Are we Martial "Artstists"?

[profesormental]

Greetings.

Arts as was written earlier, is evaluated on a subjective level and how good it is depends on how it makes you "feel".

Science is more performance based.

Did it work as intended or not?

Can it be made to work better?

Can we control the results better and with more accuracy?

Can we increase the probabilities of getting the results we want?

It is well known that many "Do" arts or "Way" arts came about as part of a cultural phenomena in Japan where Combat training was frowned upon.

In China they were called Fist methods,

Quan Fa,

Kenpo.

Where does it say art in there?

Wong Sheung Leung called it Martial Skills training. Martial Methods.

I would call it Personal Combat Training.

If you train to win prize fights and tournaments, it's Sports Training.

If you train to feel good and look good, it's Fitness Training.

If you train to develop your personal mental and physical attributes in a Way prescribed by methods and people from long ago... it's Do Training.

If you train to show certain skills and movements that look Combat like, then it is Wu Shu, a martial art.

The problem is thinking that all Martial Methods give similar results in all departments.

Yet most martial "arts" give some training in these areas... unfortunately, your life is NOT on the line in sports, fitness, Do and arts.

It is on the line in Combat.

So I guess some proficiency in that department should be verified and validated by the practitioners in order to protect something as important as your life and that of your loved ones... and the scientific method is the best tool to use for verification and validation of performance.

And logic is the power that drives it.

So for training self defense I don't train a martial art. I train in a Scientific Personal Combat Method. Or just Kenpo in Japanese, or Mei Guo Quan Fa in Mandarin Chinese.

Much fun this conversation!

Enjoy!

Juan M. Mercado

P.S. So what is a "martial artist" to you?

[Lance C]

Here's a quote I always really liked:

"To Know a thing by its parts is science, to feel it as a whole is art."

Lewis Mumford.

[Xperience]

Hi Folks ~
It's pretty simple . . . first of all, your training depends on your objective; to kill or be killed (war art/science), to control an attacker (self-defense), to be the victor in a contest (MMA), or to dance real pretty in a ghi (sport-kata). Whatever your objective, intuition & creativity can save your butt on the street, as well as give insight on how the different 'arts' work. However, the scientific approach to training can truly enhance one's skills, as well. Could it possibly be all of the above(?) . . . Mmmm, could be.
;) X

[Lance C]

Hi Folks ~
It's pretty simple . . . first of all, your training depends on your objective; to kill or be killed (war art/science), to control an attacker (self-defense), to be the victor in a contest (MMA), or to dance real pretty in a ghi (sport-kata). Whatever your objective, intuition & creativity can save your butt on the street, as well as give insight on how the different 'arts' work. However, the scientific approach to training can truly enhance one's skills, as well. Could it possibly be all of the above(?) . . . Mmmm, could be.
;) X

Craftsman: One who builds what sells.
Artist: One who tries to sell what he builds.

Both have the same skills developed, but the end product greatly varies!

X is right, art is based on aesthetics, science is based on results of experimentation.

One huge thing many instructors forget is the ability to teach students to derive pleasure from problem solving.

First one needs a problem ----> What do you want to do?

Then the path is found.

Creative Scale:

-10----5----0++++5++++10

Some people are naturally creative and others are not.

(Didn't know anyone thought my gi looked pretty!)

As for aesthetics, I met a woman who does Savate, her kicks are both aesthetically pleasing and dangerous! Sometimes one is the other.


-Lance C

[warrior-scholar]

So should we reconsider the meaning of Tzu's "ART OF WAR"? It really does have much to do with your definitions at the outset of the discussion.

Science can only take you so far. It does not encompass all aspects of human knowledge. Chess players understand the game as a combination of tactics and artistry/creativity. The advent of the chess computer shoved brute tactical themes down everyone's throat, but top level human players continued to play creatively and somehow can still compete with these calculating behemoths today. Even if there is a day when they stop losing to the greatest players one fact remains...humans are not mere machines. Someone will go out of their way to get around the raw results and change the paradigm...it happens in science all the time, but as the consequence of creative human thinking.

[profesormental]

Greetings.

THanks for your posts! Good to knwo what you think.

I have several comments.

Science is a very, VERY creative endeavor.

Ideas must follow a logical pattern, yet this is not constraining at all! Logic give you the opportunity to verify and validate the ideas in a reliable way.

It is a mistake when people feel that science is not creative. THe scientific method is a way to create knowledge in a verifyable way.

Paradigm shifts occur when conclusions, axioms, and/or pressupositions that where thought of as right are proven wrong, and this changes conclusions that depend on the veracity of the initial ones.

Conclusions that were reached hundreds of years ago are still right.

Yet we have tools and more conclusions which let us "refine" the results and get even more prescise ones.

Both are still right, yet it is a refinement.

An art many times is not judged like that.

Does that make sense?

Sincerely,

Juan M. Mercado

[Kenpo-Zen]

I think a Martial Artist is someone who seeks to gain the knowledge of a particular system while keeping an open mind for other systems as well. seeking to learn tradition, history and perfecting the technique and form to find ways to further them. This understanding in the tradition and history as well as continued training to better understand ourselves and help others is the art. The science behind the "art" is understanding that the technique and form are foundations to understand why, what, when, where not dictating a certain way. That each technique can be adapted to the situation and knowing that each action has a reaction and understanding the possibilities or outcomes of that. This makes the martial artist and our art of Kenpo. "I would rather have ten techniques that work for me than one hundred that work against me" - Ed Parker Sr. SGM

[warrior-scholar]

I applaud you for digging into a thread some a couple of years ago!!!

One quick comment:
I think everyone in the thread has more common ground than not. It really is a semantical difference of opinion that causes disagreement. For instance, to say that ANY human discipline has NO creativity or subjectivity within it would be wrong considering we are in fact subjective beings. Likewise, it is wrong to say the field of aesthetics or art is subjective and leave it at that. This would imply objectivity has no role, which is false. Believe me, you can't just say what the heck you want and be taken seriously in those fields. However, the objective/subjective balance and requirements for hard science versus aesthetics are wholly different. So, with my working definitions I have no problem calling myself a martial artist AND a student of combat science. Others may not like this distinction and that is fine.

I like what you said, "The science behind the "art" is understanding that the technique and form are foundations to understand why, what, when, where not dictating a certain way." It seems in the past that too many practitioners focused so much on the ART, that they failed to understand the physics. I know I would fall into that category earlier in my training.

Peace

[Kenpo-Zen]

Thanks for the comments, I do appreciate them. I also agree with what you are saying about semantics. I appreciate your views. I have been absent from the art, training and science behind it for a long time. I am jut now getting back into it.Thanks for your input.