How does one prove that what they do and what they teach and what they practice and what they know is going to work? Even if it works or even if it does not work in a SD situation does not prove or disprove its validity. Isn’t this the crux of anything or rather any discipline.
Maybe it is more about “consistency” in application especially when it involved conflict/violence. If something consistently works then maybe that is proof. Don’t assume tho that because it works or worked that it is proof because that means that it is working for that person in that instance for that situation. It may not work the next time and not because it is fallible but because humans are fallible.
We martial artists spend and exorbitant amount of time explaining, analyzing and dissecting things to see how they work but when it comes to determination of its working in a real life situation we make assumptions and those assumptions are not based on fact, studies of fact with a scientific base or reality based experiences. Do you want to make a life and death situation on assumptions?
So many things must be assumed. In SD we lean heavily toward such assumptions because to do otherwise is to expose ourselves to the dangers and pitfalls of violence and conflict and all its peripheral effects such as legal prosecution, physical injury and psychological damage. So, we assume that what the teacher teaches actually works and we use thier words and lessons as “proof” that it will work.
Is this the way of things? I think so after all the military makes a lot of assumptions and then uses those assumptions to create training that will, at the very least, prepare soldiers for combat and all that entails including the real threat of death.
Where martial arts goes bad is when the second and subsequent generations continue to change, due to assumptions and the words of others with less or no fighting experiences, the systems from the origins created from combat experiences. Even those combat experiences are subjective in nature because they worked for those does not mean they will work again for others.
Trial by fire or to forge the blade in heat of battle is a requirement. Experience puts the words to the music and all of it holistically and wholeheartedly creates the symphony that is SD for conflict and violence. Even then, it is still subject to individuality as to experiences, perceptions, perspectives, cultural social influences and beliefs.
In the end proof only comes from consistent successful experience. So, what in martial arts is proven to be consistently successful in conflict and violence? In a nutshell, “avoidance.” Our human natural instinctual fight-or-flight instincts to avoid extreme violence that results in death or great bodily harm to which both are not conducive to tribal survival.
The need I find most necessary is “distinctions!” All of us have to self-assess what we are doing and why we do it so that we know, understand and see, feel, hear and accept both depth and breadth of our disciplines along with their limitations. If we can make the distinctions and then train and practice accordingly then, maybe then, all of this will actually work and we can find our proof of SD and MA.
What say ye?
No comments:
Post a Comment