problem with martial arts

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Karate is designed to kill.

I really to have heavily disagree there. The degree to which Karate is taught to kill or self defense really depends on the style. You can't generalise a form of martial art like Karate or Kung Fu as you can Taekwondo or Krav Maga as the former have many sub styles.

snip

Once again you can't really generalise a style as broad as Karate. Even at that what Karate teaches you in syllabus is a base to use elsewhere. Anyone who just learns a style and expects the rigid syllabus to transfer over to a normal scenario is not going to fair well. Aisde from the Krav Maga is taught with sole reason of self defense/military usage so it is going to focus on more practial damaging moves and less on arty Kata, standard syllabus etc. Although yes While I admit it is older anything used in Karate can easily be relevant today as it was then just because it is old does not mean it useless eg. Sun Tzu's tactics.

snip

I find your argument more than a little flawed since Krav Maga started off as defence for Jews in the 1930-40s and became used be the IDF. It is also known for being extremely brutal and lethal thus why it is used by many Militaries around the world.

I'm not saying it's useless, I'm saying that it was designed for and in a whole different era. I'm sure there's plenty of uses for it, and if memory serves, Kenpo is a variant of Karate, which I studied for a number of years as well, but it emphasized very broad, full body movements whereas Krav Maga keeps things close in and generally fast. Old stuff can be extremely useful, like Sun Tzu's tactics, but it won't work the same forever. P.S: Why remove what I'm saying if you're gonna quote me?

Last thing first avoids forum clutter and makes it easier to load pages with users that may have slow internet connections. If anyone wants to see what you said originally all they have to do is click on your name in my quote. I do see what your saying but Krav Maga is more of a full on self defense class rather than an actual martial art so I really don't think it really applies too well in this thread. It would be like trying to add the American CQD into the thread.

 

[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.

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

Believe it or not you don't always learn what something is about by translating the name literally.
Not every person has the same idea of what it means to be a warrior. For me and for most of the martial artists I associate with, it means having the skill and the knowledge to protect everyone, not just yourself.
If you know what you're doing then you should never need to fight to accomplish that and you should certainly never need to cause harm or death.

 

[Le_Lisra]

While the underlying idea is the same, its either a.) kill before be killed or b.) disable before be killed the actual way of teaching varies greatly between styles, schools and teachers.

I have friends who have been taught a very friendly if competitive kung-fu.

I learned bujinkan under the pretense it was made to get me through something alive.

So there.. what you make it yourself is up to you. If you (whoever "you" in this case are) find the philosophies that many styles and teachers like to teach unappealing or distracting, change styles. Duh.

 

[Ampersand]

my view on martial arts is you learn it not to start a fight, but to finish them

YES!! Its not about respect or honor, its about defensive and offensive combat.

Honour is a subjective concept.

 

[Ampersand]

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.

That's just my point, in my experience they don't. They'll say, for example, that dropping onto your knee on someones solar plexus could shatter the zyphoid process and kill, so don't do this unless you're in real danger. And then they move on. to me, they don't emphasize how dangerouse it is often enough. Just one little mention when u learn a dangerous technique, then you move on.

Really? where I train they never stop telling us how dangerous it is. And I do the same with all the people that I help to train.
It's just the responsible thing to do.

 

[bismarck55]

Aww, how cute... It's like a younger and more innocent bullshido thread.

 

[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

Believe it or not you don't always learn what something is about by translating the name literally.
Not every person has the same idea of what it means to be a warrior. For me and for most of the martial artists I associate with, it means having the skill and the knowledge to protect everyone, not just yourself.
If you know what you're doing then you should never need to fight to accomplish that and you should certainly never need to cause harm or death.

think what you want that doesn't change the fact that it's designed to kill. And i call bullshit. Their are lost of situations where "harm" is the only way out. That or hand over everything you got on you. And definition tell you EVERYTHING. Martial art are for combat not teaching you "respect". If it take learning a martial art to teach you respect your parents and family have failed you.

 

[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.

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

Believe it or not you don't always learn what something is about by translating the name literally.
Not every person has the same idea of what it means to be a warrior. For me and for most of the martial artists I associate with, it means having the skill and the knowledge to protect everyone, not just yourself.
If you know what you're doing then you should never need to fight to accomplish that and you should certainly never need to cause harm or death.

think what you want that doesn't change the fact that it's designed to kill. And i call bullshit. Their are lost of situations where "harm" is the only way out. That or hand over everything you got on you. And definition tell you EVERYTHING. Martial art are for combat not teaching you "respect". If it take learning a martial art to teach you respect your parents and family have failed you.

Are you projecting on me now or what? I never said anything about respect, it's not really relevant to what we're talking about here. (although i suppose martial arts do teach you self respect but that's about it)

Only the immature martial arts are designed for killing(which is ironic because their brobably the oldest ones). They are primitive and basically worthless. Killing is easy, you hardly need any training to be able to do that.
Whats hard is resolving conflict without causing harm and that's what anyone studying martial arts should be training towards. Otherwise what's the point?

