Knowledge/understanding vs. skill/ability

[t_niehoff]

Just something from my perspective --

Word choice often reveals our thinking (as words represent ideas). And one thing I see over and over again is the constant references to "knowledge" or "understanding" as though this has some significance. To me, this indicates that the speaker is viewing WCK as a system of knowledge (theory).

Helio Gracie "knows" more and "understands" more about BJJ than probably (at least arguably) any living person. He certainly "knows" more and "understands" more (in his pinky finger) than a tough, young purple belt. But if they *really* fought, the young purple would destroy Helio. Now certainly Helio is great for his age (90) and could probably beat anyone in the world in that age group or even somewhat younger (80s, maybe 70s). He might even be able to handle a young, tough scrub (with no skills). But his ability to perform, i.e., his skill level, has decreased with age (he was once a world-class fighter) even though his knowledge/understanding has continued to grow. The purple even with much less knowledge and understanding can out-perform the more knowledgeable Helio. In other words, the purple has more skill/abilty. And this same example, just by changing names, can apply to any fighting method.

This example shows that skill/ability is not commensurate with knowledge/understanding. Folks with much less knowledge/understanding can often out-perform those with greater knowledge/understanding, even knowledge/understanding not based on theory but from first-hand experience. In other words, it's not what you know/understand, it's what you can do -- performance -- that determines your skill level. The goal of our training, therefore, should not be seeking knowledge or understanding but in increasing performance (increasing skill). The knowledge and understanding is a by-product of the skill/ability (it comes from the performance) not the precursor.

[Hendrik]

He certainly "knows" more and "understands" more (in his pinky finger) than a tough, young purple belt. But if they *really* fought, the young purple would destroy Helio---------



you are making lots of assumption here based on your way of thinking and your perception.


why not just write a letter to Helio and ask him what is his experience instead of assume and conclude with your personal perception and thinking?


See, this is an example of labering others as a theorician but one un AWARE of one is a theorician too.

[sihing]

Just something from my perspective --

Word choice often reveals our thinking (as words represent ideas). And one thing I see over and over again is the constant references to "knowledge" or "understanding" as though this has some significance. To me, this indicates that the speaker is viewing WCK as a system of knowledge (theory).

Helio Gracie "knows" more and "understands" more about BJJ than probably (at least arguably) any living person. He certainly "knows" more and "understands" more (in his pinky finger) than a tough, young purple belt. But if they *really* fought, the young purple would destroy Helio. Now certainly Helio is great for his age (90) and could probably beat anyone in the world in that age group or even somewhat younger (80s, maybe 70s). He might even be able to handle a young, tough scrub (with no skills). But his ability to perform, i.e., his skill level, has decreased with age (he was once a world-class fighter) even though his knowledge/understanding has continued to grow. The purple even with much less knowledge and understanding can out-perform the more knowledgeable Helio. In other words, the purple has more skill/abilty. And this same example, just by changing names, can apply to any fighting method.

This example shows that skill/ability is not commensurate with knowledge/understanding. Folks with much less knowledge/understanding can often out-perform those with greater knowledge/understanding, even knowledge/understanding not based on theory but from first-hand experience. In other words, it's not what you know/understand, it's what you can do -- performance -- that determines your skill level. The goal of our training, therefore, should not be seeking knowledge or understanding but in increasing performance (increasing skill). The knowledge and understanding is a by-product of the skill/ability (it comes from the performance) not the precursor.

Well IMO you have to have equal parts. With all the information available today on Wing Chun through the books, video's and forum's like this, anyone can gain the knowledge and understanding of the system but are they really understanding the system without experiencing it for themselves? I think the reason why Helio would lose (I really don't know this for a fact) against a Purple Belt is the fact that at a certain skill level the resistence becomes undeniable. For e.g. in my school once a person reaches level 9 and they know their stuff, their skill is undeniable and regardless of who is senior to them with whatever many more years of experience than them, they will give the senior problems because the level 9 skill is like a forced barrier, it is there and it has to be taken out of the way before anything can be done the the person. This is where strength and speed, physical attributes will come into play more, because the skills are similar or almost equal. I can't pak sao punch and senior lv. 9 student the same as a junior and expect the same result.

