Evolving past bashing styles, systems and schools.

[The Willow Sword]

The topic pretty much says it all. I guess i should have put in the forefront of that topic "When will we....?"

Are we so arrogant and jaded and biased that we have to fall in to the traps of judging other schools and systems and styles?
i mean i have heard time and time again the saying "well if it works for you and you are happy then cool".(or some derivative of that comment) It can be a convienient excuse for masking disdain and passive agressively judging someones choice of school ,style or system.

Why are we Men so pre-disposed to resorting to the violence of what we do? i mean being that we we practice is fighting. but do we really have to stop there and remain,in my opinion, on the surface level of what these arts and systems are all about?

no wonder the chinese laugh at us and think us ridiculous. I for one would like to see here on this forum decent exchanges of information rather than immature bantering and BS.
i dont exclude myself from all the immature banter and BS. i own my own writings here. But i am tired of it. i had a revelation the other night that "the world does NOT revolve around our jaded perceptions of each other and what we practice".
What we do is but a fraction of what the world is about and i think it is time we evolve past all this BS and really be the disciplined people that we "think" and "claim" we are.
I apologize for sounding so preachy but i feel someone here has to say something and hopefully others will truely understand what i am writing here.
despite our political and martial arts differences we are good people(for the most part). we may not do good things at times and we reveal our flaws and imperfections here. But i have faith that at some point on this forum that we will start really talking martial arts and really exchanging good info and sharing our own personal insights to things, rather than repeating what someone else has said or thinks.
Many Respects,,,,TWS

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

TWS.

I fully agree with your post.

I also think that all this bashing & do you spar etc is just egotesticle and excrement of male bovine.
:D

[Ikken Hisatsu]

I never bash someone elses style. it is true though that a lot of people on here are very much into verbal-fu, and use it for their own nefarious ends- i.e. putting down arts that seem odd to them like capoeira, or arts that they are too fat to do well in, like TKD.

[Royal Dragon]

Well said.

Although I still think we should be calling fradulant schools for what they are. It helps the newbies avoid the same pitfalls we fell into.

[Ikken Hisatsu]

yes, but thats bashing a school, not a style. in the same way you would tell your friends about a dodgy car mechanic, but you wouldnt say that all mechanics are thieves

[Chinwoo-er]

What ?

And actually have an intellectual discussion about Kung Fu here ???

Thats unthinkable !!!

[Bluesman]

Because I have not been above this, and I still can not believe that I am in fact no better than those who do on almost daily basis, all I can offer is I try to do better.

[trilobite]

A couple of weeks ago I tried the same thing TWS, but my topic was hijacked by drinkers after many people called me down for being an ignorant kid that had no idea what he was talking about.

I expect something similar would happen here as well.

But I try to stay out of arguments around here.

[Fu-Pow]

You know what really gets old....

"Can't we all get along" posts.

Look fellas... this is a open public forum. Anyone and everyone can sign on.

There's some worthwhile stuff that comes up on this board occasionally but most of it is just fluff.

What is your goal in coming here? Come on ...be honest.

Personally, much like the rest of you I just come here mainly for entertainment.

When there's something juicy going on it just makes it more entertaining.

I also come here to flex my intellectual muscles. Its fun to debate and argue and try to prove your point. Sometimes you realize your wrong, sometimes you have a better argument. Nothing gained nothing lost. This forum doesn't even physically exist. It's just some data in hard drive sitting in some office somewhere.

So don't get ya panties in a bunch.

I really think its lame when some egotist comes on here as the big reformer of the (insert forum name) forum. I see this same kind of crap go on on other forums that I read.

How fun would this forum be if everyone agreed and got along?

[BentMonk]

TWS, Tril, And Everyone Else - I have actually had intelligent conversations, exchanges of ideas, techniques, etc. with people on this board. I too have been guilty of perpetuating a pointless argument. Recently however, I have posted threads, and participated in exchanges that had nothing to do with SD in particular, and everything to do with training. There will always be those who enjoy the "your style sucks and mine doesn't" threads. If you want the truth about ANY school or style, get up from your computer, go to the school, talk to the instructor, talk to the students, and cross hands with them if possible. Judge for yourself, and trust your own instincts. If you're tired of pointless debates, stay out of them. Heck, I actually agreed with Fu-Pow the other day. :D That's proof enough for me that we can move beyond the silliness...if we choose to. Respect, Peace, and Happy Training To All.

P.S. Tril - Sorry we 'jacked your thread. Have a drink you'll feel better. :D

[CaptinPickAxe]

My goal in this forum is to expand my knowledge of Martial Arts.
I have bashed and have been bashed, but what it comes down to is who has the thickest skin. Its also shows who is a gentleman and carries himself as such. What is said on here is to be taken lightly as it usually playful teasing.

Besides, who cares what other people think. As long as you find peace in your training. A great Gene Ching quote.

[The Willow Sword]

quoted by Fu-pow

I really think its lame when some egotist comes on here as the big reformer of the (insert forum name) forum. I see this same kind of crap go on on other forums that I read.

this is what my whole thread is about. this above quote here. this is the kind of thing i think we need to evolve past. everyone is certainly entitled to thier opinion.
But maybe Fu-Pow is right. maybe i should re state what i have written and say that "This is what I AM going to do from now on"
rather than "This is what EVERYONE should be doing here".

Many Respects,,,,,TWS

[CaptinPickAxe]

Humility is a core element of Martial Arts. Besides, nobody likes an *******:D

[MonkeySlap Too]

TWS, you are falling into the same politically correct deconstruction of thought that is undermining Wesern thought. By claiming that ALL positions are acceptable, at what point can you claim anything to be true, or at least valid?

Let's face it, if you are making a claim, you should have some evidence to back it up. If you claim to be a fighter, fight. If you claim to be a great coach - show your students abilities.

Martial Arts are martial by nature. Without fighting skill, you are a performance artist. With martial skill being the deviding point of what is 'real' and what is not 'real' - it is inevitable that a fight becomes the way to prove the point. If you claim to be a great painter - show us your paintings.

To evaluate something is a natural extension of using your brain. Most of our grey matter is used to identify patterns in a field. This is what your mind does. Now, sometimes the emotional monkey takes over - people get defensive of themselves, others get offended. That is all part of being human. I do agree that the wisest course of action is to persue a mature attitude, and seek non-violent solutions. EXCEPT in the case of martial arts.

It just so happens that my primary lesson to students is one of non-violence. But it is tempered by the concept that some preach pacifism, but others are condemned to it. In evauating the skills that you will risk your life on, I prefer not to so philosophically wishywashy as to assume everyone and everything is equal. Because, unfortunately, we are only equal in the eyes of the law, not in nature. Some branches grow long, and some grow short. You can still be civil, bt you don't have to assume a falsehood in the name of niceness, just because someone a little misguided wants it to be true.

Now, there is a lot of room within this sphere for friendly disagreement, and ranges of opinion. But, if you can't fight and win most of the time, or at least HAD a fighting record, or just can't at least hang with the tough crowd, stop posing as someone who actually knows. If you are down to the coaching phase - show me the fighter that leearned from you.

There is at least one fellow on this thread that has admitted to me that he really does not know enough to teach, yet has been determined to do so. Who says give me a year to train when challenged, then spends that year doing a 500 yard backpedal with Olympic skill. And now is doing his best to be my own personal Tit sa. Here's a tip - if you can't walk the walk, don't be surprised if fighters don't listen when you talk the talk. Sometimes, you really do need a teacher.

The other point that I find difficult to comprehend is the we 'Men' line. As if men are somehow more thick-headed, stupid, and violent than women. The statistics show otherwise. Men are more likely to kill, but woman are just as violent, and just as thick-headed as men. Get over your weak minded politically correctedness - it won't get you laid.

Finally, to have an intellectual discussion about kung fu - there are people on this board, and ones I strongly disagree with who can have solid, good dscussions with. But that does not mean one has to suffer the company of the misguided or foolish without pointing it out.

See my signature below for the Bertrand Russell quote to better undertand...

Finally, I really do like the sentiment of yor last paragraph.

