise without traditional or 'intellectual' influence.
To become aware of simplicity, (at least in my opinion) is a higher form of intelligence. This is truly how you can understand 'What is'.
However, in total contrast of this, one may find that in order to seek 'What is', they may find that there is less and less one can simplify, and therefore less that can be explained. This is frustrating to most people...which is why they try to fight theories with theories, to complicate a subject so far that they do not have to face the truth.
Remember, if you are seeking the truth, why complicate the lies?
To summarise these words, you must first formulate an educated opinion on a subject, using research and reading as your path; then you must criticise and simplify the subject as best you can to formulate a pure, yet still movable understanding.
Thanks for reading.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Blackbelt at 12
This is my fourth entry into the 'martial arts matters' blog; and is entitled 'Blackbelt at 12'.
''Ok, so what is this all about?'' I hear you ask. Well, after having read over my other entries once again; I have realised that there is another major issue surrounding a lot of martial arts clubs: student's interpretation on ''what it really means to be a black belt.''
Even though I am not a black belt myself; I have realised that the friends I have that are, do not understand why they are. Now, put simply this means that they had either gained their black belt at an early age, or they simply went through their classes after school for a couple of years and recieved the coveted belt. I am not demeaning any of their efforts; of course it takes a lot of will and effort to grade even up to 5th kyu, let alone 1st kyu and beyond. What I am suggesting however, is the lack of understanding when a student does recieve a higher rank.
With every belt I recieve, I understand what is expected of me both physically and mentally during the grading, but also the maturity and self discipline that it grants me outside of the dojo.
What I am suggesting is controversial, and probably not the best if you attend the kind of dojo that likes to earn money. I am suggesting that there be an age limit on recieving the black belt. The way I see it, a child that joins a club at the age of 6 has not got the mental capacity or maturity (no matter how mature they may seem) by age 11 to fully understand what it means to be representing your club as a black belt. Of course, discipline is also an issue these days, as kids like to have fun when they are together. The argument that goes against this then is ''why should someone practice for 10 years (from age 6) to get a black belt when a more senior person only has to practice for an average of 5 years?'' Well, in answer to this, I put forward the argument that children are given their belts (for the most part) for confidence buliding rather than a pat on the back for the accuracy and skill within the technique. This causes the problem of building a generation of students with black belts that have simply turned up for their classes and recieved their rank through attending.
Maybe I am wrong in thinking this, but these are my own opinions that I have formulated over years of observation, rather than 1 or 2 instances. In this age, political correctness and 'equal opportunities' are things that people tend to avoid talking about; but this is something I feel strongly about.
I am not suggesting an age limit on joining the martial arts, but I am not in favour of anyone recieving a rank such as this when they do not understand what such a significant milestone means.
Of course, it is not just children who don't fully understand what it means to become an advanced practitioner. I know plenty of black belt adults, and see so many of them in the leisure centre where I work to know that the black belt is merely a confirmation of their own egos.
So, with every rank you recieve (all the way to black belt, and beyond), recognise the maturity and discipline that is required of you to maintain what it means to be a true martial artist.
''Ok, so what is this all about?'' I hear you ask. Well, after having read over my other entries once again; I have realised that there is another major issue surrounding a lot of martial arts clubs: student's interpretation on ''what it really means to be a black belt.''
Even though I am not a black belt myself; I have realised that the friends I have that are, do not understand why they are. Now, put simply this means that they had either gained their black belt at an early age, or they simply went through their classes after school for a couple of years and recieved the coveted belt. I am not demeaning any of their efforts; of course it takes a lot of will and effort to grade even up to 5th kyu, let alone 1st kyu and beyond. What I am suggesting however, is the lack of understanding when a student does recieve a higher rank.
With every belt I recieve, I understand what is expected of me both physically and mentally during the grading, but also the maturity and self discipline that it grants me outside of the dojo.
What I am suggesting is controversial, and probably not the best if you attend the kind of dojo that likes to earn money. I am suggesting that there be an age limit on recieving the black belt. The way I see it, a child that joins a club at the age of 6 has not got the mental capacity or maturity (no matter how mature they may seem) by age 11 to fully understand what it means to be representing your club as a black belt. Of course, discipline is also an issue these days, as kids like to have fun when they are together. The argument that goes against this then is ''why should someone practice for 10 years (from age 6) to get a black belt when a more senior person only has to practice for an average of 5 years?'' Well, in answer to this, I put forward the argument that children are given their belts (for the most part) for confidence buliding rather than a pat on the back for the accuracy and skill within the technique. This causes the problem of building a generation of students with black belts that have simply turned up for their classes and recieved their rank through attending.