James

[SevenStar]

I think the reason why Helio would lose (I really don't know this for a fact) against a Purple Belt is the fact that at a certain skill level the resistence becomes undeniable. For e.g. in my school once a person reaches level 9 and they know their stuff, their skill is undeniable and regardless of who is senior to them with whatever many more years of experience than them, they will give the senior problems because the level 9 skill is like a forced barrier, it is there and it has to be taken out of the way before anything can be done the the person. This is where strength and speed, physical attributes will come into play more, because the skills are similar or almost equal. I can't pak sao punch and senior lv. 9 student the same as a junior and expect the same result.

James

No. it's not the same. matter of factly, my bjj coach just recently talked about this. He's a brown belt and in the arnold classic this year placed third - he lost his third place match to a guy who has been a black belt for years. He commented that this guy was on a completely different level than the bjj black belt we are affiliated with, who hasn't had his black belt as long. There is a constant improvement, provided you keep training.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"The goal of our training, therefore, should not be seeking knowledge or understanding but in increasing performance (increasing skill)." (Terence)

..............................................

"My bjj coach just recently talked about this. He's a brown belt and in the arnold classic this year placed third - he lost his third place match to a guy who has been a black belt for years. He commented that this guy was on a completely different level than the bjj black belt we are affiliated with, who hasn't had his black belt as long. There is a constant improvement, provided you keep training." (Sevenstar)


HERE'S WHAT I'm getting from this thread so far:

The more you train - the more your performance skills should increase. (Obviously there is a point of diminishing returns, ie.- when you're 90 years old).

But as a general rule - the premise is absolutely true.

But I don't entirely agree with Terence's opening assumptions about knowledge and understanding...because IME, the more you train - the more your knowledge and understanding SHOULD INCREASE as well - and this will ALSO affect your skill level....not just the amount of training/sparring/fighting you do.

So it's a constant give and take.

Where I do agree entirely with Terence is here:

THE MOST IMPORTANT GOAL SHOULD ALWAYS BE TO INCREASE SKILL LEVEL PERFORMANCE.

And the corollary to that is: DON'T ALLOW the "quest" for knowledge and understanding to surpass your skill in performance - the two have to be so intertwined that they are virtually equal at all times.

[sihing]

No. it's not the same. matter of factly, my bjj coach just recently talked about this. He's a brown belt and in the arnold classic this year placed third - he lost his third place match to a guy who has been a black belt for years. He commented that this guy was on a completely different level than the bjj black belt we are affiliated with, who hasn't had his black belt as long. There is a constant improvement, provided you keep training.

There is constant improvement of course, but there is a base skill level that is reached and when the base skill level is reached then that will cause problems for most levels above that base one. Unless of course the person above is so much more skilled than the person with the base skills, plus they possess more experience and wisdom. The idea behind my post is simple, a person with good basics and foundation, will pose more problems to a expert than a person with lousy basics and foundation, both may have the same amount of time in but the difference was the quality of their training in that time period.

James

[Happeh]

Just something from my perspective --

This example shows that skill/ability is not commensurate with knowledge/understanding. Folks with much less knowledge/understanding can often out-perform those with greater knowledge/understanding, even knowledge/understanding not based on theory but from first-hand experience. In other words, it's not what you know/understand, it's what you can do -- performance -- that determines your skill level. The goal of our training, therefore, should not be seeking knowledge or understanding but in increasing performance (increasing skill). The knowledge and understanding is a by-product of the skill/ability (it comes from the performance) not the precursor.


That statement only applies to you. That is how you think.

If a person only wants to fight, then they need to do as you suggest. All practice, not much theory.

