HereBeADragon
07-18-2006, 12:20 PM
I was showing my teacher the Hardwork series yesterday and we ended up getting into a 2 hour discussion about it. :) he did not like what he was seeing and felt that this approach wasnt a good one. He felt that this is a shortcut, in the bad sense, and not a way to perfect your art. Anyway long story short after 2 hours and a sore throat he now better understands and is not so much against RMAX ideas but wow did it open my eyes! I think I came to rmax easily because I already had the spark of understanding about what its trying to accomplish. Many people from a traditional martial arts background are of the understanding that perfection of their art means to perfect their technique. While my understanding of perfection is in your effectiveness and your efficienty. I'm bringing this up because some of the points I argued I found very interesting and wanted to see some other ideas and points of view about them.
One of the first points I argued with my teacher was against the old, "this has been passed down and perfected generation after generation etc." I argued that it is impossible for an art to be perfected one generation after another by only immitating what the founder of that art showed his students. I stated that by the laws of entropy it is impossible for something to be repeatedly copied and get better at the same time. So it would stand to reason that the only way to improve would be through grows not regugitation(sp).
Next point was about the nature of mastery. The traditional view that mastery is a matter of perfection of technique. While I argued that mastery is a perfection of your effientcy and your effectiveness at accessing your skills not techniques.
Lastly was that as coach Jones said in RMAX powered internal martial arts "it should not take 20 years to get good at something." My teacher again sided with the old ways of constant repetition to gain perfection. I argued that in those days repetition was the prefered practice because conditioning and sparring were built into the life style. Fighting was common and hardwork was constant. Also today with the gifts of sports psychology we better understand how to train and teach in more effective manners than people had available 1000 or even 50 years ago.
I also noticed a fear that I had not considered before. The idea that you could have waisted years in your training when there was a better way. Many people who have been in the arts for a substantial time I would think might have that type of fear. I do recall the exact moment when I think he understood what I was saying. I asked him how much more he feels he could accomplish if he was at the level he is at now five years earlier than it took him to get there. I saw that spark when he thought about that.
It was a great discussion and it shows one of the reasons I like learning from him so much. He can dislike an idea but is willing to discuss it and consider the possiblities. Even open up to them. There was much more discussed and a lot of ideas exchanged but these were the key points that stuck with me and I hope that they will be of interest to others here.
One of the first points I argued with my teacher was against the old, "this has been passed down and perfected generation after generation etc." I argued that it is impossible for an art to be perfected one generation after another by only immitating what the founder of that art showed his students. I stated that by the laws of entropy it is impossible for something to be repeatedly copied and get better at the same time. So it would stand to reason that the only way to improve would be through grows not regugitation(sp).
Next point was about the nature of mastery. The traditional view that mastery is a matter of perfection of technique. While I argued that mastery is a perfection of your effientcy and your effectiveness at accessing your skills not techniques.
Lastly was that as coach Jones said in RMAX powered internal martial arts "it should not take 20 years to get good at something." My teacher again sided with the old ways of constant repetition to gain perfection. I argued that in those days repetition was the prefered practice because conditioning and sparring were built into the life style. Fighting was common and hardwork was constant. Also today with the gifts of sports psychology we better understand how to train and teach in more effective manners than people had available 1000 or even 50 years ago.
I also noticed a fear that I had not considered before. The idea that you could have waisted years in your training when there was a better way. Many people who have been in the arts for a substantial time I would think might have that type of fear. I do recall the exact moment when I think he understood what I was saying. I asked him how much more he feels he could accomplish if he was at the level he is at now five years earlier than it took him to get there. I saw that spark when he thought about that.
It was a great discussion and it shows one of the reasons I like learning from him so much. He can dislike an idea but is willing to discuss it and consider the possiblities. Even open up to them. There was much more discussed and a lot of ideas exchanged but these were the key points that stuck with me and I hope that they will be of interest to others here.