[Bluesman]

Well I have read about someone's mother being a ho and several members telling each other to do physical impossible things to themselves. This is not what I call flexing your brain's muscle nor getting your point across. I will try not to do this but who knows what I may do after a shot or two of good KY bourbon :cool:

[The Willow Sword]

TWS, you are falling into the same politically correct deconstruction of thought that is undermining Wesern thought.

How so? Because i no longer want to engage in immature bashing of styles and systems based on someone's "perception" of what they "think" they should really truely be? i fail to see your reasoning with this quote.


By claiming that ALL positions are acceptable, at what point can you claim anything to be true, or at least valid?
i dont claim anything monkey slap. As far as truth goes monkey slap, in anything that you do in life i would think that being true to thine ownself is what makes the truth valid FOR yourself, and screw what anyone else thinks;)



Let's face it, if you are making a claim, you should have some evidence to back it up. If you claim to be a fighter, fight. If you claim to be a great coach - show your students abilities.

I know what this quote is about and i said that i would NOT discuss that again. and i still wont.
i dont claim to be a fighter,,,,,,but i can fight.
i dont claim to be a great coach,,,,,,,but i have coached and helped alot of people when i was coaching/teaching, and not by my own admission. it was by thiers.



Martial Arts are martial by nature. Without fighting skill, you are a performance artist. With martial skill being the deviding point of what is 'real' and what is not 'real' - it is inevitable that a fight becomes the way to prove the point. If you claim to be a great painter - show us your paintings.

i disagree with the inevitability that a "fight" becomes the way to prove the point. do you know the story of the "Ronin and the Tea Master"? it is an old japanese story lesson that essentially says that one need not go through the motions to Fight to prove a point or to establish "Your" version of what is real and what is "not". it is a good story,,check it out(or i will post it on another thread real soon.)


As for the rest of your postings monkey slap,,,very intelligent very well written and very, in my opinion, wayyyy off the track of what i am trying to say here with respect to my first post in this thread. Here is a zen saying i came up with that i have shared with others and it writes like this.
"The Monkey Chatters,,,the Tiger lies in wait,,,The Sage drinks his wine and Humbly walks down the path".
i believe i have been all three of these characters. but i am still learning humility. are you?

Many Respects,,,The Willow Sword.

[The Willow Sword]

this relates to my above reply to monkey slaps post about the inevitability of fighting to prove a point.

:The Ronin and the Teamaster:

A master of Chado (The way of the tea ceremony) Tajimi Kozo, was challenged to a duel by an unscrupulous ronin who was confident of winning with ease. As Tajimi could not refuse the challenge without loss of his honour,,the tea master prepared to die.
Tajimi went to call on a neighbouring master of Kenjutsu and asked to teach him how to die properly. "Your intention is most 'laudable," said the expert "and i should be very happy to help you,,but first would you be so kind as to serve tea to me?"

Tajimi was delighted to have the chance to practise his skill,probably for the last time, and so he was totally absorbed in the ceremony of preparing the tea, forgetting what was in store for him. The expert was deeply impressed by his degree of serenity at such a solemn time: "there is no need for me to teach you how to die", he told him. "your concentration of mind is so great that you can let yourself encounter any sword expert. When you are facing the ronin, first imagine that you are about to serve tea to a guest. greet him courteously. Take off your coat, fold it carefully and place your fan on top of it, exactly as you have just done. Then draw your katana and raise it above your head,ready to strike when the opponent attacks, and concentrate on this action alone."
Tajimi thanked the kenjutsu expert and went to the place appointed for the fight. He followed the expert's advice and totally absorbed himself with the thought that he was about to serve tea to a friend. When he raised his sword above his head, the ronin sensed that before him was an entirely different character; he could see no way around him; Tajimi seemed to him as solid as a rock, completely without fear or weakness.
So the ronin, demoralized by this behaviour, threw down his katana and prostrating himself before Tajimi, humbly asked forgiveness for his unspeakable conduct.


Many respects,TWS

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by The Willow Sword
Are we so arrogant and jaded and biased that we have to fall in to the traps of judging other schools and systems and styles?

It is in our nature to judge.We judge everything, why not schools, systems and styles? Example, I don't like TKD - I've tried it, but it's not my cup of tea. There are people, like Rogue for example, who do love it, and I know from personal experience that it can be used quite effectively. Consequently, you will never hear me say TKD is a bad style, but since I don't like it for myself, then I have judged it.

i mean i have heard time and time again the saying "well if it works for you and you are happy then cool".(or some derivative of that comment) It can be a convienient excuse for masking disdain and passive agressively judging someones choice of school ,style or system.

there doesn't have to be disdain there - see above.

Why are we Men so pre-disposed to resorting to the violence of what we do? i mean being that we we practice is fighting. but do we really have to stop there and remain,in my opinion, on the surface level of what these arts and systems are all about?

It's a MARTIAL art - an art of fighting. on the surface and beneath it, fighting is what it's about - that's why it's martial. Sure, there are other lessons to be learned, but at the core is the fact that it's martial.

no wonder the chinese laugh at us and think us ridiculous. I for one would like to see here on this forum decent exchanges of information rather than immature bantering and BS.

there is plenty of that here. Check out the ultimate grappling thread and the favorite throw thread for examples. People from different styles comparing and contrasting throws in their respective systems.

i dont exclude myself from all the immature banter and BS. i own my own writings here. But i am tired of it. i had a revelation the other night that "the world does NOT revolve around our jaded perceptions of each other and what we practice".
What we do is but a fraction of what the world is about and i think it is time we evolve past all this BS and really be the disciplined people that we "think" and "claim" we are.

It's no secret that the world doesn't revolve around MY perceptions, however, MY world does. just as YOUR world revolves around YOUR perceptions. If you don't want to be around the BS, then simply don't take part in it. Easy enough, right?

despite our political and martial arts differences we are good people(for the most part). we may not do good things at times and we reveal our flaws and imperfections here. But i have faith that at some point on this forum that we will start really talking martial arts and really exchanging good info and sharing our own personal insights to things, rather than repeating what someone else has said or thinks.

We already do that. Case in point, RD and myself. I completely disagree with most of his approach to MA. We don't resort to name calling and the like, however. We just dispute our differences in an adult manner - I can show you several such threads to back it up. I've met him in person - he's not such a bad guy, we just have differing views of MA.

[rogue]

It is in our nature to judge.We judge everything, why not schools, systems and styles? Example, I don't like TKD - I've tried it, but it's not my cup of tea. There are people, like Rogue for example, who do love it, and I know from personal experience that it can be used quite effectively. Consequently, you will never hear me say TKD is a bad style, but since I don't like it for myself, then I have judged it. Since I was mentioned.:) 7* is right, and judgement [(The act or process of judging; the formation of an opinion after consideration or deliberation.
) is one of things that seperates us from the other animals. Bashing is one thing, judging is another. For example I could fight pretty good with the TKD I was learning, but now I've found a sensei who teaches at an entire different level than my TKD school. My judgement says that what I'm doing now, is superior to the TKD and I'm spending less time in the dojang and more time working on the new material which is more in-line with my goals.

[cerebus]

We're human beings. If we were beyond human, there would be no need for martial arts in the first place, hence no need for this forum. Until then we will all continue to discuss, debate, argue, bicker, cuss, & fight amongst ourselves to our hearts content. That's what it's all about :D . Are you SURE you're not still an SDer TWS? :p . T.

[MonkeySlap Too]

TWS - I wasn't referring to you or your fight. You get props for stepping up. My comment was more general.

Also - you have GOT to be kidding me on the parables about the tea master. This is a Zen Buddhist parable about state of mind, and facing the unknown. NOT about being able to fight. You see, it is this mushy thinking that is the reason you might get laughed at. FYI - most of the good CMA schools I have known from China respect good fighting ability - not how much you can talk about fighting without proving anything.

I would suggest that if you are truly looking to get into the warriors mindset that you put away the fantasy books and the ren fest gear and sign up as a mercanary in Iraq. Then you might understand the parable of the Ronin and the teamaster. Or at least check into a traditional Zen center and get a taste for the flavor of it all.