 

[Badger Kyre]

Only the immature martial arts are designed for killing(which is ironic because their brobably the oldest ones). They are primitive and basically worthless. Killing is easy, you hardly need any training to be able to do that.
Whats hard is resolving conflict without causing harm and that's what anyone studying martial arts should be training towards. Otherwise what's the point?

Immature? Krav Maga isn't new... call them what you want, I like combat styles - and maybe you should do a little research on WHY the eastern martial arts from tibet survived in which forms, and which sects, and WHY and HOW. You know, the ones that weren't wiped out.

The Spartans had unarmed fighting styles, that were banned from the Olympics because they WEREN'T a sport.

AND.. maybe you'll read my two previous posts.

BUT: i want to point out the answer to your question:

What is the point?

The POINT is to be able to DEFEAT those sorry fucking bullies that CAN'T be reasoned with...
pacifism is no defense against the merciless,
reason is no defense against the barbarian.

And the track record of "sport" martial artists against people who really ARE violent, is so poor that even Penn & Teller made a joke about it.
Want the link, again?

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

All martial arts are designed to allow one to succeed in combat. That is their purpose and intention.

But, just because the purpose of a martial art is to give one the skills required to defeat an enemy does not mean that they do little save teach a man (or woman) to kill. They have a great many unintended side effects.

The teach respect for the self - By constantly examining your limitations and failings, you are given the opportunity to put right the things you are doing wrong. This demonstrates that imperfection can be improved upon with effort.

The teach respect for the enemy - Eventually, in any martial art, you will be required to pit your skills and abilities against those of another. To prevail, you must realize that your opponent is utterly capable of defeating you, even if they are of inferior skill and ability. By pushing yourself to defeat them, you give your enemy the greatest sign of respect you can offer.

They teach self reliance - No matter who trained you, no matter how many people sparred with you, no matter who is watching a battle, when you set foot onto the battlefield, you are alone against your enemy. The only one responsible for failure is you. The only one responsible for victory is you. When I set foot on a fencing strip, it matters little that I was trained by a series of coaches or that I was accompanied to the venue by a team. I set foot onto the strip alone with my own strengths and weakness, my own demons and prejudices and I pit them against my foe. No matter who was with you on the journey to the battlefield, those last few steps are always taken alone.

They impart confidence - Confidence is not simply an abstract notion. It is more than simply believing that one is capable of some feat or another. It is the result of knowing what one's limits are. When one is regularly asked to push themselves beyond their personal limitations, they come to realize that, with rare exception, the limits of what we can do is not dictated by any physical law but rather by our perception. There is a trite old saying that applies: "whether you believe you can or believe you cannot, you are right".

 

[Ampersand]

Only the immature martial arts are designed for killing(which is ironic because their brobably the oldest ones). They are primitive and basically worthless. Killing is easy, you hardly need any training to be able to do that.
Whats hard is resolving conflict without causing harm and that's what anyone studying martial arts should be training towards. Otherwise what's the point?

Immature? Krav Maga isn't new... call them what you want, I like combat styles - and maybe you should do a little research on WHY the eastern martial arts from tibet survived in which forms, and which sects, and WHY and HOW. You know, the ones that weren't wiped out.

The Spartans had unarmed fighting styles, that were banned from the Olympics because they WEREN'T a sport.

AND.. maybe you'll read my two previous posts.

BUT: i want to point out the answer to your question:

What is the point?

The POINT is to be able to DEFEAT those sorry fucking bullies that CAN'T be reasoned with...
pacifism is no defense against the merciless,
reason is no defense against the barbarian.

And the track record of "sport" martial artists against people who really ARE violent, is so poor that even Penn & Teller made a joke about it.
Want the link, again?

What are you talking about sport for? That has nothing to do with what we're discussing here.

I'm willing to give krav maga a pass because if someone pulls a gun on you it does nacessitate a certain level of urgency, however if your any good at it you should still be able to take the attacker down without causing permanent damage.

I'm not talking about pacifism i'm talking about not being a savage, and dealing with the problem like a reasonable adult. If your attacker can't be reasoned with then you should be skilled enough to subdue them without sinking to their level. If they're too much for you then by all means close your fists and go nuts, you might even win but you've still failed to resolve the conflict.

 

[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.

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.

That's just my point, in my experience they don't. They'll say, for example, that dropping onto your knee on someones solar plexus could shatter the zyphoid process and kill, so don't do this unless you're in real danger. And then they move on. to me, they don't emphasize how dangerouse it is often enough. Just one little mention when u learn a dangerous technique, then you move on.

Really? where I train they never stop telling us how dangerous it is. And I do the same with all the people that I help to train.
It's just the responsible thing to do.

Oh where I train they make a point that martial arts is dangerous and should only be used for self-defense. They just don't make a point of how dangerous. Like the fact that even soft techniques can cause damage if you do enough of them, or the fact that it really was, in most cases, designed with the intent to defend yourself by any means necessary, including killing.

 

[Badger Kyre]

What are you talking about sport for? That has nothing to do with what we're discussing here.

