Idealist/Realist or Capitalist?

HAHA guys.
Thats Funny. I see how it is.

 

LOL well one of us has to be the one to take the flak LOL

 

Ok Guys, it was my fault, but can we stick with the thread please!

 

ok, so we know why we got involved, but why are we still in martial arts?

 

Cause its apart of our lives. For me the idea to better myself and learn from others helps me stay in it. The bond i have to so many in and out of my club. DEDICATION
Chazz

 

In what way would you say MA has changed your values?

 

Respect for all, the girls can be just a good as the guys, loyalty, honor, dedication, and so much more

-Chazz

 

It has given me more patience and self control. As well as a totally different outlook on any bad situation, whether it be confrontational, or just something happening that I would normally see as bad. I guess I tend to look more into what's behind things and why they are, and what can I learn from them now.

 

Some of the issues raised originally have become entangled with issues on a similar thread entitled 'Commercialisation', elsewhere on the forum.

 

Hi All,

Those that teach for nothing are wonderful human beings who are being taken advantage of by unscrupulous students too lousy to see the value in what they are learning.. bah!

I don't see too many coaches in other arts/sports expected to give up their valuable time and opportunities to be with their family to teach the great unwashed that think life is free man..

Pay your way,
Bob McMahon

 

Hi Bob,

Having looked into your own History, and the acheivements you have made in a long MA career, please believe me when I state that this thread is not aimed at successful professional Instructors. Nor, as I have said before, am I seeking some form of 'Saint' status. Many of the M Artists posting on this site are people with great experience and knowledge, like yourself.

The 'Idealist, Realist or Capitalist' thread was probably the first thread on this site to raise a contentious issue. I did this with full consciousness of the reaction it was likely to cause. I wrote it to get people talking, and opening up. In effect I was 'drawing fire', to see who the big guns were. At the time of that initial post, the membership to the forum was small!

The themes gradually got mixed in with other threads, such as Commercialisation. I sensed a raw spot with a lot of the guys posting so I kept pouring in the salt.

No one has really asked me a direct question as to my own feelings on the subjects I raise, most people just attack them. I have seen the techniques that most of you use when you go on the offensive. A lot of you overextend, leaving yourselves open to a more effective counter attack.

I teach MA to attract like minded people and try and instill in them the values I learned through my own tuition. I need no remuneration, because the process is it's own reward. I do however charge for lessons! We should strive to learn perpetually from each other. I show you mine, you show me yours.

Do we do things because that is what we have always done, or what we were always taught?

Choice is to choose!

Listening is best done in silence!

:Angel:

 

I'm with Bob on this one.
Everyone makes the MA into something that has meaning for themselves, and the variations are endless. Even though I think that my way suits me best, I don't think that anyone else is wrong for having a different take on the MAs.
I realize that there are plenty of folks out there for whom the martial arts IS a sport, and it is quite rational for them to want the same sort of professional compensation that a coach would get in other sports.
There are also those for whom the MAs are more of a spiritual journey than a 'bidness', and it also logically follows that they may not want to 'corrupt' their spirituality with the pursuit of money.
There are also those who fall along every possible point in between. Therefor, I don't see how it is terribly useful (maybe interesting, but not too useful) to polarize something as complex as the marial arts into Either/Or...

All of the usual disclaimers apply:
AFAIK, IMHO, FWIW, My.02, YMMV, etc.


Take care

paul

 

Thanks Pablo,

Very well summarised. You ask a question at the post, along the lines of; So what is the point in arguing about it.

I thought I had already just answered this;

As the subject of debate is a question I raised, the answers are certainly "useful " to me. I'm not saying I am an Idealist, Realist or Capitalist, just looking for open ended suggestions.

It is very easy to get discussion going, by choosing subject matter which is controversial. If I started a thread about 'Police Brutality' or 'Racism in the Martial Arts' for example. It is interesting to note, that when I posted 'Amazing Stories' I only got one reply, and that post was entirely focussed on positive aspects of the arts.

Is a debate 'polarised' by the question, the answer, or by both?

YMWAH, AYFSOE

 

Regards,
Bob

 

Andy wrote:
"...Is a debate 'polarised' by the question, the answer, or by both?..."

More likely by the way the question is framed.
If we define two positions, and a presumption that one of them is more correct, then we do indeed have a polarized debate. Debates may be entertaining, but as far as 'use' goes, the titillation that a debate incites seems less useful to me than an open exchange of a variety of view points, i.e. a forum.
In other words, I feel that a thread that discusses "From Idealists to Capitalists" is more 'useful' (NOT better, just more applicable) in getting a handle on the scope of the issue than a thread that sets up sides by asking "What are you? An Idealist or a Capitalist?". I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with the second thread, just that it seems likely to provide more controversy (and defending of 'sides') than substantive sharing.
The latter may have a more intriguing title, with a hint of conflict to stir things up, but in terms of researching a complex issue, the truth often lies somewhere in between. In that case, stirring things up may be, as I said earlier, more interesting, but less useful.

Thanks

paul

 

In both cases gentlemen, your analysis is valid, if only as a historical comment

I wasn't asking if anyone was an idealist or whatever. It was merely the title of a post. Neither was I claiming to be any of those things. Nor, did I accuse anybody of being those things.

If some people want to hang back in the debate, waiting to add their own 'sage' wisdom at the end, that's fine. The path a debate takes is a result of everyone involved in the debate, not just those of one ( perceived ) opinion.

Here you refer to;

Just to clarify. Yes I want people to attack the subjects I raise, not my feelings (which incidentally are impregnable ).

At the end of he day.......