As far as humility goes, I find it very funny that you are preaching it.

Also - you still cling to the notion that truth is solely determined by the individual. If this is so, I encourage you to believe that you can fly. Nothing is more erroneous. I gaurentee you that a Tae Bo player can not step into the ring with a Golden Gloves boxer.

TWS - I know you probably have some form of conviction that you must be right. But i would suggest reality testing those ideas you cling too, you might be surprised. Especially when you discover that there actually are some objective truths. Here's a hint: If you can measure it, it is real.

[Golden Tiger]

"Judge not yet yee (you) be judged yourself"......

[Bluesman]

We find our faults best in other people.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Judge not lest ye also be judge has to do with trying not to notice anothers faults - it is a nice spritual lesson to pull one away from bad feelings about others.

It does not say that you cannot judge things. If you take the Christian position, and say you can't judge anything, well you can't judge the big evil-boo satan, and sinning is just relative, so don't worry about it. If your wife cheats on you, well in HER truth it was okay...

I know, the little steam engines are going huh?!? My point is simple, even though Willow Sword has difficulty with it. Let's say two Doctor's are talking. One is trained at Harvard, and did his residency at John Hopkins. He not only has a successful 'lineage', and has people he treated who liked him, but he can produce statistics of his treatments that work through third parties.

The other doctor goes to a school that calls itself Harvard-Do, and claims to not only give it's degree in medicine, but in ALL the world's forms of medicine, and that everything else that is taught is inconmplete or false. The wierd thing, s thier 'Western medicine' looks just lke African Witch Doctor practices. But they swear to you it's the scientific method. They have plenty of beleivers who like them, but cannot produce any statistics on successful treatments or any information from third parties.

Now, who would you go to for medical care? Be careful! You better not judge, because making other people confront thier own misconceptions is far worse than allowing people to get bad treatment.

My god people, the fruits of the deconstructionist movement have taken root in your minds, and you probably have no idea what I am talking about.

This will be fun.

Oooh, can't we all get along? Sure. Personally. Will I trade in my critical reasoning capability, and the method for measuring success just because somewone elses head is full of fantasy? No. I'd rather NOT get along with you. You can earn your place on the floor just like everyone else.

Wasn't it MerryPrankster who said the big problem in martial arts is that respect is earned in life, but most martial artists expect it to be just given?

[Meat Shake]

Earning respect by giving it is a most common practice.
;)

[The Willow Sword]

Also - you have GOT to be kidding me on the parables about the tea master. This is a Zen Buddhist parable about state of mind, and facing the unknown. NOT about being able to fight. You see, it is this mushy thinking that is the reason you might get laughed at. FYI - most of the good CMA schools I have known from China respect good fighting ability - not how much you can talk about fighting without proving anything.

i think you are missing my point on the story and how it relates here on this forum. first of all let me state that this is my interpretation(which is the beauty of these parables in that the lessons in them are many, so you can interpret them from many aspects) the point of the story is that you confront things with a positive attitude,,in here on the forums you confront bashing and disrespect with a positive attitude and converse with your antagonist as if he/she were a friend(as i am doing with you right now). what i also wanted to stress about the inevitability of the "fight" to prove something: i dont have to Prove to you ANYTHING, if you wish to test me then that is your own perrogative, but my actions and ways are not dictated or molded after what you or anyone thinks concerning my "abilities".
as with the tea master raising his sword with conviction knowing that he could die so to do i raise my sword and wait. but only if i am challenged. it is a figure of speech though monkey slap. heheh i got rid of the chip on my shoulder and FYI i stopped doing the ren fests(didnt really fit in with them anyway).



Also - you still cling to the notion that truth is solely determined by the individual. If this is so, I encourage you to believe that you can fly. Nothing is more erroneous. I gaurentee you that a Tae Bo player can not step into the ring with a Golden Gloves boxer.

yes i do cling to that notion for I know in MY heart it is the "truth"
haha but the jibe you throw in about believing that i can fly based on my notion is off to what i am saying here. I do have common sense and i KNOW the "truth" about physics.
and tae bo is not about stepping in to the ring with a golden gloves boxer,,its a cardio excersise that is based on martial moves to keep you fit. forgive me but your quote is silly and irrelevant here.


TWS - I know you probably have some form of conviction that you must be right. But i would suggest reality testing those ideas you cling too, you might be surprised. Especially when you discover that there actually are some objective truths. Here's a hint: If you can measure it, it is real.

hey man i test myself all the time,in more ways than one, i just dont brutalize myself or others in the process, with respect to the martial arts, i recognize the core of what the arts are about and i also recognize the deeper meanings of that way of life,and one thing that i do realize is that you dont waste your energy and you dont frivolously fight your way through opponent after opponent to establish to yourself that you are an accomplished fighter. in my opinion here you save yourself for the time when you will really NEED to utilize it,,for survival, for self preservation, everything else is just play,,theory,,competition,,and also testing applications(i just dont do the competitions for i believe that they are a waste of time and energy.)

This has been great conversing with you monkey slap. point and counterpoint. mature and with intellect,,and disagreeing in the politest way possible with one another and still getting along.
i definatle like the "tea" you have served to me. i hope it is the same with you.

Many Respects,,,TWS

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
TWS, you are falling into the same politically correct deconstruction of thought that is undermining Wesern thought. By claiming that ALL positions are acceptable, at what point can you claim anything to be true, or at least valid?

Let's face it, if you are making a claim, you should have some evidence to back it up. If you claim to be a fighter, fight. If you claim to be a great coach - show your students abilities.

Martial Arts are martial by nature. Without fighting skill, you are a performance artist. With martial skill being the deviding point of what is 'real' and what is not 'real' - it is inevitable that a fight becomes the way to prove the point. If you claim to be a great painter - show us your paintings.

To evaluate something is a natural extension of using your brain. Most of our grey matter is used to identify patterns in a field. This is what your mind does. Now, sometimes the emotional monkey takes over - people get defensive of themselves, others get offended. That is all part of being human. I do agree that the wisest course of action is to persue a mature attitude, and seek non-violent solutions. EXCEPT in the case of martial arts.

It just so happens that my primary lesson to students is one of non-violence. But it is tempered by the concept that some preach pacifism, but others are condemned to it. In evauating the skills that you will risk your life on, I prefer not to so philosophically wishywashy as to assume everyone and everything is equal. Because, unfortunately, we are only equal in the eyes of the law, not in nature. Some branches grow long, and some grow short. You can still be civil, bt you don't have to assume a falsehood in the name of niceness, just because someone a little misguided wants it to be true.

Now, there is a lot of room within this sphere for friendly disagreement, and ranges of opinion. But, if you can't fight and win most of the time, or at least HAD a fighting record, or just can't at least hang with the tough crowd, stop posing as someone who actually knows. If you are down to the coaching phase - show me the fighter that leearned from you.

There is at least one fellow on this thread that has admitted to me that he really does not know enough to teach, yet has been determined to do so. Who says give me a year to train when challenged, then spends that year doing a 500 yard backpedal with Olympic skill. And now is doing his best to be my own personal Tit sa. Here's a tip - if you can't walk the walk, don't be surprised if fighters don't listen when you talk the talk. Sometimes, you really do need a teacher.

The other point that I find difficult to comprehend is the we 'Men' line. As if men are somehow more thick-headed, stupid, and violent than women. The statistics show otherwise. Men are more likely to kill, but woman are just as violent, and just as thick-headed as men. Get over your weak minded politically correctedness - it won't get you laid.

Finally, to have an intellectual discussion about kung fu - there are people on this board, and ones I strongly disagree with who can have solid, good dscussions with. But that does not mean one has to suffer the company of the misguided or foolish without pointing it out.

See my signature below for the Bertrand Russell quote to better undertand...

Finally, I really do like the sentiment of yor last paragraph.

Or, to summarize - the problem with evolving past bashing styles, systems and schools is that some styles, systems and schools suck.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Most enjoyable indeed. It is a lesson in perspective, and how I crafted my first esponse might have struck truer in influencing you if I had taken a moment to consider what your perspective might have been. This is the best part of debate.

