Mental Training

Many of us have seen the Thanksgiving Father vs. Son knifefight pictures posted on this forum and others. The posting of the pictures has led me to consider the benefit of martial artists studying them (or similar graphically violent material).

I have come across two divergent theories concerning the value of studying the material.

Perspective #1: Martial art students should be exposed to this graphic imagery. By conditioning the student to this imagery over time, there is less of a chance of shock when faced with the horror of a real conflict. You must face the grim reality of combat with indifference so your mind may remain focused on the ultimate goal of victory.

or

Perspective #2: Martial art students should not be exposed to this graphic imagery, as it is counter-productive to the creation of a positive mindset and offense oriented strategy. Pictures like this effect students whether they are conscious of it or not. During a real encounter this imagery will ignite fear concerning the potential damage one can expect if any mistakes are made. Rather than psyching oneself out with imagery of knifefighting failure, the student should simply train hard and keep a survivor-perspective untarnished with pychologically traumatic imagery of failure.

What do you think?

I don't get mad.
I get stabby.

I think you have posed some interesting questions here stranger, so here's what I think.

If one immunizes themselves to anything they will resist it much better than one who has no exposure at all.

To hide from the realities and brutality of life is to forfeit that exposure.

If you do not fear, then you are foolish. Being able to control your fear through mindset is a discipline that is part of correct Martial Training. If you cannot overcome your fear, it will overcome you.

In the saline moment of combat, what has been and what is to come is not important, the mind needs to be in the here and now at this point or what is there will be missed.

Imagery in and of itself is a type of lesson and a shallower experience, but can be gained from when regarded as what they are. Images that bear no weight on your personal reality. Unless of courses the imagery is of you in which case the experience is deeper and the imagery is used as a usefull reference and a teaching tool.

Exposure is key in the overall development of character, but exposure for the sake of it and without the checks and balances and training that allow us to regulate and control our emotional states can lead to great fear and even emotional and mental instability.

So, meat to the strong and milk to the babes is rule of the day when it comes to showing or teaching the uninitiated and unprepared people. Otherwise we are only looking at these images to satisfy a morbid curiousity which in turn denotes a lack of ethical, mental and moral fitness.

But to regard them with a knowing eye and a mindful practice done is to be able to learn from them.

peace

Kung Lek

Martial Arts Links

Fear of the unknown is always greater and more dangerous than fear of the known. Ignorance IS bliss--but only to someone who is friggin' ignorant to begin with; those sort of peoploids wouldn't benefit from anything, IMO.

Look at the pics. Know what you're up against; it ain't like the cartoonish violence you see on TV and the movies.

K. Mark Hoover

A completely sheltered life leaves one unprepared for violent disaster.
Kung Lek's note on "checks and balances" is well put, as is his comment on training the mind to be in the "here and now."

There are people who chronically worry about mistakes, about what is the right move, and so on, crippled by fear of failure and/or inability to decide. This personality aspect is there, with or without the suggested imagery. I don't think education to correct this should hinge on harsh criticism, or with emotional traumatizing that almost ensures poor judgment. Unless one wishes to do away with personal judgment, except under extreme circumstances, and substitute obeying a superior officer.

"Conditioning over time." That's interesting. What are you conditioning by repeated exposure? If done by someone who is highly practiced, it can amount to specific programming (combined with martial arts training). You training a soldier? For real? A soldier lives with the others, under control of superior officers almost 24 hours day during training and combat times. In no way can this be taken as entertainment. It's to grind away at the restraints on violence that have been put in place, to impose following of orders as a credo. "Civilized" living is replaced by another code which cannot be disobeyed.

I do not believe in the casual use of violent imagery as presented in the statements presented as a correct conditioning tool. Occasional exposure is one thing, and almost unavoidable in these times. Immersion will not teach focus unless the capacity to focus is already there. To focus at will and have the spirit at peace is not something that will be trained by repeatedly emotionally traumatizing the student by violent imagery. In my view, exposure to brutality, is necessary. Too much, and you might be teaching that same brutality of mind, or provoking an emotional numbness that passes for progress, in someone who feels overwhelmed by pictorial situation which is beyond their ability to deal with on one or more levels.
If the student already possesses great adeptness, then challenges of mind and spirit and body via a Master is the training, not the most gory picture that can be found.