Maybe I am wrong in thinking this, but these are my own opinions that I have formulated over years of observation, rather than 1 or 2 instances. In this age, political correctness and 'equal opportunities' are things that people tend to avoid talking about; but this is something I feel strongly about.
I am not suggesting an age limit on joining the martial arts, but I am not in favour of anyone recieving a rank such as this when they do not understand what such a significant milestone means.
Of course, it is not just children who don't fully understand what it means to become an advanced practitioner. I know plenty of black belt adults, and see so many of them in the leisure centre where I work to know that the black belt is merely a confirmation of their own egos.
So, with every rank you recieve (all the way to black belt, and beyond), recognise the maturity and discipline that is required of you to maintain what it means to be a true martial artist.
Respect
This is my third blog entry on martial arts, and more importantly my third attempt at informing the martial arts community on a problematic matter. This time the subject is respect; and more specifically respect for others and their art.
I've had some experience in this field, especially when I was first hunting around for a decent class 4 years ago when I was first starting out. I had been to see numerous classes which included branches of Kung Fu, Karate, Muay Thai and even Jeet Kune Do. Most of the senseis/sifus were welcoming, informative and very knowledgeable within their own art; both on the technique and philosophical meanings of the art. However, this is where my problem starts; and where I first realised that not everyone is as disciplined as they make out.
The first class I visited was a Kung Fu class. I had phoned the sifu ahead of the class just to make sure I wouldn't have been imposing on the lesson if I just turned up to watch. He explained to me that taking part would probably be the best way to establish if I liked it or not. Although very grateful of his offer; I was not about to commit myself to the first class I saw. To be honest, my being there and watching the classes was more for observing how the sifu/sensei taught the art, rather than the art itself.
So, I turned up to the class, and watched the sifu for the first half hour get the class underway. The usual warm ups, stretches, formalised kicks/punches/blocks and combos ensued. After the sifu initiated the students into free form sparring and the like, he came over to where I was sitting and started to ask me what I thought. This was great I thought; the sifu is talking to me personally and asking ME questions! However, after about 15 minutes of conversation; I realised that this sifu was dead against anything that wasn't Kung Fu. Now of course he will be in favour of it, (He's spent the last 25+ years practicing it!!) but his views on other arts were derogatory to say the least.
This continued to happen throughout my quest to find the class I felt comfortable in, until I came into contact with someone from a Karate club that had started just 3 months earlier. Now I haven't mentioned any names so far, but I am proud to be a member of this club, so will name it as UK Karate Kai. I promptly became a member and went eagerly to my first class along with a friend who had been on a similar search as myself.
Although younger than all of the other instructors I had previously spoken to, sensei Mick Golden seemed more tolerant; and more honest about the other arts...and the art of Karate.
So, as the weeks passed and I grew more confident, it was time for me and my friend's first grading, to 8th kyu. The grading went well, I remembered all of my techniques and passed the kata exam. Straight after our class there was a Tae Kwon Do class in the same room, so we all left quietly and appropriately; bowing to our sensei, each other and finally the dojo itself. However, during our formal exit, the Tae Kwon Do practitioners had started to pour into the room, led by their instructor. As I passed a TKD student, he uttered ''Get out, Karate is s*** anyway''. Not only did this annoy me greatly at the time; it also confirmed my beliefs that a lot of students who claim to practice martial arts do not understand the fundamental principles on which the arts are based. I am not attempting to put down any art in particular here; I am just recognising my own experiences and sharing them.
I believe that one of the most important lessons in martial arts, (and certainly something that should be instilled into a student at the start) is respect for others AND other arts. Afterall, the martial arts community already has too many misinformed disrespectful people outside, so let's not add to the problem and quarrel within; we are all Martial brothers and sisters: sticking together is the only way in which we can advance our understanding of the martial arts.
Thanks for reading
I've had some experience in this field, especially when I was first hunting around for a decent class 4 years ago when I was first starting out. I had been to see numerous classes which included branches of Kung Fu, Karate, Muay Thai and even Jeet Kune Do. Most of the senseis/sifus were welcoming, informative and very knowledgeable within their own art; both on the technique and philosophical meanings of the art. However, this is where my problem starts; and where I first realised that not everyone is as disciplined as they make out.