Sorry about the ren-fest comment. I just could not resist the impulse as that is where I have seen the most deluded 'martial artists' ever.

Nontheless, it might be good to point out that some of these parables do have specific meanings, that are often difficult to understand outside the context of Zen thought. A 'positive attitude' would not be deemed a 'correct understanding' of that parable. As the attitude discussed is neither positive or negative. It is simply in the moment.

You see, your personal perspective on the parable impacts how you interpret it. But some interpretations, because they lack the other information required for actually understanding it, results in misperceptions.

Now a Zen practitioner will look at your answer and go...hmmm, that is not as correct. And you might go off happily going 'well it's MY answer, and it's true for me' - and it might even offer you some benefit. But when you offer up your solution to others as an example of Zen thought, only those ignorant of it's facets will agree with you.

So in this situation, you can HAVE your relative truth. But you can also be wrong. It is, as they say, a matter of perspective.

[The Willow Sword]

you say "Tomato" i say "Toemahtoe"

Many respects,,,TWS

[Meat Shake]

I say you're putting the ac-cent on the wrong syl lable.
:eek:

;)

[ninthdrunk]

I think the problem with the bashing on the forums is it is so juvenile. I dont think there is anything wrong with telling someone they are an idiot or their fighting ability is under par....if it can be proven. The first time I posted and made it known I studied sd I had people trying to tell me what I do is worthless and would never hold up. These same people are always bouncing from one argument to another, and will result in the "if it works for you..." TWS pointed out. I will be the first to admit there are bad sd schools, but there are great sd schools out there as well. This is the same for every style. We shouldnt look at what someone studies and say they are an idiot and couldnt fight their way through a bowl of spaghetti if we dont know that. Hell, for all we know someone could be learning tae bo thinking it is a real martial art and they may transform themselves and the "style" into a great fighting art (please do not take this very seriously). Some people come on here with the "my style is better than yours" attitude and they deserve whatever they get. That is like bashing the whole system in one swoop. Truth is we dont know anything about one another, and dont know the true capabilities of a fighter from any system unless we have studied that system and fought that fighter. I think TWS's idea is great. I dont think it will happen, but I am all for doing my part. I havent posted here long, but I have never gotten into the bashing of others. Even when I wanted to (I have erased numerous posts before they made it to public view), nothing would be gained from it. I have heard others talking about how important it is to let newbies know about what styles are good and bad. This is crap. If someone stepped into my teacher's shaolin do school, they would get an awesome experience that would last them a lifetime (if it were right for them), but they could go to another shaolin do school not two states away and have a completely different experience. Lets try to get past the generalizations that are keeping this forum from being a place of intellectual thoughts and insight. Some folks here are doing this on a regular basis and thanks to you. Others are here because they cant cut it in the martial arts real world and feel the need to get a rise out of others....I dont fully understand it myself, but to each his own. I hope this is the start of a new mentality around here. Good luck to everyone.....

Ben

[Golden Tiger]

Monkey Slap two, your Dr analogy reminded me of something. What do you call the person that graduated 1st in their class at Harvard med school? Part 2: what do you call the person that graduated last in his class at University of El Salvodor Med school? Give up? you call them both Doctor!!!

Your analogy has nothing to do with judging , it is more about judgment. Perhaps you little steam engine ran out about half way up the hill.

[CrippledAvenger]

Hi KKM! Get tired of your old login?

[MonkeySlap Too]

GT - trying to use an old joke to dissuade others from using thier critical faculties and discernment is not a good debating skill.

I suggest you reread the posts, and if it is still too difficult to understand, I'd suggest reading a few texts on logic or rhetoric.

[Ralphie]

i disagree with the inevitability that a "fight" becomes the way to prove the point. do you know the story of the "Ronin and the Tea Master"? it is an old japanese story lesson that essentially says that one need not go through the motions to Fight to prove a point or to establish "Your" version of what is real and what is "not".

Your interptretation and the intention of the story are two different things altogether. In fact mst summed it up here:


Nontheless, it might be good to point out that some of these parables do have specific meanings, that are often difficult to understand outside the context of Zen thought. A 'positive attitude' would not be deemed a 'correct understanding' of that parable. As the attitude discussed is neither positive or negative. It is simply in the moment.

It is not that the tea master forgot what lay ahead of him, it's that it is/was irrelevent. The tea master was present, not in the past or future. Action and innaction the same thing; no conflict. Thoughts present, body present, instincts present, emotions present and stable...all seperate and ready to work in conjunction presently. It really is your own personal conflict that you think you have to interpret this seperately from what's at its root. The ronin stopped because he recognized he would be dead if he would have continued. If you want to bring in Karma, he is acting negatively on a neutral element which would have struck him down in bringing balance. He had no chance. He would have effectively killed himself, and that is what brought him to his knees.
In essense, other people's conflicts are there own, and will always continue. Be involved in that, and your own personal conflicts will continue.

This stuff sounds kinda hokie, but this parable is why I pursue martial arts. You can't escape mentally while your're getting smacked around. Pain has a way of pulling you back to reality. Understanding conflict both internally and externally helps you get rid of bs you don't need through resolution (this could just mean innefective ways of fighting). That's why I think the friction that happens here is beneficial to everyone. Even if it rubs some people the wrong way.

[The Willow Sword]

Your interptretation and the intention of the story are two different things altogether. In fact mst summed it up here:

well in your opinion they are two different things. i consider the story and how certain people here on the forums deal with one another linked. from my point of view the story is about Humility.

a haughty and arrogant person decides to challenge another based on what he thinks is going to be an easy win. the person being challenged is just trying to go about his way,,so he humbly confronts the challenger after seeking advice of someone of the same caliber as the challenger( but not as arrogant or haughty).
he there fore confronts the challenger as a friend and raises his sword, which can be intepreted as a raising of awareness, or even a raising of ones spirit in the face of this fear to over come it.
and what was the end result? he did NOT have to fight. He defeated the challenger without having to resort to the violence, hence dealing with people here who bash and trash each other and try to "intellectually" put down the other to make the chattering monkey feel better about himself and what he does.
i use the parable in this context for it is a deeper understanding of the process by which we deal with one another,,besides,,you never really KNOW who you are dealing with unless you really confront them,,and not as an antagonist, it doesnt have to be that way does it? i dont think so.
your intepretation of the Ronin and the tea master and mine are valid ones. but to say that the other is mis intepreting because he feels HE is right and the other is wrong? that is arrogant presumption,,thats ego. thats the haughty and unscrupulous Ronin.
i am trying to be the tea master now,,for i have been the ronin too much here,, and i am tired of it. and since this is a free country and i can express my views and opinions here on this forum, i am doing so now.

Many Respects,,TWS

[MonkeySlap Too]

Willow, I think you will find the same amount of acceptance for your interpretation of the Ronin and the Tea Master among Zen practitioners, as you found for SD among legit CMA players.

This is not a case of multiple interpretations. You are layrering on an interpretation that fits your knowledge level, but it demonstrates that you do not understand the parable. You would be better off making up your own parable rather than trying to force your interpretation on this one.

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

Now this will not go down well with some of the guys here:

For me MA study is about conflicts and conflict resolution, may they be personal, intellectual, physical or whatever.
Reducing MA to solely the desire to win, fights, punching, kicking and so on is doing a great disservice to the MA and their founders, IMHO.

MA if trained and understood correctly will help the practicioner in EVERY aspect of life to prosper and enrich himself and the people around him.

Before you can control and try to beat others, you first need to control yourself and be master of yourself.

I wonder how many people have faced an opponent that was full of focus and intent that they KNEW that they were powerless to do anything against said opponent.

Anyhuh, let the flames begin.

[MonkeySlap Too]

TJM - no one really disagrees with your point here, you are missing the gist of the disagreement.

TWS feels that there is not a 'correct' interpretation of a specific lesson in a zen parable, and that HIS interpretation is equally valid even though it demonstrates a lack of knowledge required to get the context of the parable. And furthermore, to challenge his thought process, to point out that he MIGHT be incorrect, is simply haughty ego.