What comes with that focus we speak of? The depth of our being. When conditioning, be sure of what is being transmitted and how it is individually interpreted. How does the teacher respond emotionally to these images? That's another question of interest.

A picture or a movie can go only so far, because there is a tendency of suspend belief which might kick in. On the other hand, an image might take hold as we allow ourselves to get close to the situation depicted. How lasting this is is debatable. While it is necessary to have exposure, I question what is going on with people who flood their lives with gore. The fear might have been immunized against? I don't know. One can joke about the terrifying, and take some of the horror out of it, which can exhibit like morbid curiousity, a thrill. Or, denial. There is also the possibility that someone will actually enjoy this stuff, and then we're getting into something else, sadism.

My exposure to the realities of war, bloodshed, hit home via the movie, Andre Rublev, a 4-hour drama re a Russian icon artist and the times he lived in. Also, in Lancelot du Lak (in French, Canadian), a work of art re the realities of knighthood. And then, there was 9/11/01. A good example of how Nothing, no picture, no movie, no nothing prepared me for that or what I have been feeling, and the dispair that brutality begets brutality, and yet there is a time to fight with lethal force. I have no interest in seeing gory martial arts movies.

Part of overcoming fear is to focus on the moment in terms of acting on it, not being paralyzed by emotional flooding, and exercising one's will to do so. Types of trained abilities vary, and can include dissociation into one of the animals used in Kung Fu practice, which can distance the threat and bypass the thinking mind. But, underneath is an acceptance of physical death as a probable consequence of resisting, and having the smarts to recognize opportunities, or if none appear, to go with it anyhow because the alternative is untenable. That is where the "indifference" comes in. No picture can teach this.

Frankly, I don't see repeated exposure to violent imagery as a reliable or viable teaching tool. For #1, knowledge of, exposure is all over the place. Awareness is enough in terms of violent imagery. Anything else is over the top. The mind is not to be focussed on victory, but on being=action.
For #2, seeing a gory picture doesn't necessarily lead to flashbacks to that fiction in a real encounter. The fear native to the individual will surface with or without pictorial conditioning. I covered fear of mistakes above. Imagery of failure can be there with or without pictorial aids. Only a severely traumatized person will maintain an outside imagery (i.e., movie) of failure to the degree described. I think this is something on its way to Post Traumatic Stress, caused by a picture, a movie. This is an extreme case. Heck, someone attacks me with a knife, I'm not thinking of Jack. Death is part of life. Determining what is the self is as well. Neither can be hidden from for long. Shocking the system can have an effect, can encourage a decision to think along different lines, but you are what you are as an individual. If you don't admit the possibility of failure, you won't be able to deal with it, recover from it when it happens in a physical conflict.

thanx,
Cody

I think this could go along with the sparring vs no sparring debate. I always believe that it is better to know the possible outcomes. I always thought I'd be fine against being punched hard in the head until it happened. I am a better fighter for the experience, and I think that those pictures have made me more aware of the gruesome dangers of knife fighting.
I understand the bit about people having a messed up mindset because of it, but at least they are given the chance to change the mindset over time. They won't have much time to change it in the middle of a fight.
Forewarned is forearmed :cool:

"Forfeit the game
Before somebody else takes you out of the frame
And puts your name to shame
Cover up your face
You can't run the race
The pace is too fast,
You just won't last!"

I think showing those pictures would be a good way talk someone out of carrying a knife. Educational material for the class. "You don't want to carry a knife and start fighting with it. This is the outcome....if you're lucky enough to make it alive"

This is very interesting....


I can say this. I hate fighting, everyone knows that here, and I don't like acting tough.

However....I study quite in depth real fight footage from police cameras, media, pictures, etc.
I reflect very much on my own fights of the past, and I think of worst case scenarios where the "hero" doesn't win at the end...

So far it has made me more positive about how precious life is, and how stupid all the "tough guy" crap really is.

