Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 198

Thread: Question about internal blocking

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R. Brown View Post
    I know the feeling. It is too bad he had to bring his bad blood into this conversation.
    I am sorry if you were offended. None of the bad blood was directed at you. This thing goes back for some time and it is a long story.

    I know that you are not involved with this and it is of no interest to you but I do take my hat off to you because very few people here had an idea of what I was talking about when I metioned the "live" techniques.

    The result being Vankuen's accusation of me being a "chi magician" etc.
    I am getting fed up of some "kung fu" exponents (or kickboxers) here who start with the "chi" jokes every time they come across an internal concept that is alien to their understanding of the martial arts.

    HW8

    P.S. You can also check the link I provided in an earlier post on this thread to see how this question came into being.
    Last edited by HardWork8; 05-13-2008 at 06:36 PM.

  2. #32
    HardWork8,

    It isn't what you said, but how you said it that gives a bad impression of you. Van searched for an explanation about a concept he was unfamiliar with, that is a good quality. He did not bring your name into this conversation and did not defame you here. While he may have said something offensive to you about you, he did not mention your name.

    It is you who brought the bad blood from the other thread into this one. You could have PM'd him or you could have chided him on the other thread. You comments on this thread would have been an asset if the rudeness had been avoided.

    It is possible you had not been clear enough previously or perhaps the manner in which you addressed the topic created a block to the information. It doesn't matter whether you were clear in your own mind or not. Sometimes information does not click until some small key word or explanation is learned and then it all falls into place. Perhaps your comments loaded the scales and the comments here tipped the balance towards understanding.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R. Brown View Post
    HardWork8,

    It isn't what you said, but how you said it that gives a bad impression of you. Van searched for an explanation about a concept he was unfamiliar with, that is a good quality.
    On the surface he did the right thing, but then he turns around and pretends that this is something that he is familiar with but perhaps under a different definition. He was trying to leave false impression. I gave him enough info in the other thread for him to recognized the concept that I was talking about.

    You may check the thread yourself if you have extra time on your hands.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R.Brown
    He did not bring your name into this conversation and did not defame you here. While he may have said something offensive to you about you, he did not mention your name.
    Point taken. I suppose that there was a kind of an accumulative effect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R.Brown
    It is you who brought the bad blood from the other thread into this one. You could have PM'd him or you could have chided him on the other thread. You comments on this thread would have been an asset if the rudeness had been avoided.
    Point taken again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R.Brown
    It is possible you had not been clear enough previously or perhaps the manner in which you addressed the topic created a block to the information. It doesn't matter whether you were clear in your own mind or not. Sometimes information does not click until some small key word or explanation is learned and then it all falls into place. Perhaps your comments loaded the scales and the comments here tipped the balance towards understanding.
    Well, Vankuen said he knew of this concept only after you explained it to him. I know that if I had given him the same explanation then I would be hearing his comments on "chi magic"; "chi blasts" etc.

    I provided more than enough info for him to conclude about the concept that I was talking about. Have a look at the thread. He didn't even appreciate the difference in the approach a of an internal stylist to that of a Shotokan karate exponent.

    I believe that nowadays, some MA practitioners view the internal kung fu styles as no more than relaxation exercises.

    HW8

  4. #34
    I read some of the other thread. I just PM'd you.

  5. #35
    Hey ya'll...though I hoped otherwise, I figured he would be in here at some point to defend his internet honor. So much for wishful thinking.

    It was indeed an honest inquiry into the terminology used, and as I stated in both this thread and the catalyst thread, I figured it was a matter of semantics, and it was. That was the point in the other thread--the words themselves don't mean anything...

    I just wish he could have answered the question the first few times it was asked, then this thread would have never needed to be created.

    But with that...thanks again for the elaboration, it's appreciated.
    "I don't know if anyone is known with the art of "sitting on your couch" here, but in my eyes it is also to be a martial art.

    It is the art of avoiding dangerous situations. It helps you to avoid a dangerous situation by not actually being there. So lets say there is a dangerous situation going on somewhere other than your couch. You are safely seated on your couch so you have in a nutshell "difused" the situation."