NOw I ask you - where is the ego? Hmmm?

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

MST.

As far as I understand ZEN there are no correct or wrong interpretations, it is the study and search that is more important than the goal.

Question for you:
"When is there no snow on Mount Everest."
Do you know the answer to the question?

As for ego I see 2 at work here TWS and yours.
;)

[The Willow Sword]

Peace,Prosperity and Longevity to You and your Family MST :)


Many Respects,,,TWS

[SevenStar]

You're not gonna win a debate (or a fight) with MST. Resistance is futile.

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

Originally posted by SevenStar
You're not gonna win a debate (or a fight) with MST. Resistance is futile.

I am not debating, fighting nor resisting.
:D

If I wanted I could get involved into a debate as to why saying "interpretation X is correct" is a violation of Zen principles and philosphy.
;)

[MonkeySlap Too]

Actually, Taiji Monkey, you are incorrect. In the case of a parable, such as the Ronin and the Tea master, there is a specific meaning. A 'correct' interpretation.

You should not confuse these with Koans, which are designed to stretch the mind beyond logical thought - although many koans also have answers that are 'more correct than others'.

Just because Zen in its practice is deconstructionist towards the mind, it does not mean the entry level information - the parables - do not have a specific meaning. They do. But sometimes it requires some basic understanding of the culture and the beleif system to get it.

I was just pointing out that TWS did not know those things, and from his POV created a meaning that made sense to him, but was not the actual point of the story.

See my Bertrand Russell quote below.

Oh, and saying I have an ego is no surprise to me. But I do try to be accurate and factual. You will find that if I am presented new info that provides a better understanding of something, I am very capable of admitting my error. I find it a rather specious argument tha keeps popping up on this board that if you somehow are able to present a logcal argument, it is your ego at play. As if that is a bad thing.

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Actually, Taiji Monkey, you are incorrect. In the case of a parable, such as the Ronin and the Tea master, there is a specific meaning. A 'correct' interpretation.


My Boss(Japanese) who is heavily into Zen for most of his life would disagree with you there. ;)

His argument is that you cannot know the "correct" interpretation as you are not the person that created the parable nor knew his intent/mindset.

All we can do is guess and, yes, there are accepted interpretations, but being accepted does not make them 100% true or the sole one.

Anyhuh, not the discussion for this forum.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Finally, a good response! Thank you Taiji Monkey.

Actually, I think this is a better use of this forum.

However, while your boss might have a point, it falls into a form of intellectual quicksand that can result in knowing nothing - which is the point I guess...

But, like it or not, these stories and parables have meanings passed on for generations. They serve as guideposts, if you will. Pointing towards the next steps on the road, and do actually have a consistent meaning and interpretation. That is the point of a parable.

Poetry may deserve your bosses interpretation, but applying that to the parable is perhaps a misunderstanding of what your boss means.

Nontheless, I would still counter that TWS interpretation is so far off base, and creates a rather misguided line of thinking, that it could be called incorrect. Even in the arena of Zen.

[Christopher M]

MonkeySlap is just perpetuating the patriarchal hegemony of modernism. Solidarity forever!

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

MST.

Discussing things like Zen via the net is not a good idea in my opinion, I prefer face to face discussions as misunderstandings are easier avoided.

Also busy reading another interesting discission about kongo Zen on another forum and if it is a religion or not, etc.
:D

[The Willow Sword]

I really do wish you well , but why do you continue to insult me in a passive aggressive way? Do you have some personal problem with me MST? Are you so convinced that YOU are "Right" and "Correct" and that i am wrong? I mean fine if thats the way you feel but it is only an opinion that you have, and you seem to be overstating that you do not agree with me, it is getting a tad aggravating, i will be honest about that.

any other problems you have with me,MST, you can certainly pm me and we can discuss it further, away from these forums and in a civil manner.
Peace,,,TWS

[Ralphie]

tws,

I will say that you bring so much into this parable that is not there, I have to say again intent is one thing interpretation is another.


a haughty and arrogant person decides to challenge another based on what he thinks is going to be an easy win.
In fact it's never clear why he challenges the master, unless I'm missing something.


the person being challenged is just trying to go about his way,,so he humbly confronts the challenger after seeking advice of someone of the same caliber as the challenger( but not as arrogant or haughty).
Really? or is it that the 3rd person points out that someone who has acheived a high level of self mastery sees no difference between actions weather pouring tea or using a sword.


he there fore confronts the challenger as a friend and raises his sword, which can be intepreted as a raising of awareness, or even a raising of ones spirit in the face of this fear to over come it.
Who would raise a sword in friendship? He's a teamaster, no? Why would he need to raise his awareness? Isn't it already complete? Why would he be afraid, when he is not conflicted? He raises his sword like he pours the tea, with a single purpose. That is stated in the parable. No interpretation necessary.


and what was the end result? he did NOT have to fight. He defeated the challenger without having to resort to the violence

He was never violent, the conflict was never from him, and the challenger was the only one who was fighting. His own nature did him in. The tea master did not change through the story. Only the ronin did.


but to say that the other is mis intepreting because he feels HE is right and the other is wrong? that is arrogant presumption,,thats ego. thats the haughty and unscrupulous Ronin.
I actually never mentioned misinterpretation, only intent and interpretation. Arrogance seems to be more your problem. I never added how I "feel" about this story. It is what it is. There are some loaded cultural things related to the tale, but the story itself is pretty straight forward. The ronin is weak in his ignorance , but is humbled when he is confronted with what is sure to be his death should he pursue it.

Or it could by you're
the righteous man and I'm the
shepherd and it's the world that's
evil and selfish. I'd like that.
But that **** ain't the truth. The
truth is you're the weak. And I'm
the tyranny of evil men. But I'm
tryin'. I'm tryin' real hard to be
a shepherd.

[MonkeySlap Too]

TWS - I have no problem with you. I just think you are wrong in your interpretation of this parable. So wrong, it is staggering. This is not a judgement of you as a person, but a debate about an intellectual position you have taken.

I know my 'style' is assertive, and can be interpreted by some as abrasive. Please understand it is not my intention to hurt your feelings, simply to state the situation.

If I could be so bold - I know your intentions are good. I've actually spoken to you. I beleive that. But IF you choose to position yourself as a teacher of wisdom as well as fighting - go seek out some wise teachers.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Ralphie - well said. You have done a much better job of detailing than I have, as I flip back and forth from my work...

[Merryprankster]

I really do wish you well , but why do you continue to insult me in a passive aggressive way? Do you have some personal problem with me MST? Are you so convinced that YOU are "Right" and "Correct" and that i am wrong? I mean fine if thats the way you feel but it is only an opinion that you have, and you seem to be overstating that you do not agree with me, it is getting a tad aggravating, i will be honest about that.

I suspect that MST is not really directing this AT you per se, but rather at the framework around which you are constructing your part of the debate. He is having a common reaction that those of us with at least some background in philosophy/rhetoric/logic have to the current trend in popular modern thought, which can be summed as follows:

"All arguments (in the rhetorical use of the word) are logically equivalent and therefore have equal rhetorical merit."

The above is sheer intellectual laziness borne, in my opinion, of a misunderstanding about Phenomenalism mixed with *******ized Existential tendencies. It is quite aggravating. It eliminates intelligent conversation, denies validity to the concept of judgment and allows morons to think they've just trumped the debate (although they phrase it rather less elegantly). Instructors used to laugh these people out of prep schools and college. Unfortunately, now, they graduate, gain access to the internet, and maintain conspiracy theorist websites.

Obviously, the concept of Cognitive Relativism was around long before Phenomenalism and Existentialism, but these two beasties rebirthed it.

For those who give a swut: http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/c/cog-rel.htm

[The Willow Sword]

You are personalizing my comments after your post as if they were meant specifically for you. and they were not.

Peace,,TWS

[MonkeySlap Too]

TJM - PM me the thread on Kongo Zen - now THAT sounds like fun...Love the Sonny Chiba movie about Doshin So.

