problem with martial arts

[brownie212]

i asked my sensei a while whats the best technique you know?
her answer was being able to do 100 meters in around 10 seconds?
some else asked to be serious
her answer was that she was if they catch you after that they deserve to hit you.

remember you learn martial arts with the hope that you never use it, not that you will, also strange fact for you, a person who has not done martial arts is more likely to kill or seriously injure in a fight than some one who has. why? well at least in my school of karate-do you are taught to block first, theoretically a good karate-ka never needs to use a strike. and a someone who knows a martial art knows how to incapacitate someone so they can get away without having to seriously injure them.

yes almost all if not all martial arts have techniques that can and will kill if executed, hell the entire idea of Kata is to teach techniques without the student knowing what its for. the most depressing thing about this is people who have actually practiced martial arts for quite a large period of time and haven't actually learned what its for. There's a common story as to the origins of my martial art, karate, the story goes that it was a method which peasants in feudal japan developed to defeat or delay opposing samurai without a weapon, hence the name karate, literally means empty hand, this is frankly bull peasants couldn't afford any hobbies, they had to work, it was actually developed by the samurai as a way of training mind and body, and instilling the discipline expected of a member of who in those times were the most elite and respected in society, karate was not created as a way of killing it was created to train the mind.

 

[vanthebaron]

Eastern Martial Arts were usually designed to teach discipline or to acheive a higher state of conscience through physical meditation.

Hahaha! Where do you get your information? Shaolin was taught to the monk's to kill Chinese solders who wanted to take over the monastery, Karate was created to kill samurai in the Ryukyu Islands, Muay Thai was based off the Thai boxing style the solders were taught to use when they lost their weapons, its born of blood dude.

 

[StriderShinryu]

I get into a lot of fights because, I'm a smart ass and I make asses out of a lot of people in my class, so because I embarrassed them the jockstraps fight me.

I think I'm starting to see what the problem is here.

 

[astrav1]

You had the wrong Shihon for it then if you think that was what Karate was for.

 

[Gudrests]

Krav Maga is designed to kill.
Karate is designed to kill.

There is no difference.

The particular line your Krav Maga instructor gave you was to teach the philosophy that once you engage you must engage to kill on the assumption that otherwise you will die. Karate is no different.

Judo and Wendo are far more defensively oriented than Krav Maga or Karate, but even they require that once you engage you do so with intent to harm. To do otherwise almost guarentees you are worse off for trying to defend yourself.

In any event, I'm not sure I see where your problem is.

(I took karate not Krve Maga) the problem is simple, they tell you "this will teach you respect" and a ton of other stuff that doesn't mean shit when all they are telly teaching you is how to fight. Shito-Ryu got me out a few good brawls but respect it didn't teach.

did it teach you respect for your teacher?...i know sure as hell my judo teacher demanded respect...and when the master came straight from Japan (cant remember his name...im gonna call him yoda because i swear to you he had magical powers) Just his being there demanded respect..he would not abuse that but he showed us that no matter how small someone is. (i was like 10 and he was my height) they can be as powerful as you can imagine....after in the blink of my eye he had the biggest teacher there on the floor turning a color no one is supposed to turn....with one hand just standing there.

 

[vanthebaron]

I get into a lot of fights because, I'm a smart ass and I make asses out of a lot of people in my class, so because I embarrassed them the jockstraps fight me.

I think I'm starting to see what the problem is here.

I was trying to make a pun. I'm smart, but I'm also a smartass. I one of the jokers of the group of unlucky bastards I hang out with.

 

[brownie212]

Eastern Martial Arts were usually designed to teach discipline or to acheive a higher state of conscience through physical meditation.

Hahaha! Where do you get your information? Shaolin was taught to the monk's to kill Chinese solders who wanted to take over the monastery, Karate was created to kill samurai in the Ryukyu Islands,

bull karate was not designed to kill samurai, like i said before common story but not true

Most Martial Arts came from rebellious peasants striving to overthrow the ruling classes.

nope peasants couldn't afford martial arts, martial arts take time and money to learn even back then that peasants simply didn't have.