Let's all be honest here. It will help everyone in the long run. Who is going to be a ring fighter? Who is going to be fighting every day of their life like a bouncer at a bar? Who is going to be fighting because they are military or police? All of those people need the physical practice only to improve their performance skill.

I don't want to be a ring fighter or military or police. I want to learn the philosophy and spiritual and special abilities kind of stuff that kung fu teaches. If I am really in danger, I will be better off with a gun or a knife. I want to learn medicine so I understand how the human body works. So I could fix myself or someone else who was injured. So I could evolve and become one of those old super monk kind of guys.

You know what? If you want to be strong enough to beat up people, you don't even have to do kung fu. If you live a "kung fu lifestyle", incorporating kung fu principles into everything you do thruout the day, you will become stronger than about 75% of the people you will meet.

[sihing]

That statement only applies to you. That is how you think.

If a person only wants to fight, then they need to do as you suggest. All practice, not much theory.

Let's all be honest here. It will help everyone in the long run. Who is going to be a ring fighter? Who is going to be fighting every day of their life like a bouncer at a bar? Who is going to be fighting because they are military or police? All of those people need the physical practice only to improve their performance skill.

I don't want to be a ring fighter or military or police. I want to learn the philosophy and spiritual and special abilities kind of stuff that kung fu teaches. If I am really in danger, I will be better off with a gun or a knife. I want to learn medicine so I understand how the human body works. So I could fix myself or someone else who was injured. So I could evolve and become one of those old super monk kind of guys.

You know what? If you want to be strong enough to beat up people, you don't even have to do kung fu. If you live a "kung fu lifestyle", incorporating kung fu principles into everything you do thruout the day, you will become stronger than about 75% of the people you will meet.

This all sounds great Happeh, but you have to realize that Terence is a legend in his own mind and is all knowing. Plus he has no problem proclaiming this to everyone in a very Politically Correct Language, so that no one will confront him about it, LOL...Terence can believe, proclaim and declare as much self knowledge as he wants, I just simply read his posts, absorb what is useful to me and disgard what is USELESS.......

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

The post just made previous to this one is yet another attempt to hijack a thread that purports to make wing chun REAL...

by attacking the messenger of realism.

And if Terence invites the above poster to get together to SHOW each other what it is they advocate - instead of typing about it on a keyboard - once again the poster will add just one more person to the list of those he won't actually face up to after ripping into them and their point of view.

So there you have it...I've just saved a whole bunch of useless back-and-forth posts that will do nothing but distract attention from the main thrust of the thread.

[t_niehoff]

Happeh wrote:

I don't want to be a ring fighter or military or police. I want to learn the philosophy and spiritual and special abilities kind of stuff that kung fu teaches.

**Quite frankly, then you don't "need" to practice a fighting method, you could get more of what you want by just taking up zen or some form of spiritual practice. Why would someone take up a fighting method to not fight or not develop skill in fighting? It seems to me that what you are doing is making excuses for not having fighting skill -- with the "justification" of that's not what you are after.

If I am really in danger, I will be better off with a gun or a knife. I want to learn medicine so I understand how the human body works. So I could fix myself or someone else who was injured. So I could evolve and become one of those old super monk kind of guys.

**For "self-defense" we are better off with a weapon, but as Helio once said, you don't always have your weapon with you but you always have your jiujitsu. The proper objective of medicine is treating or preventing disease; the proper objective of a martial art is fighting.

You know what? If you want to be strong enough to beat up people, you don't even have to do kung fu. If you live a "kung fu lifestyle", incorporating kung fu principles into everything you do thruout the day, you will become stronger than about 75% of the people you will meet.

**There's no such thing as "the kung fu lifestyle" -- this is more role-playing nonsense that nonfighting theoreticians (and the snake-oil salesmen that "teach" them) advocate. Funny how that "lifestyle" always involves providing lots of cash to the snake-oil salesman. ;)

-----------------------

Victor, certainly knowledge will grow with our performance levels -- and that's because the important knowledge or understanding isn't something anyone can give you but your find it for yourself through your performance. But as I said, this is a by-product and will come naturally if one's focus is in increasing one's (fighting) performance.