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
TJM - PM me the thread on Kongo Zen - now THAT sounds like fun...Love the Sonny Chiba movie about Doshin So.

Your Inbox is full, details below:

http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22607

It is part of a long-ongoing discussion that has spread across forums.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Instructors used to laugh these people out of prep schools and college. Unfortunately, now, they graduate, gain access to the internet, and maintain conspiracy theorist websites.

Really unfortunately, they graduate and fill faculty and review board positions. :eek:

[Christopher M]

That meaning is constructed and intentional doesn't mean it's relative.

If cultural contexts change intended meaning, it doesn't mean there was no intended meaning to begin with.

"I know it is the fashion to say that most of recorded history is lies anyway. I am willing to believe that history is for the most part inaccurate and biased, but what is peculiar to our own age is the abandonment of the idea that history could be truthfully written. In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that "facts" existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by almost everyone. ... It is just this common basis of agreement, with its implication that human beings are all one species of animal, that totalitarianism destroys. Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as "the truth" exists. There is, for instance, no such thing as "Science". There is only "German Science", "Jewish Science", etc. The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, "It never happened"--well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five--well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs -- and after our experiences of the last few years that is not a frivolous statement."
- George Orwell (qtd from Carveth (http://www.yorku.ca/dcarveth/shortessays.html)).

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by TAO YIN
everything is [relative].

So 2+2=5 is as legitimate as 2+2=4? I don't think so; and I suspect you don't either.


if we cannot see the earth move does that mean it doesnt move?

If we could see the earth move, would "the earth doesn't move" be as legitimate a description of the world as anything else? I don't think so; and I suspect you don't either.

But we can infer that the earth moves very consistently and objectively. So is "the earth doesn't move" as legitimate a description of our observations as anything else? I don't think so; and I suspect you don't either.


the monk who lived in that cultural context had a meaning all his own.

Absolutely. Which is precisely why not all statements about his remarks are equal, right?

[Lowlynobody]

2+2 = 5 is legitimate as long as they are symbles or objects on a monitor. Once you apply it to reality and see that when you get 2 of one thing and add 2 more and you realise you have 4 you see what is in reality legitimate. Though that reality is based on a perception that is derived from experiance and the imprint of other's perception upon your own. If everyone in the world knew that 2 + 2 = 5 would the one person in the world who knew that 2 + 2 = 4 be legitimatly correct?

[TAO YIN]

christopher, don't get me wrong, i totally know what you are going on about,,,,but.

contextually,,,,,everything (is) or could be, relative.

look at this situation. murder one points a gun at my eye and says, "is 2+ 2, 5?" I say, "no". murder x points the gun a way and fires off a shot. he points the gun back at me and says "say 2 + 2 =5 and believe it, or ill blow the back of your brain out of your skull."

At this point I would have the ability to change my perception of 2 and make it 3 or whatever, and believe it to be so, well, that is unless I didn't value my life whatsoever.

everything is relative because everything is a symbol that you learned so you could and can express your ability to reason to others, and at the very least, for your own well being. 2 is a symbol. that sentence i just wrote is a symbol. our communication here is based upons symbols. me waving my hand is a symbol. im hungry, better eat with my hand, symbol, function, life as a human, and da.

if i had learned that 2 + 2 =5 all along, that would make it more legitimate for me no matter how many times someone tried to tell, teach, or show me that 2 +2 =4. mainly because of repetition and reinforcement.

your idea of legitimate is not always right, and mine isn't either. im not talking right as in broad truth known by all or most. im talking right as in my own mind knowing whatever we are talking about to be right.

if i can't see the world move, and no one had ever told me that it did and does, and i had never been taught in some way or read a book to tell me that a was a and b was b and 2 was 2 and 3 was 3, then how would i know any of this? does a blind mute from birth know the world moves?

but still that same blind mute has reasoning and realitve understanding of the world around him all his own.

you can only infer because you lerned that or had that ability imbeded into you at one time. if i put my hand on a hot stove. **** that is hot. but if i walk, i don't usually think, the world is moving and im not.

everything is relative, and like i said all along

DEDUCTIVE REASONING DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK!

[cerebus]

Heh, heh. Hey Tao Yin. You really shouldn't waste any time trying to reason with CM. He just likes playing "Cat's cradle" with words. He'll talk forever without ever really saying anything and sidestep any straighforward questions you ask him (then claim that you never answered HIS questions, LOL :D ). I mean, if you're bored & killin' time, sure, it can keep you occupied but don't make the mistake of thinking that you can ever get through to him once he's made his mind up. Peace. T.

[KC Elbows]

Tao Yin probably thinks he lives in a tough neighborhood. Where I live, muggers will make you do trig at gunpoint. It's that bad.

And they know when you're answer is wrong, buddy. These are some real math savvy criminals we have here. They have to be.

Tell a mugger out here it's all relative, and you might have to EXPLAIN what you mean in mathematical terms.

That's why most math is weak. No live testing. When you can apply functions while sidestepping a muay thai kick, then maybe you can come to my neighborhood, boyo.

[Merryprankster]

Tao Yin,


At this point I would have the ability to change my perception of 2 and make it 3 or whatever, and believe it to be so, well, that is unless I didn't value my life whatsoever.

But your belief doesn't make it so. It doesn't even make it true FOR YOU. It just means you believe it to be true and you are mistaken. So, the meaning of 2+2 isn't relative. It's quite absolute.

Point being that your perceptions don't have any impact on what is real or true IN FACT, and what is not. They are simply your perceptions of reality. If your perception of reality is/was that all chairs had teeth and wanted to eat you when you sat down that doesn't change the fact that chairs do not have teeth and do not desire to eat you. If you perceive that you can fly, it does not necessarily follow that you can.

This is why Cognitive Relativism is bunk. It grants validity to bull****.

[scotty1]

That's what I thought but didn't quite know how to say.

[The Willow Sword]

constant need for monkey slap too to tell me , rather overbearingly i might add, that i am way off on my intepretation of this parable of the Ronin and the Team master. i decided to run a search engine on the story. What i had written down in the thread was what i took from a book on japanese martial arts that i receieved when i was 13 years old. it was one of the things that insipred me to get in to the martial arts to begin with.

http://www.storytellingcenter.com/resources/articles/neile3.htm

if you scroll down you will find the story, basically it is the same story but with a bit more detail. after reading the comjplete story and thinking hard on my interpetation of it and how i relate it to how people deal with each other here on the forums i have come to the sound conclusion that my intepretation is in fact one of a few CORRECT interpretations that can be given on this story.


MST ,,your intellect is staggering,,and you had me going there for a mintue that i really might be way off base,,but as i read the complete story and thought again on my views on it. a serene cool wind of confidence swept over me and i knew. i just knew.

so i want to thank you MST for the lesson that you may or may not have been conciously aware teaching me, and that is to have confidence in myself and abilities and it does not really matter what another will think if it be an insult passive aggressively or direct.

Peace and many respects,,,TWS

[Merryprankster]

CORRECT interpretations that can be given on this story.

If this is anything like your "CORRECT" interpretations about why people compete, I'll take MST's version. :rolleyes:

[BentMonk]

After reading the posts on this thread I have come to one conclusion. There are very few individuals here who are truly concerned with sharing training techniques, or having respectful exchanges of any kind. MST will flame this post by saying that he was respectfully pointing out the fact that TWS was incorrect concerning the parable. MST is a classic example of an expression an uncle of mine used to say. "If you can't dazzle them with brillance, baffle them with BS." He takes up huge amounts of space talking in circles, and tossing around philosophical terminology. All in an effort to show us all how smart he is. Well color me unimpressed. For all I know, MST may have degrees in philosophy running out his azz. I could care less. I find his attitude condecending, arrogant, and rude. TWS simply tried to point out that we could all benifit from each others experiences if we could get off the "your style sucks and mine doesn't" kick. You guys flamed him for his efforts. Yeah, Yeah, I hear you guys typing. "The only reason he agrees with TWS is because he's one of those SDers." I agree with TWS because I see someone trying to move beyond pettiness, and into informational discussion. I firmly believe that we should exercise our own judgement. I do not agree that everyone's oppinion should be taken as fact. However, I do not see myself as an obligated educator of the masses, as MANY on this board obviously view themselves. As to the correct or incorrect interpretation of ANY parable, there is no right or wrong answer. Those of you who staunchly insist to the contrary need to go back and reread your stuff. Well, I've got other stuff to do. I just felt like throwing two more of my cents into this "discussion". Ignore it, flame it, agree with it. It's all still just another oppinion. They're like azzholes, we've all got one. Peace.