 

[StriderShinryu]

I get into a lot of fights because, I'm a smart ass and I make asses out of a lot of people in my class, so because I embarrassed them the jockstraps fight me.

I think I'm starting to see what the problem is here.

I was trying to make a pun. I'm smart, but I'm also a smartass. I one of the jokers of the group of unlucky bastards I hang out with.

My point was that embarrasing others is a sure way to get yourself into trouble regardless of how much knowledge you have, martial or otherwise. Being a smartass and embarrasing others is pretty much a direct opposite to any sort of honour or respect, even self respect, so it's not hard to see why you're having such difficulty grasping where one would find the honour/respect in a traditional martial art.

 

[vanthebaron]

Eastern Martial Arts were usually designed to teach discipline or to acheive a higher state of conscience through physical meditation.

Hahaha! Where do you get your information? Shaolin was taught to the monk's to kill Chinese solders who wanted to take over the monastery, Karate was created to kill samurai in the Ryukyu Islands,

bull karate was not designed to kill samurai, like i said before common story but not true

"As important as the date of 1507 is in understanding the historical development of karate, the ban on the ownership of weapons is not a simple watershed. It is not true that prior to 1507 Okinawan warriors exclusively used weapons in combat and after they adopted unarmed systems of combat. The fighting arts that later developed into karate did not appear out of nowhere."
-from http://www.martial-arts-insight.com/karate.html paragraph 5

Most Martial Arts came from rebellious peasants striving to overthrow the ruling classes.

nope peasants couldn't afford martial arts, martial arts take time and money to learn even back then that peasants simply didn't have.

[/quote]you have to be high man, I have this book can the encyclopedia. pesents are responcable for a good chunk of MA styles we have, including about 80%(guessed number)of stick fighting (using the stick of a rake to beat someone dead). Ankō Itosu was from a family of great standing and is the grandfather of all modern karate styles. He set up the Ten Precepts of karate. He taught the PEOPLE (peasants) his style.

My point was that embarrasing others is a sure way to get yourself into trouble regardless of how much knowledge you have, martial or otherwise. Being a smartass and embarrasing others is pretty much a direct opposite to any sort of honour or respect, even self respect, so it's not hard to see why you're having such difficulty grasping where one would find the honour/respect in a traditional martial art.

yes because it wrong to correct people who are wrong.

 

[spartan231490]

I was in philosophy class today and something hit me. I studied Shito-ryu for 3 years, and it was pounded into my head that this was teaching my respect, honer, and all that jazz, but none of my teachers seemed to mention that this was made for KILLING. I never really saw it as respect more of an "Appeal to Authority". Non-Eastern fighting forms (eg: Krav Maga) are more survival oriented. In KM you are told "this is you enemy, he has a knife, kill him before he kills you". This is what Eastern fighting styles started as to paraphrase a comedian "Karate was invented to teach you how to kill someone with a rice ball from across the room." don't give me that "it'll teach you respect bullshit, it a method of killing nothing more.

I don't know about where you are, but in my experience, martial arts taught in america tends to downplay how lethat what you are learning really is. They warn you what techniques can kill, but they don't really come out and tell you that martial arts is designed to kill the enemy, or at least hurt them so badly as to incapacitate.

 

[vanthebaron]

I was in philosophy class today and something hit me. I studied Shito-ryu for 3 years, and it was pounded into my head that this was teaching my respect, honer, and all that jazz, but none of my teachers seemed to mention that this was made for KILLING. I never really saw it as respect more of an "Appeal to Authority". Non-Eastern fighting forms (eg: Krav Maga) are more survival oriented. In KM you are told "this is you enemy, he has a knife, kill him before he kills you". This is what Eastern fighting styles started as to paraphrase a comedian "Karate was invented to teach you how to kill someone with a rice ball from across the room." don't give me that "it'll teach you respect bullshit, it a method of killing nothing more.

