Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Discuss sparring, training applications in a competition environment, or even in real-life (fighting, self-defence). Please no violence!
And stay on topic.

Moderators: Dvivid, Inga, nyang

Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Phalanxpursos » Wed May 30, 2012 7:05 am

Greetings people.

Question:

I've practiced Martial Arts and wondered if people are being triggered into aggression more easily because they practice martial arts, so basically how is your aggression in daily life? Are you easily triggered into aggression because you practice martial arts, or are you more the responsible type who avoids aggressive behavior?

My story:

I've used my martial arts briefly for selfdefense a couple of times, but I engaged with sparring on the street on invitation. The real fights I had lasted very short and I won, the sparring I did on the street lasted for a long time and they were all draws. But I must admit that me practicing martial arts upgraded my self-confidence which resulted in a bigger ego, one time I had an aggressive fight in a bar. Of course was it in self defense, but with aggression comes justice. I became expelled from a bar for fighting, eventhough it was in selfdefense.

Conclusion:

I think it is better to follow a path of non-violence, even if you use martial arts for self defense can it turn against you. Non-violence is a path of responsibility, the key issue here is to use self defense as a last resort. You should give morality and withdrawal a fair chance, if you can't withdraw or use morality then give martial arts a better chance.

You should give Withdrawal a bigger priority.
Strategemata Liber Secundus;
"VIII: Restore Morale with Firmness"
Phalanxpursos
Forum Specialist
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Wed May 30, 2012 8:23 am

I really don't follow how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?
It's like having a strong Army and then telling everyone what a peace loving nation you are.
How does it work? This training to hurt or kill people combined with this "ideal - perfect" world of non violence? Never made much sense to me? Reminds me of someone studying to learn to drive a car, passing the test, then never driving. FWIW I believe people learn a martial art to prove something to themselves, to feel better about themselves, to feel more manly, etc., etc. The other part of all this, the non violent part, is simply something they are "supposed" to say.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Brian » Wed May 30, 2012 8:38 am

Phalanxpursos wrote:Greetings people.

Question:

I've practiced Martial Arts and wondered if people are being triggered into aggression more easily because they practice martial arts, so basically how is your aggression in daily life? Are you easily triggered into aggression because you practice martial arts, or are you more the responsible type who avoids aggressive behavior?


Personally, I would not conclude that martial arts, per se, trigger aggressive behaviour but that it lies deeper in the psyche of the individual (who might also be a martial artist) in how he/she reacts to violent situations. If it is in your nature to be aggressive, then your nature will lead. The ethos of martial arts today lies more in the 'way of the peaceful warrior' than that existing when they were first developed.
I am now in my 46th year of training/teaching martial arts and in all that time I have never felt the need for aggression, nor a desire to place myself in a situation that might require it.
My battle has always been with Ego, not another human. However, having said that, I understand the concept of 'Hun'...Literally translated it is a trait that encompasses all the elements of ferocity, cruelty and viciousness. It is little less than natural killer instinct. However 'hun' must not be confused with emotion, such as anger or revenge which instead cloud judgement, suppleness, and clarity of thought - the qualities we need most in combat. Like the lion stalking it's prey, it is patient, motionless in the reeds, with the mind focused on one single aim. Ready to seize the prey without remorse, only at the perfect moment.


I've used my martial arts briefly for selfdefense a couple of times, but I engaged with sparring on the street on invitation. The real fights I had lasted very short and I won, the sparring I did on the street lasted for a long time and they were all draws. But I must admit that me practicing martial arts upgraded my self-confidence which resulted in a bigger ego, one time I had an aggressive fight in a bar. Of course was it in self defense, but with aggression comes justice. I became expelled from a bar for fighting, eventhough it was in selfdefense.
Conclusion:
I think it is better to follow a path of non-violence, even if you use martial arts for self defense can it turn against you. Non-violence is a path of responsibility, the key issue here is to use self defense as a last resort. You should give morality and withdrawal a fair chance, if you can't withdraw or use morality then give martial arts a better chance.
You should give Withdrawal a bigger priority.


A pity you didn't come to that conclusion BEFORE you engaged in the street 'invitation' fights. Remember...'violence begets violence'.
Taiji, QiGong and Meditation
Brian
Forum Specialist
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:54 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby caesar » Wed May 30, 2012 9:29 am

I really don't follow how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?


Really? In a former martial art, we even had scenario training where we would practice taking punches and kicks so that minimum damage would be felt. Our teacher was often talking about pacifist views and explained to us how it is often better to take a few hits instead of proving oneself that you "can defend/beat", this was where the question of human's ego comes to light.

I believe that training especially traditional martial arts almost forces the practitioners to confront their egos. After all...after one has had enough practice, he/she will notice how in martial arts, the ego is actually hindering the process of learning...and the very same ego is the one having a blind belief that something like "pride" must be defended which leads to aggression and fights.

I myself feel much more calm when doing martial arts...and the better my skills are, the less I really want to use any of them...but of course it all depends on the martial art and the teacher. Also martial arts with "soft approach" will give a practitioner better chance to neutralize opponent(s) without doing serious damage, although this is of course high level stuff...

I really don't follow the logic when asking:

"how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?"


...do you then also make the assumption that

"practicing a martial art, makes you more violent"


Does practicing survival and techniques make you violent? I think, that being a "violent person" needs much more than going to a dojo.

The other part of all this, the non violent part, is simply something they are "supposed" to say.


But I am not supposed to say any of this, I truly feel this way and it has come from my own experiences.
caesar
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Wed May 30, 2012 9:47 am

caesar wrote: Also martial arts with "soft approach" will give a practitioner better chance to neutralize opponent(s) without doing serious damage, although this is of course high level stuff...

I really don't follow the logic when asking:

"how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?"


...do you then also make the assumption that

"practicing a martial art, makes you more violent"


Does practicing survival and techniques make you violent? I think, that being a "violent person" needs much more than going to a dojo.


First off I don't buy this so called "soft" thing as better. It is simply ANOTHER WAY of doing things. Take a scan of Doctor Yang's book on martial appilcations and you'll find more than enough ways to break bones and do deadly damage. Might be "soft" for you but I doubt the opponent will think so after having sustained a broken arm.
Well, how can someone practice methods of doing damage to another person and claim to be "non violent"? Oh yeah, I practice hurting people BUT I'm really peace loving. Makes sense to me. :roll: :roll: :roll:
As for "practicing a martial..... more violent". I don't believe I said that.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby brer_momonga » Wed May 30, 2012 12:53 pm

pete5770 wrote:As for "practicing a martial..... more violent". I don't believe I said that.

then what does this sentence mean?
pete5770 wrote:I really don't follow how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?

c'mon pete, it was the very first line of your post...

as far as martial arts fueling aggression in an aggressive person - I would say it depends on the discipline of the student and the leadership of the school.
brer_momonga
Forum Specialist
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby caesar » Wed May 30, 2012 1:02 pm

As for "practicing a martial..... more violent". I don't believe I said that.


Well then be so polite and explain yourself. "how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?" actually indicates that you said something very close to "a person training martial arts cannot be non violent. If he/she claims something else, he/she is only saying it, because..."the non violent part, is simply something they are "supposed" to say.", as you said yourself Pete.

First off I don't buy this so called "soft" thing as better. It is simply ANOTHER WAY of doing things.


Well...I didn't say myself that "they would be better", I'm not sure where you actually summoned that...different indeed! I was trying to explain that different ways of training might give you different ways to think. Different approaches might give you different ways to solve a situation. The softer does not mean that it wouldn't be as brutal as "hard" as you said. But it might teach you how to handle a situation with less force.

Well, how can someone practice methods of doing damage to another person and claim to be "non violent"? Oh yeah, I practice hurting people BUT I'm really peace loving. Makes sense to me.


Umm...I'm not sure if you're practicing for the purpose of hurting people. I myself train for various reasons: overall healthy body and mind, the beauty of it but most of all: I train it for the purpose of obtaining better skills to defend myself IF I'm being attacked and I have no way out. Now putting it this way makes it sound much more realistic and peaceful than "I practice hurting people"

Doesn't make sense to you? Difficult to understand that you might actually learn a skill and also realize that you really don't want to use it? Is it really so difficult to comprehend, that one's sense of responsibility might get stronger while learning to understand the power of martial arts?
caesar
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Wed May 30, 2012 1:53 pm

how is your aggression in daily life? Are you easily triggered into aggression because you practice martial arts, or are you more the responsible type who avoids aggressive behavior?


I am less aggressive because of it.
So are my children.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby chh » Wed May 30, 2012 3:37 pm

I think Pete is using a pretty standard sense of 'non-violent' in his comments, at least it's the one I'm most familiar with. Specifically: if there exists some hypothetical situation in which you'd be willing to use violence, you're not 'non-violent' under this definition. Martial arts practitioners who are interested in what they're studying can't really be non-violent in this sense, unless they are just also unusually interested in spending their time learning something they will never ever use. I think dictionaries also often tend towards that definition.

It seems like everyone else engaging in this part of the discussion is thinking of a different sense, in which 'non-violent' means 'not aggressive', or 'preferring not to use violence if possible'. This is a perfectly fine interpretation of 'non-violent' too, but it's obviously different, and I don't think there's a point in arguing about the topic unless everyone's on the same page about that.

I don't know whether practicing martial arts tends to make people more confrontational or less, but people have given both answers in this thread, so it can clearly go both ways! Personally, I've never been in a fight before or after starting martial arts training, and I've never tried to physically intimidate someone, so I can't really say which is the case for me.
chh
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:09 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Wed May 30, 2012 7:22 pm

chh wrote:I think Pete is using a pretty standard sense of 'non-violent' in his comments, at least it's the one I'm most familiar with. Specifically: if there exists some hypothetical situation in which you'd be willing to use violence, you're not 'non-violent' under this definition. Martial arts practitioners who are interested in what they're studying can't really be non-violent in this sense, unless they are just also unusually interested in spending their time learning something they will never ever use. I think dictionaries also often tend towards that definition.

It seems like everyone else engaging in this part of the discussion is thinking of a different sense, in which 'non-violent' means 'not aggressive', or 'preferring not to use violence if possible'. This is a perfectly fine interpretation of 'non-violent' too, but it's obviously different, and I don't think there's a point in arguing about the topic unless everyone's on the same page about that.

I don't know whether practicing martial arts tends to make people more confrontational or less, but people have given both answers in this thread, so it can clearly go both ways! Personally, I've never been in a fight before or after starting martial arts training, and I've never tried to physically intimidate someone, so I can't really say which is the case for me.


+1.... well put
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Sanfung » Thu May 31, 2012 3:24 am

I don't believe it's contradictory for a peace loving country to have a powerful military force any more than it is for a student of the martial arts to have a general wish to avoid violence if possible. Security from being interfered with is a powerful thing. One gains freedom from fear in such a way. If I'm allowed to share a few aphorisms, the Taijiquan instructor Professor Cheng Man-ching wrote, "As you grow more relaxed, you become less afraid. As you become less afraid you grow more relaxed."

I stand by the definition of non-violence as meaning that one should prefer to avoid violent actions and not espouse aggression in its own right, but fully recognize that there are situations where there is no other solution. If I'm allowed to share another aphorism, Blaise Pascal wrote, " Justice without force is powerless; force without justice is tyranny." One could be completely righteous but never have the means to back it up and therefore crumble in front of a bully, per se. On the other hand, someone could just as easily be particularly aggressive and use his or her skill for the wrong reasons.

Owing to the nature of the human condition, the first definition of non-violence that chh offered is unrealistic. The human capacity for evil knows no bounds. If no one ever stood up to that evil then society would have collapsed a long time ago. On the other hand, people shouldn't go around picking fights. Caesar's comment up the thread a bit about self-defense seems the most balanced.
Sanfung
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 3:05 am

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Thu May 31, 2012 8:25 am

Sanfung wrote: The human capacity for evil knows no bounds. If no one ever stood up to that evil then society would have collapsed a long time ago.


Couldn't agree more. However, this seems to point toward the use of aggression whenever and wherever this "evil" is found and, to be honest, I'm all for it. Sort of a "Kill them all. Let God sort them out." type of thing. Here again I have ALMOST no qualms about doing this. Almost. My problem is who decides and who controls the one who decides. You certainly don't want someone like myself being in charge of "evil eradication", or as you say, on the other hand......
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby chh » Thu May 31, 2012 9:25 am

"Owing to the nature of the human condition, the first definition of non-violence that chh offered is unrealistic. The human capacity for evil knows no bounds. If no one ever stood up to that evil then society would have collapsed a long time ago."

I tried to be pretty clear that I wasn't promoting one interpretation over the other. They both exist, and people do chose to live in a way that leaves violence completely off the table. You can look up 'nonviolent resistance' on the internet to see a fairly detailed history of movements that follow that philosophy. In some of those cases, lots of people probably died because of their beliefs that all violence is unjustifiable. In other cases, the people probably took advantage of the fact that there were external pressures on the state or entity that was using violence (economic, diplomatic, possibly military pressures), so that nonviolent resistance might increase that pressure and so was supported by that specific context.

Calling that philosophy unrealistic doesn't attend to the actual details of the philosophy, which you can look up on the internet.
chh
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:09 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Thu May 31, 2012 4:34 pm

FWIW I'm not sure you can avoid aggression or aggressive behavior, either from others or from yourself. It's everywhere you go. Seems that there is always someone being pushy, loud, complaining, overbearing, or threatening. We have all seen it, been exposed to it, and i'm sure, at times, have all said or thought something to the effect of "Someone ought to just beat the hell out of that guy. He deserves it". Who out there doesn't get p*ssed off enough, at times,
to comtemplate the satisfaction of opening up a can of "whoop *ss" on someone? Those of us who can control these urges tend to stay out of trouble. Those who can't, well..... In any case I think it's safe to say we ALL have these kinds of issuses, even the so called non violent people. I mean it's human nature. Isn't it?
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Thu May 31, 2012 5:07 pm

You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war.

Albert Einstein

I was think that this was an interesting analogy to this aggression topic.
It seems to me that lots of people say that you should study the martial arts but not
use them. I'm thinking that good old "Al" might not believe you can "simultaineously prevent and prepare for aggression". :? :?
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Thu May 31, 2012 8:41 pm

I make a distinction between violence and aggression.

War may involve violence and aggression, but is oriented around goals in a manner that bears little semblance to aggression common to individuals. Likewise the violence of individuals is hard to compare to war.

One can most certainly prepare for negotiating the aggression of self and others without pursuing aggression from self or soliciting it from others.

Mammals tend to be aggressive and violent, humans are no exception. In my experience those quickest to engage in violence are typically poorly educated and often poorly trained. Consider a toddler who in seeing someone else pick up their toy they start hitting or screaming. As children age it is the ideal that they learn self restraint, though this is clearly not always the case.

Aggression however is far harder to curtail than violence, for aggression to be diminished requires more than inaction, while many aggressive people restrain themselves from violence. Self mastery is a vital element that is often neglected by some forms of training, in these cases it is common for the training to increase aggression by teaching that anger is appropriate and even useful.

It all comes down to patience and self mastery. Those quick to anger are more aggressive and more likely to be violence, like a cranky child. Those less easily offended and more tolerant in general are less likely to be angry aggressive or violent.

Does the training one chooses increase ones patience and tolerance?
I think that it may, or may not, it is complicated.

In a single school or class different results in terms of this can be found.
It has more to do with self and less to do with the style or training.
ag·gres·sion
   [uh-gresh-uhn]
noun
1.
the action of a state in violating by force the rights of another state, particularly its territorial rights; an unprovoked offensive, attack, invasion, or the like: The army is prepared to stop any foreign aggression.
2.
any offensive action, attack, or procedure; an inroad or encroachment: an aggression upon one's rights.
3.
the practice of making assaults or attacks; offensive action in general.
4.
Psychiatry . overt or suppressed hostility, either innate or resulting from continued frustration and directed outward or against oneself.
vi·o·lence
   [vahy-uh-luhns]
noun
1.
swift and intense force: the violence of a storm.
2.
rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment: to die by violence.
3.
an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws: to take over a government by violence.
4.
a violent act or proceeding.
5.
rough or immoderate vehemence, as of feeling or language: the violence of his hatred.

Is anyone using these words in a manner inconsistent with their definitions here?
Last edited by Josh Young on Thu May 31, 2012 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Inga » Thu May 31, 2012 9:49 pm

Interesting to read people's viewpoints. The original question from Phalanxpursos was asking us as individuals if we find ourselves more aggressive because we train martial arts. He also stated he felt that using martial arts to defend oneself should be a last resort. I think the statement is hard to apply as a blanket rule, and can only be a case by case decision. Is the threatening person armed? Are they threatening a loved one who can't defend themselves? Is this a life or death situation, or an argument over a score? I would agree to hold back from using martial arts unless really necessary, but in some situations, the point of talking might already have passed. I would agree in most situations where there is posturing, shoving, minor argument involved one should tame the ego and walk away. If there is serious risk, one should act. And I believe that action should be swift and short lived. I would break someone's knee if they were trying to drag me into a car, and then run like heck and call the police. Should I get into the car and negotiate and not hurt the person? I believe the threatening person has made a decision which comes with consequences. If I was in a situation where it was a crowded bar or concert and a drunk angry person swung at me (because I had a tee shirt on they didn't like) I would block it (hopefully) and move away - that is not worth hurting someone over. I'm sure people have a spectrum of opinions on this, but we were asked to comment on our own lives, and that's where I'm at right now.

Do I ever imagine I'll really ever hurt someone with my martial arts? No. I don't train with the hope I will one day hurt someone. As Josh and Brian mentioned, I am interested in conquering myself. I train martial arts for discipline, to improve my confidence, to maintain physical health and promote mental well being - I began meditating once I got deeper into martial arts which of late has lead me towards an interest in Buddhism. So personally, I can say that training martial arts has not made me more aggressive in my daily life. Quite the opposite, it's lead me on a journey where I am learning about expanding my compassion.
Ancora Imparo
Inga
Admin
 
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:55 am
Location: New England

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby wpgtaiji » Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:18 am

Josh Young wrote:
ag·gres·sion

noun
1.
the action of a state in violating by force the rights of another state, particularly its territorial rights; an unprovoked offensive, attack, invasion, or the like: The army is prepared to stop any foreign aggression.

violence
noun

an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws: to take over a government by violence.


I like how Josh puts it. These two appear to be most relevant for self defence, or is people talking something else?

Does a martial artist go out and violate peoples' rights by attacking them? I cant imagine it, though I am sure that some would blame it on training. Why does it seem that a person goes to a tai bo class and seems to be more aggressive than a real martial art class (admittedly, there are few available)?

A martial art teaches ONLY timing, coordination, and balance. They do it with what APPEAR to be "fighting" techniques, but ask anyone who is a good fighter, and they laugh at 99% of what is called martial arts today. Why? Because it was never meant to be used in that way, at least from what I can tell from studying this stuff for a few decades.

Oh, dont get me wrong. The physical movements CAN be interpreted as attacks or blocks or something, but if that is all that you see in them, then your art is not that good. There is lots more there (at least in an internal art like Taiji).

The problem I see today is that the training that most receive is nice physical stuff. It gets the body healthy and fit, but it doesnt really change the person. I dont mean that the person has more confidence or something like that! You can gain confidence at a math camp! Discipline is another overused selling feature of martial arts! It is bogus. Everyone in the world has focus, discipline and confidence in THE area of their lives that they LOVE the most! EVERYONE! SO those "attributes" are not changes.

By change i mean that that person KNOWs that they can handle any situation. They are not cocky or pushy. They just know that if someone mouths off, they can deal with it. If someone cuts them off driving, they can deal with it. If someone pulls a knife on them or their family, they deal with it. If someone comes up and hugs them, they deal with it. There is literally no difference in the approach. People are attracted to that. That is what they want (in my estimation), yet there are VERY VERY few who can deliver that today.

What I think pete is missing is a part of the definitions i isolated in the quote. It has to do with VIOLATING the rights of others. If someone comes at you with the INTENT to harm or kill, that person has forfeited their right to live in trying to take your life. The only reasonable approach is death. It is not a violent act because it was agreed on at the initiation of the attack.

I dont think anyone on this board would initiate such an thing, so it is a moot question (after we consider Josh's words!)

It is interesting that Erle devoted time to what could be called "bringing out Yang". He NEVER wanted anyone to be aggressive, but if you watch his stuff, it could very well be classified as such. What he was doing was bringing up Yang energy. It is a yin/yang thing. One of the principles we use is to return the force used on us back to the attacker. I know this is paid lip service in almost every martial art in existence, but until Erle explained it in his simple terms, i had never EVER seen it the way i had imagined it.

What does it mean? Quite simply, as the attacker comes at you, he has a certain amount of "yangness", for lack of a better word. Simply be more Yang than him, effectively turning his yang into yin by comparison. It isnt ANGER! It is an attitude of "you started this, but it is over NOW". The amazing thing is, when someone comes at you in a "fooling" sort of way (not really), it doesnt take much to be more yang, so they dont get hurt. If their intent is more serious, the response is more serious.

It is interesting. We have a method of learning this. Eli was teaching it and he says that it is the attackers job to control how much he gets hurt, not the defenders job! We are using neigwan on the arm, which is sensitive, so it is the attacker who must throw "softer" punches (with the same sort of intent) because the "defender" must not be gentle, for fear of that aspect rubbing off in other areas. It happened to me in my karate days! I had been so used to pulling my punches, that one of my sempai told me to hit him as hard as I could. Funny thing, i continued to pull the punches! He told me what was going on, and didnt let me do it again (point made).

Sorry for the length. I had been resisting jumping in to this topic. I need to sleep now...
wpgtaiji
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:48 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Phalanxpursos » Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:41 am

pete5770 wrote:I really don't follow how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?
It's like having a strong Army and then telling everyone what a peace loving nation you are.


And that my friend is what is called a Paradox, Paradox means opposites. Some Paradoxes are good, some Paradoxes are bad, Selfdefense and Non-Violence are a Good Paradox.


Brian wrote:Personally, I would not conclude that martial arts, per se, trigger aggressive behaviour but that it lies deeper in the psyche of the individual (who might also be a martial artist) in how he/she reacts to violent situations. If it is in your nature to be aggressive, then your nature will lead. The ethos of martial arts today lies more in the 'way of the peaceful warrior' than that existing when they were first developed.


That is a very wise statement.

Brian wrote:A pity you didn't come to that conclusion BEFORE you engaged in the street 'invitation' fights. Remember...'violence begets violence'.


Well I was practically forced to street fight, it was fun, we became good friends and talked a lot about martial arts.

caesar wrote:Really? In a former martial art, we even had scenario training where we would practice taking punches and kicks so that minimum damage would be felt. Our teacher was often talking about pacifist views and explained to us how it is often better to take a few hits instead of proving oneself that you "can defend/beat", this was where the question of human's ego comes to light.


That sounds interesting, was this just basic selfdefense?

pete5770 wrote:Well, how can someone practice methods of doing damage to another person and claim to be "non violent"? Oh yeah, I practice hurting people BUT I'm really peace loving. Makes sense to me. :roll: :roll: :roll:
As for "practicing a martial..... more violent". I don't believe I said that.


Well that is the Martial Arts Paradox, learning how to defend yourself and be non-violent.

brer_momonga wrote:as far as martial arts fueling aggression in an aggressive person - I would say it depends on the discipline of the student and the leadership of the school.


True.

caesar wrote:"how someone can practice martial arts and then claim they are non violent?"


Well that is what is called a Paradox, Selfdefense and Non-Violence is a Good Paradox.

Sanfung wrote:Professor Cheng Man-ching wrote, "As you grow more relaxed, you become less afraid. As you become less afraid you grow more relaxed."


Awesome Citation, I practiced Chen Man-chich Tai Chi.

Sanfung wrote:Blaise Pascal wrote, " Justice without force is powerless; force without justice is tyranny."


That is truly an awesome quote.
Strategemata Liber Secundus;
"VIII: Restore Morale with Firmness"
Phalanxpursos
Forum Specialist
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Amaranth » Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:43 am

Some say what you do is who you are, so should that seem as though since you train fighting/violence that you are violent? Does not training in control of violence allow you to exhibit greater ease with acting non-violently? There is some natural tendencies to lash-out, and it seems to me that martial artists should have a better grasp on controlling these outbursts.
Amaranth
Forum Contributor
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:11 am

Next

Return to Sparring and Fighting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

©2013 YMAA | About YMAA | Privacy Policy |Terms of Use | Permissions | Contact Us