----------------------

sihing,

I'm not a legend in my own mind -- in fact, I know exactly what my performance level is because I get out there and mix it up with some good people (that kick my ass). So it's not that I'm so good (because I'm not), it's that most WCK people suck, and what they are doing, their "practice", is actually making them worse fighters. So the more they practice, the worse they get. If you don't beleive that you suck, then go mix it up with some good people, like solid MMAists, and see for yourself. Or come to Victor's get-together. But I'm sure that I'm wasting my breath since you'll never take your blinders off.

[Matrix]

certainly knowledge will grow with our performance levels -- and that's because the important knowledge or understanding isn't something anyone can give you but your find it for yourself through your performance. But as I said, this is a by-product and will come naturally if one's focus is in increasing one's (fighting) performance. I see it slightly differently. You can attain knowledge that will enhance performance, and of course as your performance grows so should your knowledge. I think that knowledge can be attained outside the strict confines of performance.... However, it does not become useful knowledge (as opposed to trivia) until it is applied. I just don't like the idea of knowledge being strictly a "by-product", since that infers that knowledge is secondary and perhaps even an unexpected consequence of training. I see knowledge and skill and essential elements of my WC. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but I think it's an important distinction.

Having said that I think Terence makes some very good points. If you're looking for philosophy and spiritual elements you may find better results elsewhere. However, that does not mean that someone should be excluded because their nature is less "martial" than others might like. Everyone trains for different reasons, and I have no right to tell them that their reasons have less value than mine.

I also agree that people can actually get worse through their training. You can train bad habits as easily as good ones. I might be one of those people, who knows.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I think that knowledge can be attained outside the strict confines of performance.... However, it does not become useful knowledge (as opposed to trivia) until it is applied." (Matrix)

EXCELLENT way of stating it. I agree 100%.

[sihing]

I see it slightly differently. You can attain knowledge that will enhance performance, and of course as your performance grows so should your knowledge. I think that knowledge can be attained outside the strict confines of performance.... However, it does not become useful knowledge (as opposed to trivia) until it is applied. I just don't like the idea of knowledge being strictly a "by-product", since that infers that knowledge is secondary and perhaps even an unexpected consequence of training. I see knowledge and skill and essential elements of my WC. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but I think it's an important distinction.

Having said that I think Terence makes some very good points. If you're looking for philosophy and spiritual elements you may find better results elsewhere. However, that does not mean that someone should be excluded because their nature is less "martial" than others might like. Everyone trains for different reasons, and I have no right to tell them that their reasons have less value than mine.

I also agree that people can actually get worse through their training. You can train bad habits as easily as good ones. I might be one of those people, who knows.

Yes good post. Have you ever heard the saying "To Know and Not to DO is NOT to KNOW"

As for spiritual enlightenment and philosophy I think Martial Arts, just like any Art form, is as just as legitimate as any other path towards enlightenment, remember the idea is to KILL...

James

[t_niehoff]

Matrix wrote:

I also agree that people can actually get worse through their training. You can train bad habits as easily as good ones. I might be one of those people, who knows.

**If you fight as part of your training, you'll find out.

[Gangsterfist]

Experince also helps imo.

My sifu grew up in maccau china. Got in lots of fights growing up and learned many different martial arts to defend himself. He is not the biggest guy ever either. He trained in taji, wing chun under ho kam ming, choy li fut, and a got a black belt in okinawan karate.

When i chi sao with him its a whole different world. Its like nothing I have ever seen, and i get owned with him not even doing anything. I end up beating myself.

I OTOH, have gotten into some fights from growing up, but not as many as he did. I got in fights on the playground at recess, I got into fights in high school, your group of friends vs my group of friends. I live near a bunch of bars and resturaunts so during the spring and summer I get a lot of drunks walking past my house, and a few of them have tried fighting me and my roomates. One really drunk guy hopped our fence, walked up to our porch and offered us 20 bucks to fight him. No kidding.

