Shou Shu - real or another made-up melange?

[Brad]

i dont think the history is made up, or he would say he created Shou Shu because you can tell its not Kenpo and id say that its a lot more effective than Kenpo and that would make him a bigger genius than Parker.

Like I said, what personal experience do you base this on(the superiority of Shou Shu I mean)? There's actually a very practical purpose for making up history, and that's to make money. People watch a lot of kungfu movies and are easily impressed by fantastical histories and legends. Atributing silly titles such as Da Sifu to tradition gives him a legitimate reason to put himself on a pedastal to feed his own ego.

[Brad]

well Shou Shu has worked for me, thats all that matters to me.

So you're saying that honesty, integrity, and the possibility of your teacher causing great phycological harm to cute, innocent, little children mean nothing to you? As long as you can fight good, that's all that matters? Surely, you have a concience.

[Akuma]

Originally posted by Brad

But how can someone say they have integrity if they willingly promote a lie? And, in my opinion, saying "I don't care whether he's a fraud or not, as long as I learn to kick ass!" is just as bad as making up the lies yourself. I feel that when you lie to people even if you give them the tools to defend themselves, you're still hurting them in other ways. There's potential for serious phychological damage when someone you trust turns out to be a fraud, especially among children and young teens. Adults might be able to handle it ok, but kids tend to take things like this kind of hard. And just saying,"what they don't know, can't hurt them" isn't a very good argument either as the chances of them finding out eventually are pretty high, and the longer they believe a lie, the harder it will hit if they find out the truth.

That's a very good point. However, some instructors could have integrity but be thrown into this lie(if it is one) without realizing it is one, and honestly truly believe in the school and founding instructor. Not everyone there could be pushing the lie..hence why I say that it is possible for some teachers to have integrity at the school..

I do agree with your points in general though...

[dezhen2001]

theres too much pressure guys - **** i wouda been flattened by now

some good posts though - especially from joedoe

dawood

[shaolin kungfu]

what styles have you had experience with, sparring or training? Can you honestly say that shou shu is more effective than all other styles?

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Akuma


That's a very good point. However, some instructors could have integrity but be thrown into this lie(if it is one) without realizing it is one, and honestly truly believe in the school and founding instructor. Not everyone there could be pushing the lie..hence why I say that it is possible for some teachers to have integrity at the school..

I do agree with your points in general though...

Despite what my signature says , ignorance is a pretty poor excuse for helping prop up a lie. Shouldn't the instructors try to learn more about the art by themselves? I know I try to learn more about the history of Ngor Chor as much as I can.

To me, trying to find out about the history of my art enhances my enthusiasm and enjoyment of the art. Maybe I am just a wierdo

So far my research has turned up 2 slightly different versions of the art's history, however that doesn't mean I simply accepted the history told to me by my sihings. And my quest continues .

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by turbo76
i dont think the history is made up, or he would say he created Shou Shu because you can tell its not Kenpo and id say that its a lot more effective than Kenpo and that would make him a bigger genius than Parker.

yeah, but you're saying that based on absolutely no direct experience with kenpo or any other art. just what you see in movies and books. that's your whole problem, turbo. you're not willing to do any independent thinking about this.

you say that the history is impossible for you to know, because you weren't there. only direct experience could make things clear for you. and yet, you're willing to write off the effectiveness of kenpo or any other art by stubbornly refusing to engage in direct experience. that's keeping yourself willfully ignorant. which is precisely what a dishonest school is counting on.

you don't care about the history. because what you're learning works. do yourself a favour and see whether it works against other people. YOUR DIRECT EXPERIENCE. one friend who does taekwondo isn't enough research. find others. try out your style. don't rely on anyone else's opinion. without that, you're just towing the party line.


stuart b.

[edited to apologize for being overly harsh. i'm not saying this because i enjoy bashing on you turbo. you seem like a decent guy. and many of us here genuinely think you're being taken for a ride.]

[turbo76]

[apoweyn]

alright turbo. do whatever you want. (as if you need my permission.)

personally, i don't like having pertinent information withheld from me (which phil admitted to doing). and i certainly don't like being lied to (which may or may not be the case here).

regardless, it's your life.


stuart b.

[apoweyn]

anybody else noticed that everytime some guy steps up as an authority on some obscure art we've never heard of before, he's always got prior experience in arts we have heard of before?

whether it's some obscure weapon system used by the navajo or the vikings or some closely-guarded family kung fu style, the guy always has several years of something far more recognizable under his belt.

if these arts preexisted that individual, you'd think that there would be at least a couple of teachers who knew only that obscure art. instead, we get people with enough background in other arts to be able to synthesize something and slap a new (and often nonsensical to native speakers) name on it.


stuart b.

[carly]

II. Information Control

1. Use of deception
a. Deliberately holding back information
b. Distorting information to make it acceptable
c. Outright lying

2. Access to non-cult sources of information minimized or discouraged
a. Books, articles, newspapers, magazines, TV, radio
b. Critical information
c. Former members
d. Keep members so busy they don’t have time to think

3. Compartmentalization of information; Outsider vs. Insider doctrines
a. Information is not freely accessible
b. Information varies at different levels and missions within pyramid
c. Leadership decides who "needs to know" what

4. Spying on other members is encouraged
a. Pairing up with "buddy" system to monitor and control
b. Reporting deviant thoughts, feelings, and actions to leadership

5. Extensive use of cult generated information and propaganda
a. Newsletters, magazines, journals, audio tapes, videotapes, etc.
b. Misquotations, statements taken out of context from non-cult sources

6. Unethical use of confession
a. Information about "sins" used to abolish identity boundaries
b. Past "sins" used to manipulate and control; no forgiveness or absolution

III. Thought Control

1. Need to internalize the group’s doctrine as "Truth"
a. Map = Reality
b. Black and White thinking
c. Good vs. evil
d. Us vs. them (inside vs. outside)

2. Adopt "loaded" language (characterized by "thought-terminating clichés"). Words are the tools we use to think with. These "special" words constrict rather than expand understanding. They function to reduce complexities of experience into trite, platitudinous "buzz words".

3. Only "good" and "proper" thoughts are encouraged.

4. Thought-stopping techniques (to shut down "reality testing" by stopping "negative" thoughts and allowing only "good" thoughts); rejection of rational analysis, critical thinking, constructive criticism.
Denial, rationalization, justification, wishful thinking


5. No critical questions about leader, doctrine, or policy seen as legitimate

6. No alternative belief systems viewed as legitimate, good, or useful

[firepalm]

Well Shou Shu was taught (per the first post) to the Mandarin ruling class (?). I've read that a few other styles have had such similar such distinguishments; Baji Quan, Yang Taiji, Hop Gar, etc... yet they didn't manage to remain such unheard secretive styles. Odd how Shou Shu was taught to generations of the Mandarin ruling class (blah, blah, blah...) & no info can be found on it till some 'middle America white guy' (with dubious Kenpo ties) comes along.

Mention was previously made of Ed Parker Jr. being able to answer questions on Moore & his Shou Shu. Come on this is the same guy that hung out with Olaf Simon & graded him Bahahahahhahahhahaha.

Like I said before "middle america white folk figures!"

[shaolin kungfu]

The fact that the history is false points to the effectiveness of the art. If shou shu was truly effective, it would'nt need to lie about it's origins. BJJ is a brutally effective art and never and needed a lie to gain popularity. People recognized it for what it was. It has become a popular and well respected art, even without a long history. Same goes for JKD, and numerous other arts. If shou shu was effective, people would join because of that, and not because of some falsified history.

Just my thoughts.

[turbo76]

[firepalm]

try working on your comebacks