[Salacious Crumb]

BentMonk smoked the "Chi pipe" too long this morning. Perhaps he feels holding hands and singing kumbaya is the best way to learn how to fight?

[BentMonk]

Originally posted by Salacious Crumb
BentMonk smoked the "Chi pipe" too long this morning. Perhaps he feels holding hands and singing kumbaya is the best way to learn how to fight?

Nope I don't feel that way at all. This is the only board out of those I post on where style bashing takes up most of the band width. I've always been impressed with TWS's attitude on this board, so it bothered me to see a well meaning post get so unabashedly ridiculed. Once again, JMO. Peace.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by BentMonk
, MST may have degrees in philosophy running out his azz. I could care less. I find his attitude condecending, arrogant, and rude.

Yeah, but this is supposed to be a martial arts discussion board. Generally, when you come across an expert in a discussion board, you listen to them. However, here on KFO we have 1 individual who is a 5th degree Shuai Chiao black belt, a senior student of Dr. Brian Wu, teacher od Southern Praying Mantis system, friend of Mike Sigman, friend of Victor DeThoeras, as well as someone who's been known to play with Wai Lun Chois students and Dr. Weh Chin Ni's students vs a guy who did Shaolin Do for a while and then got beat up by a tiger guy.

And here on KFO, everyone thinks the Shaolin Do guy is more legit.

[Salacious Crumb]

I've always been impressed with TWS's attitude on this board, so it bothered me to see a well meaning post get so unabashedly ridiculed. Read some of his posts from a couple of years ago. You'll see paler shades of YinYangDagger/ CrazyMadDrunk/ Golden Snake.

And here on KFO, everyone thinks the Shaolin Do guy is more legit. :eek:

[BentMonk]

Originally posted by Water Dragon


Yeah, but this is supposed to be a martial arts discussion board. Generally, when you come across an expert in a discussion board, you listen to them. However, here on KFO we have 1 individual who is a 5th degree Shuai Chiao black belt, a senior student of Dr. Brian Wu, teacher od Southern Praying Mantis system, friend of Mike Sigman, friend of Victor DeThoeras, as well as someone who's been known to play with Wai Lun Chois students and Dr. Weh Chin Ni's students vs a guy who did Shaolin Do for a while and then got beat up by a tiger guy.

And here on KFO, everyone thinks the Shaolin Do guy is more legit.

Legitimacy does not justify rudeness. If anything someone with those type of credentials should have more reason not to lower themselves by ridiculing another's point of view when expressing their own.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by Lowlynobody
2+2 = 5 is legitimate as long as they are symbles or objects on a monitor. Once you apply it to reality and see that when you get 2 of one thing and add 2 more and you realise you have 4 you see what is in reality legitimate.

And any style and training methodology is legitimate as long as they are just airy speculation on a message board. Once you apply it to reality, you see what is in reality legitimate.

And those of us who've taken two of one thing and added two more in reality tend to get a little short with the folks online telling us that we really had five, but lacked the perception to realize it.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by BentMonk


Legitimacy does not justify rudeness. If anything someone with those type of credentials should have more reason not to lower themselves by ridiculing another's point of view when expressing their own.


Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
TWS - I have no problem with you. I just think you are wrong in your interpretation of this parable. So wrong, it is staggering. This is not a judgement of you as a person, but a debate about an intellectual position you have taken.

I know my 'style' is assertive, and can be interpreted by some as abrasive. Please understand it is not my intention to hurt your feelings, simply to state the situation.

If I could be so bold - I know your intentions are good. I've actually spoken to you. I beleive that. But IF you choose to position yourself as a teacher of wisdom as well as fighting - go seek out some wise teachers.

hmmm, sounds like a conscious effort NOT to be rude. What are you reading Bentmonk?

[BentMonk]

Ok, perhaps rudeness was not the word I should have chosen. MST may be making an effort not to be rude, but he is blatantly condecending, and arrogant. Still two qualities unbecoming of someone with solid credentials and the years of experience required to earn said credentials.

[The Willow Sword]

i am glad it got such a good response. i am going to continue to walk my talk on this and go onto other posts. As for the detractors here about what i posted in the past, i already stated that i own my own writings here, and that i am moving past them. i think that you should as well. I am through with the SD threads because they are a waste of my time, and everyone elses for that matter( no offense intended to the SD'ers who post here in a good manner).

Water Dragon: yes i was beat up by a tiger guy, but it was not the reason why i left SD. since you seem to be so interested in bringing up the past why not go in to the archives and find out why i actually did leave SD(what i chose to share with people here) that being said,,, im out

see you guys in other posts.

Many Respects,,,The Willow Sword

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by The Willow Sword

Water Dragon: yes i was beat up by a tiger guy, but it was not the reason why i left SD. since you seem to be so interested in bringing up the past why not go in to the archives and find out why i actually did leave SD(what i chose to share with people here) that being said,,, im out

I know why you left SD. The point was the experience of the 2 individuals engaged in the argument. You = a couple years in Shaolin Do and maybe met a few others. MS2 = over 20 years in the CMA, the credentials, fight record, and endorsement of other accepted professionals in the field to back it up.

Did I state anything that is not true? Here's a good general rule. When you come across someone on the boards who has more experience and is a better player than you. STFU out of respect and listen to them. You don't have to agree, but you should STFU.

[MasterKiller]

STFU out of respect and listen to them. You don't have to agree, but you should STFU. I don't think anyone here is above a friendly challenge or debate. TWS just should have cut his losses sooner.

Regardless of what people here think, there actually is a difference between showing respect and showing your @ss.

[The Willow Sword]

i have over 17 years in the martial arts. a mixed bag of stuff but a good solid 8 years in the internal arts.

and i do listen and STFU when it is warranted.

Peace,,,TWS

[Radhnoti]

I thought folks were overly abrasive(?) to TWS in that exchange as well...though I have a different interpretation of the parable. It would have been easy...in my opinion...to give him some breathing room and not try to score "points". But, perhaps, people were for some reason more personally invested in the discussion than I realize.

Concerning relativism, since we seem to have folks who understand it so well. I've been called a moral relativist...and that may be a fair evaluation as I think "evil" and "good" are not concrete and defined except in a societal context.

Is the primary argument against this mindset that it allows for people to argue that they aren't "guilty" because they see things in a different context?

...'Cause I have a way around that in my mind...or is there another argument of which I'm not aware? I just took Logic and Philosophy 101 in college. :o

I tried to link off the link to "relativism" before, but it was dead...and the sites I've found mainly attack moral relativism with the argument I outlined. Thanks.

[MonkeySlap Too]

TWS - just read the version you posted. As far as I can tell, it is a Westernized version of the tale, and I can see how you drew your conclusion. While I still think that if you viewed the tale from the context of Zen thought your answer would still be different.

While I still do not think your interpretation is accurate - I can at least see how you got there.

This also brings up the idea of the metaphors used as descriptive jargon in CMA. Without the cultural context, how many of us actually get the meaning?

Finally, I still will not agree to the 'everybody is right' school of relativisim. No one has produced a valid argument on why it makes logical sense or validates the position taken by TWS.