Does being in NHB or K-1 or UFC etc make you a better fighter than people who do not compete professionally but have been in real life fights, serious fights even?

What about WSL, would he last in NHB or UFC today? He had really good wing chun skills and was a natural fighter.

So, really if you train hard and have some real experiences, whatever they may be, I think your wing chun should speak for itself even if you win or lose. Infact, some say you learn more from losing.

[lawrenceofidaho]

What about WSL, would he last in NHB or UFC today? He had really good wing chun skills and was a natural fighter.
If WSL (in his prime) used a time machine to visit the present, and planned on entering an NHB match, I'm quite confident that after seeing the skills, tactics, conditioning, etc. of modern fighters, he would be starting a cardio regimin and cross-training in grappling to optimize his chances at success.

I SERIOUSLY doubt he would say that wing chun is the ultimate/complete/perfect system that can't be improved upon and doesn't require any conditioning to make it work. -Fighters, like WSL, have to be realists because they are not sitting in an armchair saying "what if?", but actually mixing it up with a skilled opponent who's trying to put some hurt on them.

Here's a "what if" to consider.........What if you KNEW that in six months from now you were going to be violently attacked by a really good grappler?

-Wouldn't you want to learn as much about grappling as you could (what makes it work, what makes it dangerous, etc.), and train realistically against the best grapplers you could find? I doubt you would settle for having Joe Shmoe in your kwoon come at you half-heartedly with takedowns and fumble around on the ground because being totally honest with yourself, you'd know that this kind of "training" wouldn't be doing you much good at all.......

Right? :confused:

[Fresh]

So in your opening post are you saying that Helio does not try to increase his performance anymore? Or that is it useless to try? On the way to proving your point you sure make a lot of other weird points sometimes. :D

[Fresh]

If WSL (in his prime) used a time machine to visit the present, and planned on entering an NHB match, I'm quite confident that after seeing the skills, tactics, conditioning, etc. of modern fighters, he would be starting a cardio regimin and cross-training in grappling to optimize his chances at success.

Yeah 'if' he wanted to enter some NHB match. Since that kind of a time machine does not exist its any ones guess what he would want to do. He might want to still be doing wing chun instead of obssessed with NHb matches.

[lawrenceofidaho]

Yeah 'if' he wanted to enter some NHB match. Since that kind of a time machine does not exist its any ones guess what he would want to do. He might want to still be doing wing chun instead of obssessed with NHb matches.
I agree that it's doubtful he'd be "obsessed" with NHB matches, but it's not unreasonable to speculate that he'd be involved in them to some degree since he seemed to enjoy fighting and the things he learned first-hand from it.

-Lawrence

[lawrenceofidaho]

Since that kind of a time machine does not exist.......
Of course it does, -my sifu said so....... :D

[Sihing73]

Here's a "what if" to consider.........What if you KNEW that in six months from now you were going to be violently attacked by a really good grappler?

-Wouldn't you want to learn as much about grappling as you could (what makes it work, what makes it dangerous, etc.), and train realistically against the best grapplers you could find? I doubt you would settle for having Joe Shmoe in your kwoon come at you half-heartedly with takedowns and fumble around on the ground because being totally honest with yourself, you'd know that this kind of "training" wouldn't be doing you much good at all.......

Right? :confused:

Hello.

The above is an excellent point and is an example of the evolutionary nature of WC and any real combat art. You will train to face the dangers you are most likley to meet and your methods will vary accordingly. Environment certainly plays a factor in how you fight or what techniques you will use. For example; if you live in a cold climate where everyone wears thick layers of clothing will your methods differ than if you were in a warm climate with minimal clothing? If you fight on a sandy beach will you use a different method than fighting in snow or on ice or even in a parking lot?

While I do not hold to the need to train like nor participate in NHB types of fights, I do agree that everyones needs will vary and that whatever art they train in, for our purpose it is WC ;) needs to be adaptable and open to evolving to face the threats most likely to be encountered.