The first class I visited was a Kung Fu class. I had phoned the sifu ahead of the class just to make sure I wouldn't have been imposing on the lesson if I just turned up to watch. He explained to me that taking part would probably be the best way to establish if I liked it or not. Although very grateful of his offer; I was not about to commit myself to the first class I saw. To be honest, my being there and watching the classes was more for observing how the sifu/sensei taught the art, rather than the art itself.
So, I turned up to the class, and watched the sifu for the first half hour get the class underway. The usual warm ups, stretches, formalised kicks/punches/blocks and combos ensued. After the sifu initiated the students into free form sparring and the like, he came over to where I was sitting and started to ask me what I thought. This was great I thought; the sifu is talking to me personally and asking ME questions! However, after about 15 minutes of conversation; I realised that this sifu was dead against anything that wasn't Kung Fu. Now of course he will be in favour of it, (He's spent the last 25+ years practicing it!!) but his views on other arts were derogatory to say the least.
This continued to happen throughout my quest to find the class I felt comfortable in, until I came into contact with someone from a Karate club that had started just 3 months earlier. Now I haven't mentioned any names so far, but I am proud to be a member of this club, so will name it as UK Karate Kai. I promptly became a member and went eagerly to my first class along with a friend who had been on a similar search as myself.
Although younger than all of the other instructors I had previously spoken to, sensei Mick Golden seemed more tolerant; and more honest about the other arts...and the art of Karate.
So, as the weeks passed and I grew more confident, it was time for me and my friend's first grading, to 8th kyu. The grading went well, I remembered all of my techniques and passed the kata exam. Straight after our class there was a Tae Kwon Do class in the same room, so we all left quietly and appropriately; bowing to our sensei, each other and finally the dojo itself. However, during our formal exit, the Tae Kwon Do practitioners had started to pour into the room, led by their instructor. As I passed a TKD student, he uttered ''Get out, Karate is s*** anyway''. Not only did this annoy me greatly at the time; it also confirmed my beliefs that a lot of students who claim to practice martial arts do not understand the fundamental principles on which the arts are based. I am not attempting to put down any art in particular here; I am just recognising my own experiences and sharing them.
I believe that one of the most important lessons in martial arts, (and certainly something that should be instilled into a student at the start) is respect for others AND other arts. Afterall, the martial arts community already has too many misinformed disrespectful people outside, so let's not add to the problem and quarrel within; we are all Martial brothers and sisters: sticking together is the only way in which we can advance our understanding of the martial arts.
Thanks for reading
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
A Journey through the arts.
Hello, and welcome to a string of blogs that will hopefully tackle some issues that surround the stigmas shrouding modern martial arts. I myself only have 4 years of trained experience within a dojo, but my experience outside of the dojo comes from very simple yet meaningful beliefs that many higher grade students never fully realise.
Now, before we set off, let me make one thing clear. I am not trying to degrade any art within these blogs, nor am I attempting to make myself stand out as an overconfident idiot who thinks he knows a lot about a subject. These are merely my opinions on the martial arts, martial artists and my own experiences with both.
If you are new to the martial arts, let me welcome you my friend; you are embarking on a journey that will generate experiences that stay with you for the rest of your life. If you are an experienced martial artist; please read these blog entries with an open mind, afterall; martial arts teaches us to be disciplined and observant in everything we see...so please be patient.
Comments and questions on these writings are more than welcome, and suggestions as to advancement in my writings are also welcomed. If you are going to comment, please make sure it is appropriate and polite.
Thankyou, and welcome to the journey.
Now, before we set off, let me make one thing clear. I am not trying to degrade any art within these blogs, nor am I attempting to make myself stand out as an overconfident idiot who thinks he knows a lot about a subject. These are merely my opinions on the martial arts, martial artists and my own experiences with both.
If you are new to the martial arts, let me welcome you my friend; you are embarking on a journey that will generate experiences that stay with you for the rest of your life. If you are an experienced martial artist; please read these blog entries with an open mind, afterall; martial arts teaches us to be disciplined and observant in everything we see...so please be patient.
Comments and questions on these writings are more than welcome, and suggestions as to advancement in my writings are also welcomed. If you are going to comment, please make sure it is appropriate and polite.
Thankyou, and welcome to the journey.
Thoughts on 'teaching' Jeet Kune Do.