I specifically said why, and will repeat, as it has EVERYTHING to do with what we are talking about:
"And the track record of "sport" martial arts against people who really ARE violent, is so poor that even Penn & Teller made a joke about it.
Want the link, again?"

Most "modern" , I guess you would say, "mature" martial arts ARE little more than a sport;
and their track record in actually violent situations is NOT impressive.

Situational awareness, Honor; and discipline are excellent things to teach anyone, in or out of the military -
but most modern martial arts FAIL MISERABLY for self-defense -
read my first post on the subject if you'd like to go into why.

I sm not speaking out of lack of personal experience, nor out of merely anecdotal personal experience, is what the original comment was about.

 

[Vault boy Eddie]

Some martial arts lend themselves better for real world fighting, if you get in a fight and get into karate poses you'll probably get your ass beat. MA's like dirty boxing and jiujitsu are more real life fighting techniques since you'll probably end up on the floor with the person you are fighting. And the whole respect and honor thing is outdated, martial arts-wise.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

I like honor in martial arts. Everyone who says honor is outdated, remind me to NEVER have you watch my back when we're outnumbered or in a tight spot. I will not trust you, and would sooner fight alone than have to wonder "Is he going to cover me?" Too much to worry about.

 

[Ampersand]

What are you talking about sport for? That has nothing to do with what we're discussing here.

I specifically said why, and will repeat, as it has EVERYTHING to do with what we are talking about:
"And the track record of "sport" martial arts against people who really ARE violent, is so poor that even Penn & Teller made a joke about it.
Want the link, again?"

Most "modern" , I guess you would say, "mature" martial arts ARE little more than a sport;
and their track record in actually violent situations is NOT impressive.

Situational awareness, Honor; and discipline are excellent things to teach anyone, in or out of the military -
but most modern martial arts FAIL MISERABLY for self-defense -
read my first post on the subject if you'd like to go into why.

I sm not speaking out of lack of personal experience, nor out of merely anecdotal personal experience, is what the original comment was about.

First of all that's bullshit and i dare you to say it to any boxer or ultimate fighter of any level.

Secondly why are you trying to debunk a point that I haven't made? Those aren't modern martial arts, their sports, the objective is to win the game.
In the real world the objective is to resolve conflict without anyone getting hurt and the "deadly arts" arn't any use at all for that.

Thirdly stop reciting martial arts cliches. Seriously have you practiced martial arts or just watched alot of movies?

 

[Badger Kyre]

I like honor in martial arts. Everyone who says honor is outdated, remind me to NEVER have you watch my back when we're outnumbered or in a tight spot. I will not trust you, and would sooner fight alone than have to wonder "Is he going to cover me?" Too much to worry about.

I hear THAT. We can quibble about styles, but honor and discipline are something civilian society has forgotten. to no good reason.

First of all that's bullshit and i dare you to say it to any boxer or ultimate fighter of any level.

Secondly why are you trying to debunk a point that I haven't made? Those aren't modern martial arts, their sports, the objective is to win the game.
In the real world the objective is to resolve conflict without anyone getting hurt and the "deadly arts" arn't any use at all for that.

Thirdly stop reciting martial arts cliches. Seriously have you practiced martial arts or just watched alot of movies?

It's most certainly NOT bullshit; have dared, and probably will again.
Maybe you should go back a few posts and see who and what you are talking to.

It's interesting that my boy from Israel is in the army now, and isn't even IN close-combat- I expected him to become a trainer-
as for me, I have SMASHED an ex-golden glove - but if we had been BOXING I would have gotten slaughtered, so , so much for boxers. I have a JAB that has hosiptalized men - one straight to ICU - but a good enough boxer ain't likely to let me get that in, so I go for takedowns if I can.
As to ultimate fighters, are you claiming to BE an ultimate fighter ? I did see just the other day, the fella beta up the football player here in Austin. Not a very sporting fight, but... look at his fighting style.
Myself, I tried to place, and couldn't get into semi-pro's.
Let's just say, I've had my share of "martial arts" AND "fighting styles", and I don't LIKE martial arts movies. These aren't cliches in movies, these are truisms amongst people that actually might engage in combat for a living.
Which if you are what you are claiming, you should be pretty aware of.
You SOUND like one of those dojo puppies that talks all tough and gets his ass bent over by an MP... not that I've ever seen THAT, lol.

 

[Tsunimo]

Martial Arts (all of them) were as created as a form of killing with out weapons during a time when it was kill or be killed, and if you were weaponless, you pretty much died. They were created with the mindset that if you don't kill your attacker, he will kill you.

No I dont beleive that, I have started Aikido recently, and we do not fight with the intent to harm them, we defend ourselves and "help" our attackers to the ground. We are taght to do so in a way that, when done correctly, will force the enemy to a point were is is no longer willing to fight, but without hurting him, or at least not seriously.

 

[archvile93]

I think the key words here are "self-defence", most of the worlds martial arts are taught to defend and not attack...however it might not turn out that way.

You're defending yourself by killing your attacker. That way he can't kill you, because he's dead.