A different take on the Human Weapon Episode

You make a good point Seago. When I was training a lot, I only trained the full classes on sunday and a saturday night class. I only trained with one shihan and Hatsumi. No one else and I trained more with the shihan than Hatsumi. Though I wouldn't mind training with some of the other shihan in Tokyo. I should probably get my ass in gear.

The only reason I'm starting BJJ, again, is just the exercise. This teacher is fairly competition oriented and he's not MMA oriented which is fine with me. I mean doing 7 minute ground matches at a time during for 1 1/2 hours is exhausting. It's great exercise and I get to practice my techniques both BJJ and BJK. It beats running.

Unfortunately, I'm nursing a bruised rib right now from my last training session. Age catching up with me.

 

This is M Thorntons coaching blog, please read it and see if anything resonates.

http://aliveness101.blogspot.com/

This is the training & concepts BLOG of SBGi founder Matt Thornton. Tune in here for frequent articles and posts regarding the core principles of SBGi, training tips, health, well being, and other assorted ramblings. *(This BLOG is Matt's BLOG and should be viewed as such. All SBGi members are encouraged to learn, create, keep, or toss, their own belief systems as frequently as they see fit.)

 

LOL....

It probably wouldnt be very beneficial to begin a conversation on cults. Nice try though.

While I dont agree with the video 100%....I think there are some valuable gems of truth to be found there.

The video wasnt directed at bujinkan or TMAs specifically....but "street/ self defense" oriented individuals/arts..



If you took offense to the video perhaps it just hit too close to home, who knows?

 

You know Phill Elmore is a MAP member

 

Actually, that's Godwin's Law.

 

Hi seattletcj,

In my opinion, I think the term "cult" gets bandied around way too much around these parts.

I watched the video you posted of Matt Thornton. As a behavioral scientist, I thought it absolutely reaked of groupthink. Most of what is identified as "cult behavior" is, in fact, groupthink; the most telling factor being an intensified sense of "us" versus "them" --- with the "them" always being awful, terrible, deluded people of questionable integrity.

Also, I personally find it hilarious he invokes the name of Abraham Maslow. Self-actualization, my right cheek.

In regards to the point he was trying to make, both sides are quite frankly wrong. "Street" vs "sport" is not mutually exclusive as some TMA's make it out to be, but at the same time, it is not mutually inclusive as many MMA's make it out to be, either. There are attributes and qualities learned in sports-based martial arts that transfer well to self-defense (such as physical fitness, performance under stress/anxiety, familiarity with both giving and receiving full-contact attacks), but there are also a number of techniques and tactics learned in such arts that are largely impotent if one's opponent has, say, a knife hidden under his or her coat sleeve or, as another example, one is no longer wearing gloves while hitting.

I would say the real dichotomy, in this regard, is not between "street" versus "sport" but between "self-defense/protection" and "play-fighting". You can train as "alive" as it gets but still be doing "play-fighting". Most TMA's and MMA's, in my opinion, are focusing on play-fighting, not self-defense. Dead play-fighting and alive play-fighting is still just play-fighting.

Laterz.

 

With all the threads that are essentially the same it's a wonder it took so long.

 

Its his opinion, based on his experiences. Thats what he says at least.
Not "group think".

Sure. That doesnt mean you cant train in an athletic alive manner, for these
"street" variables.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0fPL4f3Eqc"]Dog Brothers and Gabe Suarez - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THW-c6E5nvs"]Blade Attack - Dog Brothers Defense against Bladed Assaults - Die Less Often 2 - YouTube[/ame]

 

For the record I like SBG, but I think that video was ridiculous.

 

Hi seattletcj,

I fail to see how personal opinions are incapable of expressing or reflecting groupthink. In fact, that's kinda how groupthink works: it refers to modes of thinking that manifest a sort of "rationalized conformity".

More to the point, the clip (as well as articles Thornton has written) I saw demonstrated four notable symptoms or features of groupthink:

• Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group.
• Stereotyping those outside the group in negative terms.
• Rationalizing criticisms of the group's assumptions.
• Illusions of invulnerability concerning the group's methods.

Of course, I don't think any of this really reflects on SBG as much as it does on Thornton himself. Likewise, the elements of groupthink within the Bujinkan and other martial arts organizations do not necessarily reflect those organizations but individual members that have taken it upon themselves to "mindguard" the group.

Interesting clips, but I think you failed to grasp my point.

The issue I was trying to raise is that any martial art that simply assumes your opponent doesn't have a concealed weapon on his person is training in play-fighting. Any martial art that doesn't teach you to attack and defend in such a way that would effectively neutralize a threat whether he is armed or not is teaching play-fighting.

This is really the problem I have with a lot of this so-called "sport" mentality that enthusiasts of MMA and BJJ constantly assert: its the compartmentalization of combat, the dividing of things into categories like "armed" and "unarmed". From a self-defense perspective, this is complete and utter horseshit. The most dangerous weapons are always the ones you don't see.

And concealed weapons are just one issue. There are other variables that could also be brought up, such as tactics/strategies against multiple attackers, the inclusion of kyusho/pressure point targets (which falls under the satirized "eye gouging" nonsense), considerations of environment/terrain, and so on. Nearly all "sport" arts, as well as quite a few "traditional" arts, teach techniques and tactics that would be borderline suicidal in many of these conditions.

This, to me, is quite independent of the aliveness debate. There is dead play-fighting training and alive play-fighting training. There is also dead self-defense training and alive self-defense training (which, by the way, is what the Dog Brothers are doing).

Just my opinion, of course. Maybe it reflects groupthink, too.

 

Ya, they might. That doesnt mean they do in this case, professor.

Actually...is this a fundamentally bad thing anyway?
I think this can describe culture, and society in general.
Which is absolutely natural.
As long as it isnt a cult...or a group with negative properties.

I'm not really interested in going tit for tat with you on this. The video is what it is.
But....

Actually I think your wrong on most of those.
Matt T states in that clip that yes, he is "painting with a broad brush".
But believe what you will.

Ok, great. So why did you argue so strongly that it was "groupthink" to begin with ? :bang:

I didnt fail to grasp the point, actually.
Whatever you point is.....on the specifics of street and sport...playfighting or not.....
Aliveness is more beneficial to all areas of "combat" training, then non-aliveness.

Of course . But they are not equal !

Check out this video. Particularly 5:20 +

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-g6JTQDWNc"]Training & the i-Method - Matt Thornton - YouTube[/ame]

"I fully encourage people to be as skeptical about what I say, as they are about what anybody else says"


I personally dont subscribe to every detail M Thornton says. But I think its fundamentally correct.

 

Hi seattletcj,

*shrug*

What can I say?? The lectures I saw and the articles I've read from Thornton sounded like symptoms of groupthink to me. I could very well be wrong.

Like I said, just my opinion.

The sticking point of groupthink is that it is a psychological means of preemptively disencouraging criticism and dissent from within the social group or organization. It is a way of co-opting unanimity and uniformity within the group by exaggerting the merits of the group while stereotyping those outside it.

I should iterate, however, that many groups that are supported by groupthink on the part of certain self-appointed "mindguards" are, in fact, based upon Good Ideas. The presence of groupthink does not invalidate or negate the validity of the Good Ideas nor the methods of the group.

This is why, as I said, this says more about Thornton than it does about the methodologies of SBG.

*shrug*

His statements speak for themselves. The most telling one, of course, being the assumption that everybody that does or sees things differently than him are inherently dysfunctional or neurotic human beings. Classic groupthink.

Organizations and groups don't think. Individuals do. Groupthink refers to a way of thinking among certain individuals that rationalizes conformity.

Yeah, this is another issue I have: the assumption that combat boils down to Just One Thing, which in this case is "aliveness". This is just as ludicrous as the compartmentalization of combat that I mentioned in my last post.

Combat methods that would be borderline suicidal when your opponent has a knife you don't see can be trained "alive" and still be borderline suicidal under those conditions. The "aliveness" of your training won't save your life when you plunge your body into an unseen blade because it worked when you were sparring without weapons.

Training alive under unrealistic self-defense parameters is still training under unrealistic self-defense parameters. Its still play-fighting.

Now, as a matter of fact, I happen to agree with you on the importance of alive training (although I still have my skepticism concerning perpetual, as opposed to occasional, tori/tori sparring). The difference is I don't see it as the Way, the Truth, and the Life about martial arts, just one important thing among other important things.

I also believe proper "dead" training is just as important as good "alive" training.

No, but they're not cut-and-dry, black-and-white gradations, either.

I mean, really, which is more functional in self-defense:

Compliant self-defense training at full speed and full power??

or

Alive play-fighting training at full speed and power??

Can't watch YouTube at work. I'll check it out when I get back home.

Laterz.

 

Sure. I see what you are saying.
But while inflammatory, I dont think he was that off with his evaluation.
Its good to discriminate in the martial arts !
Performance based evaluation is the best way to make an accurate discrimination.

Again, who said you cant train with weapons , or self defense alive ?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCyzrVx2ahw"]YouTube[/ame]

 

Hi seattletcj,

Eh, the parts where he was complaining those involved or interested in self-defense training are just a bunch of paranoid kids that were beat up in high school and who come across as "pussies" to predators on the street struck me as highly dubious and nonsensical. I mean, there is no way to put such rhetoric as other than ridiculous.

I happen to agree with him on the positive influence of sports (taken in moderation) among children and young adults, though. I myself did wrestling in high school.

I leave it to the instructors among us to make that determination.

Certainly not me. In a previous post, I stated there is:

• 1) dead play-fighting training (example: most karate and kung-fu)
• 2) alive play-fighting training (example: most sport arts, like kickboxing and BJJ)
• 3) dead self-defense training (example: most BJK schools)
• 4) alive self-defense training (example: Dog Brothers)

I just don't take it for granted, as some posters do, that 2 is better than 3, especially since the only "litmus test" for the claim is whether self-defense training prevails under play-fighting conditions.

