Consistency and system coherence are not a matter of opinion. Any time we have had a technical discussion of the system, you don't have a clue how it it works, and resort to silly generalities or downright contradictions. If you had a coherent understanding that was different then you would not do this.
Why is it "clearly a specialism"?It is clearly a specialization in my opinion
The evidence is there to see if you want to see it. I can't force you to go and experience it if you really don't want to, and I guess you really don't want to.No evidence on your part presented to examine
Logical consistency is a big thing in philosophy, unfortunately for it to be so morality is often compromised. It wasn't logically consistent with MY beliefs, accept it.
Technical discussions on "What if" scenarios isn't proof of anything. It's a hypothetical, unproven and not scientifically tested. It's basically just opinion on personal preference and belief. That may be good enough for you, but it isn't for me.
Logical consistency? What are you talking about
Not sure what you think technical discussions regarding "what if" scenarios have to do with system coherence and consistency?Technical discussions on "What if" scenarios isn't proof of anything. It's a hypothetical, unproven and not scientifically tested. It's basically just opinion on personal preference and belief
So basically what you're saying is that because I didn't come to the same conclusion as you when exposed to VT, that I'm a liar. More likely you were practicing some sh!te version of Wing Chun & when exposed to something half decent thought you had found the holy grail. That wasn't my experience. I'm not drinking the kool aid brother, stomp your feet, throw a tantrum, hold your breath, whatever it takes to vent your frustration at the fact I didn't find VT to be anything mind blowing or special. I never said it was a bad art, just not one for me.
Last edited by dlcox; 04-20-2017 at 04:30 PM.
"What if" scenarios are not part of VT, anyway. So, this comment is irrelevant to the topic.
To get technical on some more technical aspects of the system you claim to have experienced then;
Surely you at least briefly went over the forms, chi-sau, some basic parts of the training system?
So, what information is being conveyed to the practitioner by the very first opening movements of SNT? Why cross arms? Why low, high?
What are the details on the hows and whys of dan-chi-sau?
Did you even figure out how VT punches are done in any detail?