If anyone has a good idea about a topic for discussion, then they should raise the thread themselves, or shut the hell up!

Thank you for your constructive comments. I am humbled by your superior knowledge......perhaps you could teach me by example!

My cup is empty!



:woo:

 

Ahhh, I get it. You WANT people to attack the subjects that you raise. In that case you might get a kick out of the Quaker and Taoist forums, all they do is argue, and call each other names.


Seriously, I DO like the way that this martial arts forum is shaping up. There are many things in the martial arts that could stand to have the light of day cast upon them, such as racism in the MAs, which you had mentioned. Teacher worship, rank swapping, drugs in competition, the negative effects on kids of MAs, sexual conquest of students, and other problem areas are not going to go away if they are ignored, and I salute you for bringing up a touchy area.

I am afraid that I didn't do a great job of explaining my earlier comments in a non-critical manner. Let me try to NOT muddle things up further.



Running something up the flagpole to see who salutes is a time honored and useful tradition. I agree that the subject as brought up did smoke out some of the folks with something to share.
My concern was that AFTER an initial flurry of responses, it quickly became (as do many hot button issues) merely a series of defensive responses along partisan lines. This happens all the time, and it is a perfectly natural occurence.
I was therefor suggesting that if we wished to delve deeper into this complex issue that we try a more sophisticated/precise tool, since the initial thread was starting to look more like a debate, and debates (like fighting) rarely get at the truth of an issue.
A crude analogy might be that Andy had thrown the deck of cards up into the air, which served to make things interesting.
I was now suggesting that we spread the cards out on the table and look for patterns that could be useful for an analysis.
To not perform such an analysis is to leave the door open for others (the government, other sports/businesses, or self appointed watchdogs) to use their own analyses, and their own agendas to 'solve' the martial art's problems through regulation or oversight.

Anyway, keep up the good work

paul

 

The art of fighting without fighting!

Paul,

I gather that you have the gist of what I was trying to get across.

Could you explain what you mean by partisan, and why you feel this to be a natural occurance?

I would ask also what you mean by a 'more sophisticated/precise tool? The reference I am seeing as relevant in the post you appear to be referring to runs;

The above describes neither the title of the original thread, nor the subsequent replies made! there was no " What are you?" That is a figment of your own interpretation.

How people react to this thread depends on their reaction to the three key words in the title.

1/ IDEALIST. 2/REALIST. 3/ CAPITALIST.

Look at these three words, and ask yourself;

Do any of these words describe you?

Do any of these words describe people you know?

Do any of these words provoke a negative reaction in you?

If, Pablo, you could go back in time to an empty forum, and rack your brains thinking; what question could I ask that will get people talking? What would you ask? How would you ask it? This is what happened, and that at least, I can prove!

As you said;

My cup runneth over, but I have a spare!

Andy

 

Ahh mon cheri, your leeps say Non, Non , Non!, but my Google search says Oui, Oui!
:love:

To wit:
"...Following that train of thought, is it logical to assume that; if our sensei, sifu, guru etc is in it purely for the money, then we will eventually become like them ( i.e. choose the dark side )? ..."

Zees 'Daahrk Side', she is zee bad theeng, mai non? My imaginacione, she is not so figmented as you might perhaps declare, c'est la contremps?...

Seriously, you and I are not only on the same track here, we are on the same side. So is Bob. The terms that you list are loaded with connotations, and are therefor more suitable for drawing attention to an issue, than for dissecting the mechanisms behind that issue. Whether someone charges money or does not leads into a very complex set of questions that interrelate.

For example, starting with the idea of Capitalism and MA schools, we could look at:
Who owns a kata, can that kata be protected by a copyright, if yes then does copyright protection apply to techniques, etc, if not then can anyone claim any part of the martial arts, including rank or style names?
If there is no protection, and anyone can open up a Shotokan school, with a self awarded jodan, then how are the customers to be protected from non-authentic operators, and who is going to define authentic?
If the MAs are a commercial product that can be marketed like tinned meat, then who would be responsible if some problem arose ( like a large number of people suddenly being hurt in one of these schools). The Martial Arts industry?
Nowhere in the attempt to resolve these issues can I see an very efficient use for emotional hot button labels like Capitalist or Idealist. Those terms were great to open up the issue, and I would like to see this forum become a place to discuss touchy issues in depth without recycling labels and debate tactics. It shouldn't be a matter of debating an issue and 'winning', it should (IMHO) be a matter of discourse.

Thanks

paul


'Take away paradox from the thinker, and you have a professor'
S. Kierkegaard

 

Paul,

I find it difficult to follow what you are trying to say here, and I imagine that I am not alone.

You just said;

I already explained this at least twice;

Yes I am drawing attention to an issue. I didn't promise to list all the popular questions on ethics behind the issue. The very fact that you are analysing the thread, means that you yourself are dissecting the mechanisms behind that issue, and this is what I set out to acheive.

Is your problem with, the title of the original post, the subject matter, or the subsequent replies?

Which of the above made it into a debate, as opposed to a free forum?

If you feel that you are limited to what is 'pc' by the rules of the forum, then feel free to send a Private Message.

It would be more useful to everyone visiting this site, if you were to stipulate some of your ideas on ' How to Post ' and 'What to Post' in clear diction. The place to do that ( correct me if I'm wrong ) would be on either a specific thread, a specific article in the magazine, or if you can be brief, as a supplement to the 'Rules' heading at the start fo the thread.

The final part of your last post, talks about, Capitalism, Standardisation and Commercialisation, these are all threads on the forum already.

Andy M

Communism is a nice idea, the problem is it doesn't bloody work!

And 'Lo', the pigs walked as men!

Orwell