[Christopher M]

"There have certainly been intellectual nihilists of this kind in the past, but just now the relativity theory of modern physics seems to have gone to their head. They start out from science, indeed, but they contrive to force it into self-abrogation, into suicide .... According to the anarchist theory there is no such thing as truth, no assured knowledge of the external world. ... Since the criterion of truth--correspondence with the external world--is absent, it is entirely a matter of indifference what opinions we adopt. All of them are equally true and equally false. And no one has a right to accuse anyone else of error. ... All I can say is that the anarchist theory sounds wonderfully superior so long as it relates to opinions upon abstract things; it breaks down with its first step into practical life. Now the actions of men are governed by their opinions, their knowledge; and it is the same scientific spirit that speculates about the structure of atoms or the origin of man and that plans the construction of a bridge capable of bearing a load. If what we believe were really a matter of indifference, if there were no such thing as knowledge distinguished among our opinions by corresponding to reality, we might build bridges just as well out of cardboard as out of stone.... But even the intellectual anarchists would violently repudiate such practical applications of their theory."
-Sigmund Freud (qtd from Carveth (http://www.yorku.ca/dcarveth/shortessays.html))

Just cause they're great quotes.

[Radhnoti]

So, Freud's POV was also:

"And no one has a right to accuse anyone else of error."


I think each group can act within the confines of their own relative position, AND people outside that "position" can condemn it...even punish it if they have the power to do so.
That may be a bit of a "might makes right" argument, when it comes down to practical matters I suppose...but that's my point of view.
I do know that Neitche was quite the relativist. The folks who assaulted my position used "relativist" as a condemnation and acted as though the position had been thoroughly debunked.

Don't leave me hangin' here guys, what's some good resources for me to either tear down or solidify my position? ;)

Apologies to TWS for taking such joy in his sentiment and thread derailing, but I've wondered what the weakness of my position was ever since that exchange...

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Radhnoti
So, Freud's POV was also:

"And no one has a right to accuse anyone else of error."

No. That's what he was arguing against.

He's implying that since "the criterion of truth--correspondence with the external world" isn't, in fact, absent, then it's not "a matter of indifference what opinions we adopt," and so on.

I don't want to give you any resources to bolster your position, because relativism is the devil. :p

[CrippledAvenger]

According to Freud's theories, the mind obscures reality as a coping mechanism to deal with subconcious desires being thwarted by society. There does exist a reality, but it's almost a binary system that focuses on the pleasure-pain principle-- no room for relativism in Freudian views of the world.

In other words, what the mind perceives of the concrete world (in this case, "individual truth") is not to be automatically trusted, as it may very well be an attempt to cover up an unsatisfied sexual or aggressive desire.

And so ends my pillaging of Bertram J. Kohler's lectures.

[Christopher M]

Right... but Freud's not saying that "we can say nothing" about the underlying reality, he's just saying that it might not be how it immediately appears.

[CrippledAvenger]

But at the core of it, a Freudian believes in a definitive, universal reality, not a relativistic or empirical one. There is a concrete world, and there are universal parameters that guide all human interaction and decision making. The paramaters may sometimes be obscurred through our own internal struggles to either sublimate or satisfy desire, but they still exist as universal boundaries. Furthermore, the world itself exists in its entirety regardless of interpretations and personal vision.

I'd go into more detail, but I have to get up early for work and I have yet to do my sets of 13 Tai Po (to steer this conversation back to kung fu ;) ).

[Christopher M]

Absolutely; for sure.

[Bluesman]

Never have so many, said so much, about so little. :(

Hey, that includes me:D

[Brad]

http://www.juliescoggins.com/TOMBSTONE2.jpg

[Radhnoti]

Right. I understood that Freud was arguing against that POV, I just mis-stated.
He used that statement to critique relativism, along with the general statement that relativism breaks down when it comes to practical matters. Correct?
Just working from that quote I was trying to extract the specific disagreement he had with relativism...specifically moral relativism.
Actually, I'm not a big fan of Freud. I think his stuff works, but not because he figured out the TRUE underlying impetus for why we think/feel the way we do.

Christopher M. - "I don't want to give you any resources to bolster your position, because relativism is the devil. "

Curses, thwarted again! :p How about something that tears moral relativism to pieces? I'm actually pretty concrete in my personal morals, I would probably be pretty easy to turn to the "light side". ;)

If not, thanks for the discussion anyway.

[Merryprankster]

Nietzsche wasn't exactly a relativist. He simply stated that mankind, as a whole, needed to re-value virtue. In other words, as virtue is a manmade concept, we had the power to change the definition.

He never once suggested that all arguments are rhetorically equivalent.

[Radhnoti]

I've heard it argued that his denial of the existance of God...and therefore denial of the absolutes "good" and "evil" made him a MORAL relativist. In fact, I've also heard it argued that his writings were somewhat spurred by his anger with his athiestic colleagues who were unwilling to dismiss moral absolutes which had no justification without God's existance?

What is creating your own values through your own personal "will to power" if not moral relativism? I'm quite certain that I've read of at least one religious scholar who classified Nietzsche as a moral relativist.

Again, I CERTAINLY don't claim to be well read on the issue and look forward to learning a bit here.

Thanks.

[Merryprankster]

Nietzsche wasn't a moral relativist because he didn't argue that different moral frameworks enjoyed equivalency. He certainly believed there was a "right" and a "wrong" way to behave. He just didn't think that morality came from a higher power.

It's a common misperception that he was a moral relativist, just as it's a common misperception that he was a Nihilist.

As far as the religious scholar claiming he was a relativist... well... consider the source :D

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Radhnoti
Actually, I'm not a big fan of Freud. I think his stuff works, but not because he figured out the TRUE underlying impetus for why we think/feel the way we do.

You're just saying that as a defense over the anxiety you feel for wanting to sleep with your mother. :p


How about something that tears moral relativism to pieces?

I don't think there's any definitive proof against relativistic positions, any more than there's definitive proof against solipsism or skepticism (or intangible, invisible dragons for that matter). I think it's more a matter of assessing the arguments put forward for these positions and determining if they give us anything over the alternatives.

The general impetus for wanting to reject these positions is, I think, a desire to make discernments.

[Ralphie]

Nietzsche wasn't a moral relativist because he didn't argue that different moral frameworks enjoyed equivalency. He certainly believed there was a "right" and a "wrong" way to behave. He just didn't think that morality came from a higher power.
Very true. He was close to his sister through most of his life, but disowned her when she married some guy and ran off to a ant-semite camp in South America. He thought anti-semetism was "wrong". I'm being a bit simplistic regarding Nietzshe on this, but in this venue why the he!! not.

Neitzshe was a Philologist, and so drew from historical periods as being closer to what human nature is, without the prejudice of a misplaced "interpretation" from a modern Judeo-Christian ethic. Getting back to the tale of the teamaster, interpreting that story by inputting personal feelings into it, and not taking the time to ask questions about the time/place/moral environment etc. about the story leaves it flat.

[anton]

Originally posted by T'ai Ji Monkey

...you cannot know the "correct" interpretation as you are not the person that created the parable nor knew his intent/mindset.


The birth of the reader comes at the expense of the death of the author.

[shaolin kungfu]

This conversation is simply beautiful.:)

[MasterKiller]

...you cannot know the "correct" interpretation as you are not the person that created the parable nor knew his intent/mindset. Personally, I think it's a fallacy to assume that the author has no control over the meaning of his work once it's released. The author of a story provides sign posts throught the text, which an educated reader should be able to interpret correctly. Following these sign posts leads the reader to the conclusion intended by the author. Of course, it takes a competent author to do this successfully, and the reader also brings a lot of excess baggage into the equation which the author certainly could never account for; nonetheless, it is the responsibiity of the author to convey the message properly and the responsibility of the reader to be educated about the medium which he is reading. If both do their job, the author's meaning will be conveyed.

[Bluesman]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
Personally, I think it's a fallacy to assume that the author has no control over the meaning of his work once it's released. The author of a story provides sign posts throught the text, which an educated reader should be able to interpret correctly. Following these sign posts leads the reader to the conclusion intended by the author. Of course, it takes a competent author to do this successfully, and the reader also brings a lot of excess baggage into the equation which the author certainly could never account for; nonetheless, it is the responsibiity of the author to convey the message properly and the responsibility of the reader to be educated about the medium which he is reading. If both do their job, the author's meaning will be conveyed.
So this thread was not really hijacked? :eek: