What defines a Martial artist? (Taekwondo)

If I claim to be a Doctor and charge people for my services but it transpires I have no qualifications am I still a medical practitioner?

Ashida Kim is an outright fraud and no he is NOT a martial artist

 

Words have meaning, or at least they're supposed to so we can effectively communicate with each other.

If martial arts is everything in any way related to or derived from arts which are geared toward using force against other people then the group it encompasses is so broad it is devoid of meaning and therefore pointless as a label.

 

There is no regulation like there is for doctors. Only someone who has a diploma from a Cordon Bleu school can call themselves a Cordon Bleu chef. Anyone can call themselves a martial artist.

Ashida Kim is even in the Martial Arts Hall of Fame!

 

It's not pointless as a label, it just doesn't tell you much about the effectiveness of the person it describes.

That's okay, "car" works as a label, and that still describes a car without wheels, which is removing the essential function of it.

 

I'd say it's a little more like calling a car a plane. Sure it's still got an engine based on the same original design. Yes it has wheels and they can both move you around by rolling across the ground but one of them will get you off of said ground and fly through the air.

By your logic someone who only uses a zweihander as a weight for squats could be called a fencer.

 

It would only be the same if plane manufacturers devalued their product to the point whereby most planes don't fly.

No it's not.

To most people, any person in pyjamas kicking and punching the air is a martial artist. It's just common usage, and the term no longer has anything to do with fighting ability.

 

So if I sell you snake oil it isnt fraud despite the fact it is not what I sell it as?

Cool...I have some great beach front property in Alice Springs for you to buy....

 

So if I do breakdancing wearing a gi that's martial arts right? I mean I'm wearing the clothes and moving around a lot.

Like I said if you allow the meaning to be so broad you strip it of any meaning at all. Common usage is not the defining characteristic for language otherwise we should all use text speak, atrocious grammar, and incredibly limited vocabulary.

As for what "most people" do...

 

I would get a kick out of disagreeing with EVERYONE, but probably not really helpful.

Martial arts is not about learning how to fight or even defending yourself. Some would say learning how to fight and how to defend yourself are benefits from martial arts. At the same time learning how to fight and how to defend yourself could be personal goals achieved through martial arts. Fitness and health could equally be benefits and/or personal goals achieved through martial arts.

No, I would say that martial arts is about a certain way of life similar to a military life. I stand by this because even growing up people would say, martial arts will teach you discipline!

What this means to me is that martial arts is about walking the walk. If all you do is talk, it isn't fitting of a martial way.

If you look at examples of karate and other systems categorized as martial arts, the life style (or at least in the aspect of the art) is very similar to military practices.

 

I'm totally lost with this one.

Anything can teach discipline. Why and how is turning up at a dojo twice a week to be shouted at by the local butcher while you throw punches in the air like being in the military?

How is the lifestyle of someone doing Kung fu similar to that of someone in the army?

 

In a church hall being shouted at by the local butcher? Why, that's exactly like being in the home guard!

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_Uw5eYxV4U"]Dad's Army Clip - Battle School - YouTube[/ame]

 

Water has a specific technical meaning that is immutable. Martial arts do not.

Fictional representations and mass-marketing-by-inclusion (ie. you can be unfit and never exchange blows with someone, yet still call yourself a martial artist and buy a bit of "deadly by association") have devalued the term over a period of decades.

To take a similar example from the world of audio production, the term "producer" used to have a specific meaning in the industry: someone who was the audio equivalent of a director in the film industry, and the title is still used in that way by those in the industry. However, in common usage any kiddie who ever futzed around with Garage Band for 20 mins calls themselves a producer these days. This feeds back into the industry and people who want to sell stuff perpetuate this fantasy of buying into something that somehow makes your life more important or meaningful.

When someone says to you "I do martial arts", is your immediate thought "oh hey, I better be careful around this one, they must be pretty dangerous!"?

For me, it's just like the "producer" example: 30 years ago if someone said "I'm a producer", you'd know that meant they worked with artists and record labels to deliver recorded songs in a commercial setting. Now when someone says "I'm a producer" it more often than not means they spend a lot of time in front of their computer making "phat beats" that no-one ever hears.

I just find this "martial way" and "warrior" stuff rather silly, because the commercialisation of MA has made those terms meaningless. The industry did it to itself. Still, that's market forces for you.

 

Would you say people who do Tae Bo or Cardio Kickboxing are Martial Artists?

 

Disagree completely. If you call a tail a leg, a dog still has 4 legs. Just because you / people call it a leg doesn't make it a leg.

 

No, they are aerobics classes and are advertised as such. Just like doing zumba doesn't make you a dancer or taking spin classes doesn't make you a cyclist.

If enough people do over time it does. That's exactly how language works.

The majority of martial artists either can't fight, or have never been in a situation whereby they have had the opportunity to see if they can or not. Martial artists who live up to the "martial" bit are few and far between. How can the minority dictate the meaning of a term?

 

This I agree with pretty much. It is legitimate as long as the "stated purpose" of the art/activity is met (with other benefits being a bonus)

Not inherently and certainly no more than many other endeavors

But you have to first define what "walking" is; If the stated purpose is "bumming about in funny pyjamas" then as long as you deliver on that you "walk the walk"

No it isn't, unless you just mean drilling in lines....in which case you eliminate most of the combat based systems who don't do much of that.

The majority of these trappings are cultural, not military

 

Is Iaido, a martial art? Are military service people, martial artists (even "true" martial artists)? What about average-common people who take up a legit self defense class, are they martial artists?

As for charlatans in the martial arts: The fact they maybe charlatans, if they had "any type of training", are they still to be considered as a martial artist?

Could this statement be the definitive: Martial arts are codified systems and traditions of combat practices, which are practiced for a variety of reasons: self-defense, competition, physical health and fitness, entertainment, as well as mental, physical, and spiritual development.

Some other info:
http://www.thearma.org/essays/Defining-A-Martial-Art.html#.VijdgGddGUk

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20111111001438AADTThc

For me, the martial arts is a search for something inside. It's not just a physical discipline.
-Brandon Lee

The two most important things to do for self-defense are not to take a martial arts class or get a gun, but to think like the opposition and know where you're most at risk.-Barry Eisler

I practice martial arts not to win over other people but to win over my own heart.-Tony Jaa



Again, I cannot find another thread about the term "martial arts" -someone, please help locate and post the link here

 

Leaving aside the "can you fight" part as being inherent - which I do not think it necessarily is - the validity is not in the activity, but what the activity CLAIMS

However, even with that said the GENESIS of the art needs to be from a combative system, otherwise it is not "martial". Tae Bo could legitimately be called a martial art, as could pro wrestling

Taking the Ashida Kim example, he is not a martial artist because what he sells is fraudulent; his fighting ability is irrelevant because the product is not fit for purpose or as described

OK so we then take the opinion of "the masses" as what a martial art is then?

That means "you must be able to fight" then - ask the majority of people and that is what you will get

So Ashida Kim is NOT a martial artist by that measure either: QED