Most say they take karate/BJJ/kung fu/thai boxing so that they learn how to fight. In other words, person A takes karate so that he can fight. What about person B who wants to defend himself?
1) Should he learn how to fight or 2) Should he learn self-defense? The answer is 2.
It has to be realized that self-defense and fighting are two very different beasts. In essence, fighting is all about "being there" while self-defense all about getting "out of there". Because the purposes are different, the perspectives, training and mindset are also different. Many confuse the two as the same, and that is a huge mistake.
Self-defense is not about whether you punch with the first two knuckles or the last three knuckles and fighting is not about running away from an aggressor. Fighting is not a true measure of self-defense, and neither is self-defense a measure of a good fighter.
It's interesting to note that once this is distinguished, the battle between MMA vs. WT (or substitute with any martial art of your choice) takes a very different turn. Neither is superior over the other.
Think about it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
But at the end of the day it all comes down to capabilities:
1. Is a fighter capable of fighting? Yes.
2. Is a fighter also capable of defending himself/herself? Yes.
3. Is a self-defence praticioner capable of fighting? I don't know.
4. Is a self-defence praticioner capable of defending himself/herself? Yes.
The bottom line is, being a fighter seems to embody being a self-defence practitioner. In other words, is being a self-defence practitioner a subset of being a fighter? Comments?
Post a Comment