I don't know about where you are, but in my experience, martial arts taught in america tends to downplay how lethat what you are learning really is. They warn you what techniques can kill, but they don't really come out and tell you that martial arts is designed to kill the enemy, or at least hurt them so badly as to incapacitate.

I don't see whats wrong with telling a kid "hey be careful you can kill someone very easily with these moves" 100 times in one 45 minute class.

 

[Ampersand]

Not all martial arts are like that, in fact only the poor ones are. Real martial arts isn't about killing, you don't need any training to be able to kill someone. It's about learning to control your body and by extension learning to control the bodies of those who would try to attack you.
Martial arts isn't about fighting, it's about controlling a situation (this is why the art of war can be just as easily applied to bussiness as combat). The objective is to train to a point where you are able to protect not just yourself but the person who is attacking you as well.

A trained martial artist is less dangerous then someone who has no training, in fact the world is a safe place because they are in it.

 

[vanthebaron]

Not all martial arts are like that, in fact only the poor ones are. Real martial arts isn't about killing, you don't need any training to be able to kill someone. It's about learning to control your body and by extension learning to control the bodies of those who would try to attack you.
Martial arts isn't about fighting, it's about controlling a situation (this is why the art of war can be just as easily applied to bussiness as combat). The objective is to train to a point where you are able to protect not just yourself but the person who is attacking you as well.

A trained martial artist is less dangerous then someone who has no training, in fact the world is a safe place because they are in it.

bullshit they are called "MARTIAL" arts.
Martial (from Latin martialis "belonging to Mars"): Anything connected with war or combat

 

[Krantos]

It depends on how it's presented. Will learning the art itself teach you respect, etc. No. However, learning a martial art does teach discipline. You have to practice and have extensive control over your body to master it. Whether or not that discipline carries over to other aspects of your life is up to you and your instructor.

I do, however, think that learning a marital art is a great opportunity to learn respect etc., but it requires the instructor to be on board.

I've studied three different Marital arts under three different instructors, and each had very different methods/philosophy.

My first was a children's class for Tae Kwon Do, so it was presented in a "made for kids" type way. The instructor made it very clear, however, that we were learning self defense. Get into a fight at school, don't bother coming back to class. No questions asked, no discussion. I wasn't able to stay in the class for long due to financial reasons, but I do feel that it facilitated respect due, in part, to the deference that was expected towards members of higher rank, who were, in turn, expected to mentor and encourage the lower ranking members.

I didn't get into another class until almost a decade later when I started studying Tang Soo Do. That class was a travesty. The instructor never participated in the class itself, expecting the senior students to run things, which meant that we were at the mercy of whichever one was present. Some were ok, but most were simply obnoxious twenty-somethings who wanted to show-off. The only respect that was expected was to higher ranks. Students could treat peers and lower ranks however they wanted. The class was, essentially, a way for the instructor to make money. Nothing more.

And then, about 2 years ago, I started studying Nihon Jujutsu. This was easily, the best class I've had. The art itself is the most destructive one I've learned. The philosophy is, if you put someone down with NJ, they should stay down. Virtually every technique was designed to break something, which means you need to be very careful when practicing. That's where the discipline comes into play. If you act like an ass and apply more force than you need to the rest of the class will start doing the same to you (we had a guy do this. He quit.).
It was also the most formalized class I had. We had very specific and very formal methods for beginning and ending the class. This aided the sense of gravity and respect the class projected. There was a great deal of respect between all members. It was not a simple art to learn so you honestly had to respect those higher than you, and they in turn, knew what you were struggling with, so they helped as much as they could.
And the instructor was Awesome. He would greet new students by jumping on the mat, pointing to himself and saying "Sensei" jumping off again and saying "Dan". The point was that on the mat, you had to treat him as the Sensei at all times, but off the mat, he was just a normal guy.
Sadly, the dojo had to close due to lack of funds. The lease they had expired and the landlord wanted to triple their rent.