No matter what each of us may say, none of us has the ultimate training method. If someone did then they would doubtless wipe up the floor with all others and by being toataly victorious demonstrate the superiority of their approach. However, even if someone did accomplish this all they would actually show, IMO, is the superiority of their approach for themselves as an individual. It does not necessarily hold that the same approach would work for everyone else. I believe this to be true as each lineage, no every art, has someone they can point to who was exceptional. Thus while the right art will help, the individual will make it or break it, IMO.

Some on this board post pure crap viewing only their own viewpoints or those which which they agree to be the only valid ones. If they see or hear of a different method or technique with which they do not agree then they put it down or say it will not work. This is sometimes done despite the evidence that such a method has worked for others in real life encounters. In short I think that sometime the posts are more about ego then about sharing and learning from one another in order to better our art.

Peace,

Dave

[sihing]

I agree Dave, some of the posts are ego based, just so that one person can prove their point is more valid or effective than the others. Even when one of us agrees with some of what these people are saying (e.g. Sparring/realistic training methods are a requirement for one to learn how to fight or defend themselves), they still come back and disagree with your posts, Hippocrates they are if you ask me.

James

[anerlich]

What if you KNEW that in six months from now you were going to be violently attacked by a really good grappler?

I know this is going to happen to me tomorrow morning at training :p


Hippocrates they are if you ask me.
Hippocrates (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Hippocrates.html) was actually WAY BAD when it came to geometry. He worked on squaring the circle, etc.

As far as I know he wasn't a hypocrite.

Is this a spinoff from the triangles thread or something? ;)

[AmanuJRY]

Theory...Skill...IMHO they are both important. I refuse to engage in an arguement over which is more important.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Theory...Skill...IMHO they are both important. I refuse to engage in an arguement over which is more important.

THERE SHOULDN'T and wouldn't be any arguments about this if people acknowledged that the two must always travel together - because skill without theory (knowledge) will always be limited in it's scope - and theory without skill (in application) is a complete waste of time.

BUT IF I HAD to take only one of these ingredients to the desert island - it would be skill.

They are yin and yang...or male and female principles...and the one (skill) dominates the other (theory).

[reneritchie]

There are different kinds of knowledge. Being told something may not be knowledge, as it can be difficult to assess whether or not what you're being told is accurate. This can be 'sifu sez' in MA, or a text book in a University.

If you figure out something, you have at least your own experience to help assess whether or not your findings are accurate, though what may have held true under one set of circumstances may not in future circumstances.

That's a roundabout way of saying standing on the shoulders of giants (especiall when some are giants only in their own hype) does not make one a giant, it merely makes one set up for a giant fall.

I remember in art class the teacher always chided people who drew from other artwork rather than from the real world. Michael Criton has also frequently written about the Western habit of non-direct learning.

Perhaps that's why past generation sifu have insisted their students not use their names but achieve their own success, and to test things out themselves to see if they were being tricked.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Good post, Rene.

[SevenStar]

Does being in NHB or K-1 or UFC etc make you a better fighter than people who do not compete professionally but have been in real life fights, serious fights even?



IMO, yes. Why? opportunity. A person may only get into two streetifghts in their adult life. However, They can have as many MMA, thai boxing, etc. fights as their heart's desire. They have the opportunity to gain more experience.

[Ultimatewingchun]

The opportunity to gain more experience, as SevenStar just described, will always be an opportunity to become a better fighter.

And fighting in the kinds of competitions mentioned are enormous opportunities to become better.

Now granted, not everyone involved in the martial arts will have the opportunity or the inclination, for one reason or another, to compete in such events...but we all can seek out opportunities, and should have the inclination to do so, imo, to at least work with fighters from other arts - and do it competitively - as often as we can.

And by competitively I mean hard sparring with protective gear...and hopefully a mutual understanding that there are limits to the force and damage to be inflicted, (ie.- it's not a streetfight).