Should Martial Artists read Philosophy

Hi All,

just saw yesterday a great film: The Twilight Samurai

There was a great dialogue. The samurai asked his little daughter to learn the Confucius.

So she asked: "If I learn to do needlework, someday I can make kimonos. But what good will book learning ever do to me?"

Samurai: "Well, it probably won't ever be as useful as needlework. But you know ... Book learning gives you power. The power to think. However the world might change, if you have the power to think, you'll always survive somehow. That's true for boys and girls."

One can't express my feeling about the question if martial artists should read Philosophy better. Especially in Tai Chi Chuan we prepare for the change - by thinking.

Martin

 

Great film check out when the last sword is drawn and hidden blade.

I think that reading philosophy may lead you to approach the art in a particular manner right or wrong however if you take from the saying in twilight samurai..I think he is saying "Think for yourself based on experience."

So the philosophy shall come from your experience of the art and life in general and a book shall either corroborate or refute your findings BUT it is most important to THINK for yourself.

I think that where ideology and reality meet..there I must find my philosophy.


regards koyo

 

Sir,
I've almost started taking your ability to cut to the heart of things for granted. This is another instance where you offer simple and direct profundity where others might get abstract and flowery.

The fruit of fifty years of training.
(Old Palden bows respectfully.)

My own view of philosophy's relationship to martial arts was transformed by a teacher who said, "Too many people think that action springs from philosophy, when in fact it's the other way around."

 

Just more mind games.

Should "Martial Artist's" wipe their butt's?

 

Particularly grapplers

You sir are a legend!

 

Everyone should read philosophy.

 

Grapplers who use a bidet only wipe with a warm scented towlette.

Ideology and reality will not meet.
Ideology is firmly rooted in idea.
Reality isn't if you think it is.

... and reading philosophy is the best way to refurbish the hole ... but it's still a hole.

 

isn´t MA phil. in itself?

 

Yes.

Trouble is, a lot of people can't be bothered with that side of it. All depends on the individual and how committed they are to take their MA as far as they can.

 

Grapplers wipe their ass with non-sparring forms collectors.

 

A lot of people want to be bothered with that part of it but don't have the capacity to get past superficial crap.

 

Do you mean Chinese philosophy?
I've got a degree (BSc) in (western) Philosophy.
Now I'm pretty sure that my teacher / sifu doesn't,
but he's still a better martial artist than I'll ever be.

 

I think if a martial artist goes looking for a philosophy, all they are likely to find is someone else's philosophy. Just live and train and you'll find a philosophy of your own. Look at Koyo his words are 100 times smarter than someone quoting from something they have read. He owns his philosophy because he created it, which is why it always rings true.

The Bear.

 

No it's about learning to fight, or should be. Wrapping the aforementioned 'learning to fight' up in a pretty package of Eastern philosophy isn't going to make you any better and not having the pretty package makes you no less of a martial artist.

 

For many Martial Arts is just an exercise, sport or means to learn some fighting system for self defense, very few people today follow the old ways, where being a Martial Artist was to embrace other "arts" such as caligraphy, painting, poetry and philisophical studies.
Times were different , and people had the time to explore other avenues and paths.
Wrt Philosophy and the internal arts, i do believe it is important to read things such as the "Taiji Classics" or "Sun Tzu's Art of War".
There is a wealth of knowledge laid out in the various classical texts, and if one follows any form of traditional Martial Art, with a lineage going back a few hundred years, then one can only gain further understanding of the art, its history, origins and roots.
The texts often also describe certain aspects of an art that are often not taught or overlooked in todays world, where instant results and gratification are often prized more than diligent study and long hours of repetitive practice over many years of training.

If all you are looking for is achieving some ability, that may help in some situation, that fine, nothing wrong in that, but if you seek more than just an ability, then like any other field in life, one needs to pay attention to the written word and the theory behind it all.

 

Wrt???

Is this a typo?
Do not understand.

 

I don't know text speak.

Besides which, I thought it was against the TOS here?

Anyhoo...

Back to the thread topic now folks..:hat:

 

This is a common misconception-or is that mis PERception?Anyway....

While perhaps true for hereditary landed gentry/warrior classes,the idea that the bulk of people practicing martial systems,whether military persons or civilians, were necessarily cultured educated types doesn't hold up.

The majority of people,then as now, were working class folks-farmers,laborers,etc.Most didn't have formal education,or much education at all. After working hard all day,tending to everyday family affairs, and training,they were more likely,for example, to have a good repertoire of the local folksongs at their command than any in depth familiarity with the I Ching or Buddhist scripture.Learning medicine and bone setting were a much more common adjunct than the study of calligraphy or painting.Most of the rank and file in the military were there because it offered steady employment and meals.Not to say that some individuals,in whatever countries,didn't have such pursuits as those you use for examples.But it wasn't the norm.

case in point-Yang,Cheng-fu,3rd generation of Yang T'ai Chi-the only book he wrote which wasn't actually ghostwritten by one of his disciples was so poor,due to his near illiteracy,that his students went out and retrieved them from wherever they were being sold.And he wasn't poor.

The idea that people,other than those well off,had more time than nowadays isn't true.Labor was much more intensive and time consuming-try plowing with people,rather than livestock,pulling the plow.Or mining,or harvesting, without modern machinery or tooling.Not to mention the distances some people had to travel to see their teachers,and how that eats into your time-no bus service then,and many couldn't have spared the nickel for the fare.

Not unlike boxing in the west,many practitioners came from the hungry masses,and learned such skills to seek employment applying such,or to keep the village grain safe from bandits-who themselves could be practitioners of systems and usually came from similar backgrounds.

The "scholar warrior",again,outside the ruling classes,is more a romanticized fiction than fact.