"Authentic" Kung fu: why the arguments?

[Crosshandz]

Over my time spent flirting with martial arts I have become increasingly puzzled by claims of being "authentic" between persons of ability: When two people who clearly know stuff argue about what they know and whose got the "authentic" transmission of their style.

Take, for example, the issue of where your toes should be pointing in Ma Bu. People will get into full blown disputes as to why the toes should or should not be pointed parallel and how that effects the transition into Gong Bu ignoring the fact that actually there are entirely justifiable reasons for both ways.

Why?

[hskwarrior]

Pride.........

[David Jamieson]

Lack of focus and understanding and as mentioned, pride and egotism.

If they both understood how meaningless that really is, they could move on to making their punches more powerful by hitting stuff and correcting their alignment relative to the object they are striking.

But I digress.

[GeneChing]

Honestly, I've got no issues with the arguments. I love a good fight as much as the next guy. It's just the whiners that bug me.

[Yum Cha]

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,TEN!

And its Gene for the Win by KO!

[David Jamieson]

arguments are great indeed. they expose thinking.

but bickering and beating dead horses? yeah, that's what bugs me. lol

[uki]

Why?

i believe it's some sort of egotistic status quo kinda thing... everyone wants to be special.

[GeneChing]

And its Gene for the Win by KO!

Thanks YC. I always prefer to win by KO.

[Lucas]

Manditory backflip and shouting of "This is MY fuking house!", Gene.

[uki]

Manditory backflip and shouting of "This is MY fuking house!", Gene.

the use of "my" would imply ownership...