These are my beliefs about the Jeet Kune Do system with regards to the way it is portrayed.
Bruce Lee did not believe in martial arts or self defense classes as such; and so closed his schools in favour of teaching those closest to him. I find it strange that people are compelled to say they practice Jeet Kune Do, yet bear the ignorance and closed mind approach that Bruce disliked so much. Is there any such thing as a JKD class? I'm not so sure. Jeet Kune Do (according to Lee) is just the name of an ideal; not a martial art. If one knows how to apply technique in any given situation; they are the true practitioners of JKD. If a subject can be taught, it has been summarised. In my view this is impossible to apply to any martial art. Even something as simple as a straight punch has so many variables and curves etc etc. I would go so far as to say that every punch is unique; in speed, timing, distancing and execution all playing a part in the successful-ness. How can we generalise all these variables into a single technique that can be taught by an instructor, that will work for every person in every situation? We can't. It would likely take us thousands of years just to analyse proper technique and adapt it; let alone put it into practice on the battlefield. Now, if you yourself can utilise any technique (whether learned or instinctive) to take down the guy that is trying to rob you...well done; you have discovered the path of Jeet Kune Do. If on the other hand you turn up to class every Tuesday night at 7.30 to learn techniques that Bruce Lee 'used'; you are being taken for a ride: that is not the essence of Jeet Kune Do!
I like to think of it as trying to teach an artist how to draw. Of course you can teach the artist the techniques needed to draw accurately; but you cannot teach him how to be creative...this he will gain from observing and doing; not learning from an instructor. The only creativity being taught here is the instructors' own thoughts on the subject; rather than the artist's true expression.
I know a guy that 'practices' JKD; who refused to spar with me because I study karate. This I thought was strange: Here is a person refusing to spar with me because our 'styles' don't ''fit together''. From what I can interpret from Bruce Lee's words, this is exactly the kind of attitude he was trying to dispel among martial artists. As he said himself; unless you have extra limbs there is NO different ''way'' of combat. This is true...to a point. A lot of people are confused by different modes and styles, not to mention the etiquette and formality of each seperate branch of martial arts. The ''style'' is the physical appearance and application of the learned techniques withing the form itself, whereas the ''way'' is the mode or mannerisms in which these techniques are executed. For example, we would not see someone that practices ninjitsu throw a punch the same way (if at all) as western boxing. The motor skills and muscle workings are the same; but the mannerisms and modes in which the technique is applied is different.
Let's not also forget that Bruce Lee said seperate styles of martial arts were the cause of this close minded attitude. Let's for s second presume that he was right; a karate student will always be devoted to karate, and the same goes for any other style...it is their art and that's all they know. This is fair enough to presume; but I happen to disagree with Bruce Lee on this one. It is not the style or art form that restricts the student, it is their inability to become ''aware'' of others. This may sound like I am re-regurgitating Bruce's words; I assure you these are my own feelings on martial arts. Bruce always argued that unless a martial art can adapt; it is an in-efficient way of keeping yourself alive in a combat situation. I whole-heartedly agree with him; but here is the problem in the modern world...
People do not generally join martial arts classes to fight any more. They join for relaxation, inner/outer well being, improved fitness, improvement of one's discipline, the list goes on. The point I am trying to make is that most people do not wish to become super efficient fighting machines these days; they merely enjoy the atmosphere. Of course, at its roots martial arts is based on combat, death and all the rest of it, but if Bruce believed that combat effectiveness was the most important product of martial arts training: he was contradicting his own theories. Of course, he isn't here to defend himself, and a lot has changed in the 30+ years he has been gone, but if fighting was the sole purpose of martial arts, it would have driven itself into a dead end and become and 'un-intelligent' method of expressing oneself. Although it is true that most traditional styles have become so closed that manipulation of any technique is seen as failure or improper on the students' part; I believe the reasons and goals for people training in the martial arts has become broader, more sophisticated and generally more varied than ever before.
Now this does not mean I think myself higher and wish to degrade those who do practice JKD. On the contrary, I would like to encourage people to take up martial arts and see the benefits both physically and mentally. What I do have to say to prospective martial artists is that every 'style' or mode of practice has it's own usefulness inside and outside of the dojo; whether it be actual combat or just day to day occurances that would require many of the skills you will aquire through your journey as a martial artist.
Note: If you wish to use any of the material in these blog entries, please email me and request it. I'd be more than happy to allow the use of my work if it is properly referenced.