I also feel that "dead" and even half-"alive" training is highly undervalued by many of the posters here. In fact, KempoFist made an interesting post that reflects some of my own thinking on this subject:

My opinion on this, is that type of training is encompassed in the second stage of live training, where isolated drilling takes place. (2nd of 3 stages of i-method). Much skill is bred in this stage, and many can apply it in an all out fight beyond this point. But it is of my personal opinion that without taking the next step, and integrating (3rd "i") it into a larger gameplan via sparring and rolling, you are only taking your training so far.

How much time should be spent in that third stage is a subjective issue that is disagreed not only between arts like Ninjutsu and a BJJ, but within the typical "Alive" training gyms as well. Most higher ranks at my Jits school contend that the vast majority of your time should be spent drilling (within 1st and 2nd stages) to work your finesse and efficiency in technique, and that they feel far too many people are too quick to want to jump on the mat and try to roll when their technical nuance isn't there yet.​

Okay, that's something else for me to watch when I get home.

Laterz.

 

And this is exactly the problem.
Crappy instructors creating hoards of crappy students.

Even skilled instructors with good intentions end up passing along a lot of B.S, due to the fact that it is not evaluated on performance....but intellect.

I think it was a good post too. But I believe that was KFs review of one particularly open minded dojo.

And I also see value in "dead" or "half-alive" training.
This is "Introduction" training. And its essential.

I'd venture to guess (from experience) that the majority of typical bujinkan training....maybe 85% is spent on the first stage "introduction". Even at the highest levels.
That would leave maybe 15% (probably less) to the next stage "Isolation"...and typically no "Integration" at all.


Later.

 

sorry wrong thread

 

"I'd venture to guess (from experience) that the majority of typical bujinkan training....maybe 85% is spent on the first stage "introduction". Even at the highest levels.
That would leave maybe 15% (probably less) to the next stage "Isolation"...and typically no "Integration" at all."

It would be so much better if people could really understand that BJJ/Boxing/Judo are reall just overly glorified chessmatches between very skilled chessplayers. Whatever they originally intended for has been lost throughout the years. These systems do in fact have at least 3 levels and need this idea of "integration or practical sparing" In these systems this 3rd level is a chance to practice what you have learned with people you know.

Of course there is another level beyond those 3 levels called, "competition". Which is where you test your skills against unknown variables and that is a true test of a player's skill, against that person who has developed his own system, that you don't know.

If you want to try to lock the BJK into the same rules you apply to a sport, it's a very limited view, and it's no surprise that you don't see the beauty. BJK is not about playing chess.

One example is the fact that my BJK teacher is so frightening because of the very fact that he has no systems or method to what he is going to do next. Since I never know what is going to happen to me, no matter what I do, he is able to create fear in me. I actually get the same physical feeling that I experience before entering into a real fight. The stomach cramping and general numbness, it's interesting since I think the teacher knows this. I personally see it as a part of my next stage in training. Moving beyond techniques and form.

I've never got this off of a BJJ guy (even the guy I am training with now in Tokyo) or any teacher in MMA so I wonder how I would be able to overcome this limitation if I had only trained in BJJ? I mean, even in a competition, there are rules. Just something to consider.

 

......



I also believe the bujinkan art is beautiful.
But we are not talking about beauty....we are talking about actual performance.

This sounds like more of a psychological problem, then anything else.
And it doesnt sound healthy IMO. Why would anyone be afraid of anyone else during kata training....unless there is some form of abuse happening?

Ukes job is to lose. Its hard for me to be too impressed, or "frightened" by someone who is awesome at beating up a partner who has agreed to lose.

 

I think there is a gap here in understanding. When I say that you don't understand the beauty, what I mean is that you really just don't understand the applicability or effectiveness of training in the BJK. Peformance in this situation must mean the human ability to defend or fight in a life threatening situation. If by performance you mean this, then I feel you didn't understand what I was telling you at all.

The example was to show you one of the interesting things that I learned is the ability to deal with the unknown (tying in to your idea of "performance"). In BJK training, as I moved beyond just learning to do my techniques freely (or with MUSHIN), I began working through some of the interesting mental aspects of dangerous situations. Everyone deals with the dangerous unknown differently. I deal with it in a very specific way, and by training with this instructor I was able to overcome it to a large degree. I personally believe that my instructor could sense this lacking, in my training, and addressed it with me.

I would also add that you understanding of the UKE is pretty limited too. I don't know how many UKE's you've had a chance to train with but they are just as wild as training with whitebelts in grappling-which I've worked with a lot. I would also add that I've trained with a lot of people who are very non-complient and require a lot of finess and experience to put techniques on properly. An UKE's job is definately not to lose.

As for your final comment, I am impressed that my instructor is able to embody the idea of complete unknownness or unpredicatbility to the degree that it is able to frighten me. Especially considering my lengthy career in grappling, judo, bjj, stand up (over 5 years in US and Japan) and street experience (that's why I started training). I never thought I could find a teacher that was able to instill the same feeling I get right before I get into scrap without even touching me. It something you really have to experience to understand the benefit to your training.

 

So an uke's goal is to not to lose and resist techniques? Are you suggesting this is the common practice of people playing the role of uke in the BJK?