  6. #36
    The words we use to communicate mean different things to each of us, even if the difference in meaning is slight. I can write or say something that, to me, is very clear, and yet it is as clear as mud to others. That does not mean what I said is rubbish or that the other person is an idiot. All it means is that language is an inaccurate manner of sharing thoughts.

    I understand what I mean because I am the source of my own thoughts, but others with different experiences, temperament, educational level , emotional makeup and ability to communicate, including the language they speak, will read what is written through their own unique filter. The inherent flaw of language is that it creates an avenue for the misinterpretation and misunderstanding others, but it is all we have.

    The wonder is not why, when WE think we are being clear, we cannot be understood by others, but how is it that there aren't even more [mis]understandings than there are?

    IMHO
    Last edited by Scott R. Brown; 05-13-2008 at 09:37 PM.

  7. #37
    Very true. Contradictory to my communication style of late with certain individuals, I've had to take a lot of comm' courses and leadership courses in my collegiate studies -- which agree with that mode of thought. Everyone's experiences up to date determine how they see the world, themselves, and how they interprete messages from another individual.

    Understanding where the perception of the receiver is likely come from helps to know what words to use when communicating a message. I think that's where things begin and end; and that's where the problem starts with miscommunication as well.
    Last edited by SAAMAG; 05-13-2008 at 09:42 PM.
    "I don't know if anyone is known with the art of "sitting on your couch" here, but in my eyes it is also to be a martial art.

    It is the art of avoiding dangerous situations. It helps you to avoid a dangerous situation by not actually being there. So lets say there is a dangerous situation going on somewhere other than your couch. You are safely seated on your couch so you have in a nutshell "difused" the situation."

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Vankuen View Post
    Very true. Contradictory to my communication style of late with certain individuals, I've had to take a lot of comm' courses and leadership courses in my collegiate studies -- which agree with that mode of thought. Everyone's experiences up to date determine how they see the world, themselves, and how they interprete messages from another individual.

    Understanding where the perception of the receiver is likely come from helps to know what words to use when communicating a message. I think that's where things begin and end; and that's where the problem starts with miscommunication as well.
    Yes, it is pretty difficult to make ourselves understood to everyone on a public message board. On an individual level it is always best to communicate with another according to their ability to understand. That is not possible when whatever we post is open to the entire world. There will always be those who misunderstand or take offense. The reaction each of us has concerning just about anything in life is more a reflection of us rather than a reflection of whatever it is we are reacting too.

    So, even though I may think that someone else is a jerk, how I react to that person says more about me than about him!

    Having said that, sometimes the reader doesn't want to understand. They are too busy defending their point of view to try to perceive more clearly and this will increase the confusion. On a board we cannot see the twinkle in someone's eye when they are commenting, we cannot see hand gestures and other means of non-verbal communication that help to flesh out communication. So what we bring to the conversation at any moment in time contributes a great deal our understanding or misunderstanding.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,519
    What in the heck does all this have to do with internal blocking? Dead and live blocks? Not the same thing is it? I thought I was about to learn something, but I guess it does not exist.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Trying to get back on subject, spoke to my Taiji instructor yesterday and asked him about this very thing.
    Fist off, the first thing he said was what I said, in regards to "dead arm" blocking.
    When I mentioned that I was referring to more "passive" blocking rather than "active" blocking he said, and I am paraphrasing of course, " While I can understand it, I don't agree, all is active, all is alive, the constant opposing of yin and yang make it impossible for anythign to be "dead".

    There you have it
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    1,994
    Greetings..

    My experience suggests that "alive/dead" is more of a sense of flow.. that dead blocking interupts the flow of the action, alive blocking is part of a continuous flow.. alive and dead are metaphors..

    Be well..
    TaiChiBob.. "the teacher that is not also a student is neither"

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by TaiChiBob View Post
    Greetings..

    My experience suggests that "alive/dead" is more of a sense of flow.. that dead blocking interupts the flow of the action, alive blocking is part of a continuous flow.. alive and dead are metaphors..

    Be well..
    Good post!