Thankyou
Bruce Lee did not believe in martial arts or self defense classes as such; and so closed his schools in favour of teaching those closest to him. I find it strange that people are compelled to say they practice Jeet Kune Do, yet bear the ignorance and closed mind approach that Bruce disliked so much. Is there any such thing as a JKD class? I'm not so sure. Jeet Kune Do (according to Lee) is just the name of an ideal; not a martial art. If one knows how to apply technique in any given situation; they are the true practitioners of JKD. If a subject can be taught, it has been summarised. In my view this is impossible to apply to any martial art. Even something as simple as a straight punch has so many variables and curves etc etc. I would go so far as to say that every punch is unique; in speed, timing, distancing and execution all playing a part in the successful-ness. How can we generalise all these variables into a single technique that can be taught by an instructor, that will work for every person in every situation? We can't. It would likely take us thousands of years just to analyse proper technique and adapt it; let alone put it into practice on the battlefield. Now, if you yourself can utilise any technique (whether learned or instinctive) to take down the guy that is trying to rob you...well done; you have discovered the path of Jeet Kune Do. If on the other hand you turn up to class every Tuesday night at 7.30 to learn techniques that Bruce Lee 'used'; you are being taken for a ride: that is not the essence of Jeet Kune Do!
I like to think of it as trying to teach an artist how to draw. Of course you can teach the artist the techniques needed to draw accurately; but you cannot teach him how to be creative...this he will gain from observing and doing; not learning from an instructor. The only creativity being taught here is the instructors' own thoughts on the subject; rather than the artist's true expression.
I know a guy that 'practices' JKD; who refused to spar with me because I study karate. This I thought was strange: Here is a person refusing to spar with me because our 'styles' don't ''fit together''. From what I can interpret from Bruce Lee's words, this is exactly the kind of attitude he was trying to dispel among martial artists. As he said himself; unless you have extra limbs there is NO different ''way'' of combat. This is true...to a point. A lot of people are confused by different modes and styles, not to mention the etiquette and formality of each seperate branch of martial arts. The ''style'' is the physical appearance and application of the learned techniques withing the form itself, whereas the ''way'' is the mode or mannerisms in which these techniques are executed. For example, we would not see someone that practices ninjitsu throw a punch the same way (if at all) as western boxing. The motor skills and muscle workings are the same; but the mannerisms and modes in which the technique is applied is different.
Let's not also forget that Bruce Lee said seperate styles of martial arts were the cause of this close minded attitude. Let's for s second presume that he was right; a karate student will always be devoted to karate, and the same goes for any other style...it is their art and that's all they know. This is fair enough to presume; but I happen to disagree with Bruce Lee on this one. It is not the style or art form that restricts the student, it is their inability to become ''aware'' of others. This may sound like I am re-regurgitating Bruce's words; I assure you these are my own feelings on martial arts. Bruce always argued that unless a martial art can adapt; it is an in-efficient way of keeping yourself alive in a combat situation. I whole-heartedly agree with him; but here is the problem in the modern world...
People do not generally join martial arts classes to fight any more. They join for relaxation, inner/outer well being, improved fitness, improvement of one's discipline, the list goes on. The point I am trying to make is that most people do not wish to become super efficient fighting machines these days; they merely enjoy the atmosphere. Of course, at its roots martial arts is based on combat, death and all the rest of it, but if Bruce believed that combat effectiveness was the most important product of martial arts training: he was contradicting his own theories. Of course, he isn't here to defend himself, and a lot has changed in the 30+ years he has been gone, but if fighting was the sole purpose of martial arts, it would have driven itself into a dead end and become and 'un-intelligent' method of expressing oneself. Although it is true that most traditional styles have become so closed that manipulation of any technique is seen as failure or improper on the students' part; I believe the reasons and goals for people training in the martial arts has become broader, more sophisticated and generally more varied than ever before.
Now this does not mean I think myself higher and wish to degrade those who do practice JKD. On the contrary, I would like to encourage people to take up martial arts and see the benefits both physically and mentally. What I do have to say to prospective martial artists is that every 'style' or mode of practice has it's own usefulness inside and outside of the dojo; whether it be actual combat or just day to day occurances that would require many of the skills you will aquire through your journey as a martial artist.
Note: If you wish to use any of the material in these blog entries, please email me and request it. I'd be more than happy to allow the use of my work if it is properly referenced.
Thankyou
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)