Ryu

http://lavender.fortunecity.com/powe...es/kenshin.jpg

Rimpleback Pumpernickle Kez Kez Vuy Tranh Yanagasawa Fujikage Fistibuns....
the lost son of the Fistibuns clan...


"One who takes pride in shallow knowledge or understanding is like a monkey who delights in adorning itself with garbage."

I really appreciate the responses I got to this post. For the record, my current training is in line with "perspective #1". I believe this is the better course of action. Admittedly, I really respect the instructor that suggested "perspective #2", but I could not agree on this particular issue (oh well).

In response to Cody's questions, my master and the instructor who suggested "perspective #2" are both veterans of elite units. Although civilian training is not as extreme, I believe one can go through a mental conditioning process for the realities of combat. I also believe that the results will NOT be as dramatic as they could be under the 24 hour a day indoctrination that a soldier would go through (so we are in agremment on that), yet they are significant enough to pursue.

I don't get mad.
I get stabby.

What you do when encountering fear is only something you can take care of in the moment. At the extremes of fear and fearlessness, they are the same thing, and the same thing is often considered the action one takes. With this said, people do not make mistakes when encountering fear, although often to those who feel that they personally would have acted differently it appears as if mistakes are made. We often look back at who we were in the past and put our mindset of whom we are now in the situations we were in then and realize that a lot of things we were afraid of did not need fear and a lot of things we were fearless about when we were young we would should have been scared to **** about now. Regardless, we made the choices and decissions we did based on those things and continually work to redefine the way we see the world and the way we conform to these feelings.

I've enjoyed reading this thread so far as everyone has given in great input.

- Nexus

"we are only looking at these images to satisfy a morbid curiousity which in turn denotes a lack of ethical, mental and moral fitness."

i can admit it, can you?

where's my beer?

vegetables.

When it comes down to what I personally Feel, I have agreement with GunnedDownAtrocity's quoted statement.
Also, adding the (inappropriate) programming stuff I talked about.

I've never seen these pictures, nor do I want to. I've been ridiculed for avoiding movies in which graphic violence goes past a certain point. Yes, I like action films a lot, but not this stuff.
Once you realize the Reality of violence in the environment, you don't need flash cards to remind you.

Cody

"Otherwise we are only looking at these images to satisfy a morbid curiousity which in turn denotes a lack of ethical, mental and moral fitness."

What lack of ethical, moral, and mental fitness are you talking about?

Curiosity is simply curiosity.

That occurred to me too, in terms of specifics. Then, I realized it doesn't matter really.

Morbid curiousity (indicating a form of enjoyment or fascination (sometimes almost trancelike)) is a flaw, in my view, no matter what the particular inclinations are along the mentioned lines.

Cody (talking from the gut, rather than the mind)

Lyle.

Intent is what is key in the use of any object to explain a point, teach a path, guide another, etc.

If you are showing images of others suffering, images of sexuality, images of violence and death with out the correct intent behind the showing of the images, or if you are looking at these images just for the sake of looking at them with "morbid curiousity", then it does indeed denote a lack of ethics,morality and mental fitness.

Ethics and the description of what "ethics" are has been made clear by the classicists . Your morality is based upon your social construct and you core belief systems, this varies from culture to culture but suprisingly, not by much and mental stability is wherein a person is able to function within a social construct withouty causing harm to others, themselves or encouraging others to do so through sociopathic or psychopathis behaviours.

To fetishize is to be unclear of your own social construct or to rebel against it and therefore it becomes a fetish and you would recognize it as out of the social construct and treat it as such.

I do not use the term "normal" because I feel it is too broad a term. But social construct is clearer in definition.

Most societies do not accept murder, rape, the assault or abuse of the innocents and other what can be considered "taboo" areas.

This is because of historical reference and the ability to progress and understand that which is nourishing and that which is not. It is also true that to expose the unitiated is dangerous and can indeed cause mental instability.

so, if one spends a a great deal of time looking at graphical images of death or sex without the intent of understanding and instead fetishizing them for personal pleasure, by definition one is ethical weak, morally weak and mentally unstable vis a vis these primal urges controlling their intent.

peace

Kung Lek

Martial Arts Links