The short version, is that the art itself does not teach respect, etc. As the OP said, it's just a way to hurt people. The way it's presented, however, can teach respect, etc. if you get a good instructor.

 

[LarenzoAOG]

Eastern Martial Arts were usually designed to teach discipline or to acheive a higher state of conscience through physical meditation.

Hahaha! Where do you get your information? Shaolin was taught to the monk's to kill Chinese solders who wanted to take over the monastery, Karate was created to kill samurai in the Ryukyu Islands, Muay Thai was based off the Thai boxing style the solders were taught to use when they lost their weapons, its born of blood dude.

I made it up. Sounded legit though right? I know very little about martial arts but I thought I'd try to say something smart and see how people reacted to it.

 

[mrkmil]

To respond to the first post, I take Okinawan Goju-Ryu. My Sensei has always let us know about how karate is a "to the death" thing. I think your problem is your Sensei's ignorance the lack of knowledge about Karate's use.

 

[Badger Kyre]

The REAL short version is really simple - special forces develop their own FIGHTING styles -such as Krav Maga - but hardly limited to - because the traditional martial arts, as most people are taught them, are nearly worthless in fighting.
Ask an MP, or a Guardian Angel, or a prison guard.
Or hell, ask ME. In years of street brawls, and 12 years of prison, i never saw a traditional "martial artist" ( or most boxers ) get anything but beat the fucking SHIT out of by people who could actually FIGHT.
I got out and 'cause I'm pretty scrappy ( Badger is my prison nickname ), thought I was reday for semi-pro's, adn leanred the hard way I wasn't. But a friend and I had the same experience - and he was head of security at a local "punk" club; and used to be from Israel - and he can't place in tourney's 'cause very little of what he does in a real fight can he do in a match.
WHich was a good part of what a guy you may have heard of called Bruce Lee was saying.
Maybe you've heard of him?

Better yet, if you can handle the truth, these two guys make a pretty damn good point - and they also show fighting styles, made for hurting people, as opposed to what most civilians get taught.
Damn well done. http://www.viddler.com/explore/rim/videos/1/

 

[Phase_9]

Yes they are both for killing. The difference is one teaches you more than that, one of them teaches you strength tempered with restraint. People who do eastern martial arts learn things besides violence. And also, you shouldn't use any of them for killing. There are way more non-lethal methods in most martial arts than there are lethal moves. If someone who does martial arts is violent, it is not the fault of the martial art. Just as if someone is killed with a gun, it is not the gun's fault. You are ultimately responsible as the practitioner to practice restraint and discipline, just as it is your master's responsibility to teach you these things.

In short, martial arts were initially designed for defense, and then were turned into tools for killing, now they should be used only for defense and to better oneself. As a long-time practitioner of more than three martial art styles, I find it offensive that people see martial arts as just tools for violence.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well if I may put it a little cruder, it's all about choice.
A martial art can be compared to a knife, which by itself does not have intent, the user however does, he may butter his bread with it or kill people.

In a similar way a martial art can be used strictly as means to kill your opponent, but in the same way it can be used to teach about balance, power, flow, respect,...

 

[Badger Kyre]

Yes they are both for killing... Just as if someone is killed with a gun, it is not the gun's fault.

Quite relatedly, the US Army found that giving guns to people who weren't particularly violent produced a lot of wasted ammunition, and people 'pretending ' to fight. This was learned in WW2 in a study published later as 'men under fire'; it led to a complete restructure of how training for riflemen in the USMC was done.
This is related to one of the strongest arguments against gun ownership for home defense - the vast majority end up with having their guns taken away from them.

This is also related to why most "martial artists" get the fuck beat out of them by peopel who are genuinely prepared for real, actual violence.

so... if you can handle the truth, these two guys make a pretty damn good point - and they also show fighting styles, made for hurting people, as opposed to what most civilians get taught.
Damn well done. http://www.viddler.com/explore/rim/videos/1/