    The continuos flow of the alive blocking can go deeper when you add the "listening" element enabling you to sense the power of the blow and any further intention of your opponent.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by cjurakpt View Post
    why don't you just worry about yourself and not speak for someone else;
    Right now the only worried person here is Vankuen.


    Quote Originally Posted by cjurakpt
    when you use my post as a vehicle for reinforcing your own contention that he should "pay attention" to what you are saying, it is misappropriation
    Your post already did that all by itself as it was not meant to back anything that I had said, that is as far as Vankuen was concerned.


    Quote Originally Posted by cjurakpt
    I didn't get that at all - he seemed to me genuinely curious about those terms which inherently can be very subjective ones, meaning that my perspective on them can be taken or left however one likes
    Yes, he was genuinly interested in getting some info to use AGAINST ME.
    Furthermore, subjective or not "liveness" is a valid concept that is known by all those who have more than a passive knowledge of the internals.

    Quote Originally Posted by cjurakpt
    I don't know anything about the information being provided by you; my "information" is based on my own direct experience and as such, I even used my own term "lively" which again is a very subjective experience
    Then that explains why you could not correlate its usefulness in combat.

    Quote Originally Posted by cjurakpt
    very interesting how you are still carrying that around with you...
    And so are you, it seems.

    Quote Originally Posted by cjurakpt
    I never said it didn't; I simply said in my direct experience I have not seen / felt it applied in actual combat
    Then I would hazard a guess that you don't fully understand the concept yourself.


    Quote Originally Posted by cjurakpt
    I think you should still go fu(k yourself
    And I still think that your sifu should wash your mouth with soap.

  14. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    When I mentioned that I was referring to more "passive" blocking rather than "active" blocking he said, and I am paraphrasing of course, " While I can understand it, I don't agree, all is active, all is alive, the constant opposing of yin and yang make it impossible for anythign to be "dead".

    There you have it
    In essence he is correct. However, he is correct according to a specific context which is different than the context that was implied in the question. In a sense he is saying, "Yin is Yang and Yang is Yin, it is the interplay of the two principles that causes life." Which principle "appears" to predominate at any one time depends upon the context one is using to define a specific phenomena.

    I use the example of three bowls of water to illustrate this principle.

    Let us take three bowls of water. One has 40*F water, the second has 60*F water, and the third has 80*F water. The question is, is the second bowl filled with warm or cool water? The answer depends upon which other bowl we are contrasting it with. When contrasting it with 40* water it is warm, when contrasting it with 80* water it is cool. Inherently it is neither warm nor cold. It is one or the other depending upon the context; depending upon what it is contrasted with. Inherently a block or movement or limb or mind is neither alive nor dead, we merely "refer" to it as live or dead to illustrate contrasting phenomena or conditions of being. The terms are useful expedients that allow us to communicate apparent differences between phenomena.

    Since an arm is living flesh your Sifu is correct, it cannot be anything other than alive, however according to the context of the principles under discussion it may be "referred to" as live or dead.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R. Brown View Post
    In essence he is correct. However, he is correct according to a specific context which is different than the context that was implied in the question. In a sense he is saying, "Yin is Yang and Yang is Yin, it is the interplay of the two principles that causes life." Which principle "appears" to predominate at any one time depends upon the context one is using to define a specific phenomena.

    I use the example of three bowls of water to illustrate this principle.

    Let us take three bowls of water. One has 40*F water, the second has 60*F water, and the third has 80*F water. The question is, is the second bowl filled with warm or cool water? The answer depends upon which other bowl we are contrasting it with. When contrasting it with 40* water it is warm, when contrasting it with 80* water it is cool. Inherently it is neither warm nor cold. It is one or the other depending upon the context; depending upon what it is contrasted with. Inherently a block or movement or limb or mind is neither alive nor dead, we merely "refer" to it as live or dead to illustrate contrasting phenomena or conditions of being. The terms are useful expedients that allow us to communicate apparent differences between phenomena.

    Since an arm is living flesh your Sifu is correct, it cannot be anything other than alive, however according to the context of the principles under discussion it may be "referred to" as live or dead.
    I see what you are saying.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •