A trivial generalization about modern Western philosophy is that it splits between the more scientific "analytic" and more humanistic "continental" traditions.* A crass -- but more true than false -- characterization of these two traditions is that the analytic tradition attempts to solve problems, and the continental traditions...um...don't. Similarly, one might roughly divide East Asian martial arts into those emphasizing mutual competition and "practicality,"** and those emphasizing individual expression or even a kind of mysticism. Mark posted a video that shows how some martial arts schools go off the deep end with their pseudo-philosophizing. To see a different end of the spectrum, take a look at the documentary "Choke," which profiles what I'll call more "analytic" martial arts:
To be clear, you can find meatheads in any martial art, just as you can find goofball new age types. (In fact, you can probably say that about any bar on a Friday night.) But I'd like to make sure that those unfamiliar with MA don't get the wrong idea by the video Mark posted earlier. There are martial arts that are "all business," and I think they also have something interesting to say, in the sense that Mark was getting at. One common perception about MMA clubs and gyms is that they attract a certain lunkhead mentality, and that's not entirely false. But if you watch Choke from beginning to end, I think you'll see these various competitors are more than simply brutal brawlers out for fame and money. Try to think about the other competitors, not just rockstar Rickson Gracie. In particular, focus on Yuki Nakai, the unassuming 5'7" (yeah, 5 foot, 7 inches) Japanese fighter who defeats a number of much larger fighters to reach the final bout. If you want to talk about a martial arts philosophy that "gets something done," Mr. Nakai is a great case study.
*Yes, these terms are hotly contested, and yes, I'm grossly exaggerating, but you know what I mean.
**C.f., Wittgenstein as quoted in Ludwig Wittgenstein: Personal Recollections:
My father was a business man and I am a business man: I want my philosophy to be businesslike, to get something done, to get something settled.
-Daniel Horne
What I find truly funny is that we refer to Brazilian ju-jitsu, justly i think, as a more competitive and practical art than say tai chi, yet Rickson Gracie not eight minutes into the documentary is talking about “inner energy” like it was some cross between libido and chi. When talking about martial artists we should give them a break when they express themselves about abstract concepts, factoring in head trauma aside. Make no mistake, top fighters have just as rigorous degrees as PhDs but they wrote their dissertations in blood and body blows not on paper or though defenses of theses.
Hi Luis,
You’re completely right that everyone is entitled to have an opinion about abstract concepts. And I didn’t mean to suggest that competitive fighters can’t believe in religious/spiritual/new age-y concepts. I’ve met plenty of “hardcore” competitive fighters (particularly Japanese guys, with whom I have the most familiarity) who believe in ki (chi) or something like it. (Though, with the Japanese guys, I think that has more to do with simply growing up in Japan — where a fascination with astrology and blood types persists — than with practicing martial arts as such.) But in my experience, they first and foremost believe in logical, practical, techniques. (Get fit, get strong, practice practice practice, spar spar spar, rinse, repeat, etc.)
Even so, my metaphor may not have been as useful or apt as I first thought — I’ll think about that.
I simply meant that your average judo teacher (or boxing coach) does not tend to go on trying to spout philosophical wisdom. There seems to be more of the “hocus-pocusry” going on in certain other types of schools and styles.
More specifically, I’ve got little patience for the types of people who produce the videos like the one Mark posted, that natter on about the “way of the empty mind.” Or, more to the point, there are certain martial arts practitioners and instructors who try to claim unique (typically superior) philosophical insight. And they do so by misusing (sometimes laughably) East Asian concepts they only half understand. And they can get away with it because they take advantage of a certain kind of cultural prestige that East Asian martial arts schools sometimes (cynically) cultivate.
Case in point, the whole “the way of the empty mind,” cited in the video Mark posted. That refers to “mushin no shin,” which really means “the mind of no-mind,” not the “way of the empty mind”. And that’s a uniquely Japanese concept, originating in Zen, with no basis of which I’m aware in Chinese martial arts traditions. And yet the narrator described “the way of empty mind” as a concept that unites all East Asian martial arts. That’s the kind of nonsense that bugs me.
So, in direct response to your point, I do give martial artists a break when they express themselves about abstract concepts, insofar as I give anyone and everyone a break on that score. But there’s a certain type of martial arts practitioner who claims _special_ insight as a result of their practice, and I’m not so inclined to cut them a break.
That said, I accept that it’s hard to generalize without being unfair to someone.
Nice, Daniel. You might be interested in this discussion, on ABC Radio National: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/lifematters/stories/2010/3074891.htm
Just saw your comment, Daniel. On Judo, the teachers do sometimes refer to philosophical concepts. It’s just that they’re grounded in Kano’s very progressive, modern teachings, rather than phrases stolen from Shinto, Confucianism and Zen (the three main traditions of Japanese martial arts philosophy).
Hi Damon,
Thanks for responding! I just purchased your book on Kindle, and have been “flipping” through it. I liked your interview, and have no major quarrel with any of the points you raised.
With respect to your second comment, I have two rejoinders:
1. You’re quite right, but I see no contradiction between the statements:
a. “On Judo, the teachers do sometimes refer to philosophical concepts.”
and
b. “[Y]our average judo teacher (or boxing coach) does not tend to go on trying to spout philosophical wisdom.”
And I think you’d agree that with judo in particular, its founder, Jigoro Kano, was a decidedly rational and scientific guy, and applied this rationality when developing judo. In fact, rationality almost _defines_ judo, as opposed to esoteric concepts like “no-mindedness” or “ki”. I also think it noteworthy that Kano never tried to make himself a spiritual guru.
2. I’m not positing “philosophy” vs. “no-philosophy” in martial arts, but rather positing that there are different types of philosophies. Not all philosophical concepts are the same. There’s a difference between the philosophy of, say, Quine or Searle, and that of Derrida or Foucault. By the same token, there’s a difference between the philosophical outlook of a Jigoro Kano and a Morihei Ueshiba. That’s what I was trying to get at in my original post: “full-contact” arts like Brazilian Jiu-Jutsu or Kyokushin karate (or judo or even boxing or greco-roman wrestling) do not lack philosophy, but their philosophies are (to my mind) more analytical and left-brained. And their best practitioners (in my experience) developed their talent through regular exercise and practice — not by focusing on no-mind.
But, yes, of course, there are judoka who wear crystals and aikidoka who are research physicists. And, for that matter, research physicists who wear crystals — the world is a complex place!
Daniel,
Did not really mean to riff on the metaphor of the distinction between practical or mystical emphasis in certain martial arts. The distinction is often blurry because most martial arts have aspects of both, but i certainly believe it exists. What i was getting at was more of a commentary on how some people (philosophers come to mind) demand rigorous exactitude on expressing certain concepts than the uninitiated lay person wants, needs or can even stomach. Just like a mechanic has to have a working knowledge of classical physics, he does not have anywhere near the knowledge a physics grad student might have on the subject. The mechanic, with his limited knowledge on the subject, will be vastly better at fixing cars than the grad student even if his job is really nothing more than applied physics just because he has so much more praxis.
With that said, i think you are spot on when you accuse some people of trying to pull a fast one on us by saying some mystical sounding words and pretending that much wisdom was exchanged. The most positive way that i can interpret is as a trap to separate the dim from the bright. The worst interpretation is just pure charlatanry. I have a certain respect for dirty tricks so i am not sure i can feel bad about the positive interpretation i just gave when it is used. I do have a deep resentment for people who spout things without the least rigorous reflection on the subject. The most i can hope is that their weak base gets them swept and thrown by a real practitioner, maybe literally but certainly figuratively.
Damon,
Just listened to the interview and a memory crossed my mind i would like to share. I am a rather large fan of sci-fi and one of my favorite authors is Neal Stephenson. He wrote a book called Cryptonomicon that featured a rather extended metaphor for warfare. He made the point that the Greeks had two war gods, Ares and Athena. Ares is something of the brutal god of senseless warfare. In most of the Greek tales he is shown as something of an impulsive ass (above and beyond even the other Greek gods which is saying quite a bit) and most of his children are sociopaths and murderers of one stripe or another. His sons, Phobos (fear) and Deimos (dread) are something of his personal shield-bearers and always accompany him. Athena is the goddess of righteous warfare, of fighting in defense of the polis. She is depicted as the goddess of techne, justice and skill, the daughter of Metis (cunning wisdom) and Zeus. She is the patron of almost every hero in Greek mythology and of heroics in general. And she is a vicious fighter, having dropped Sicily on a rebellious Titan. By comparison Ares, though the god of war, was fantastically incompetent at his job. He ends up being beat constantly by various gods and demi-gods, Athena included. The point the Greeks were making, i think, is that fighting when conducted with a mind towards civilizing influences like metis, techne, justice and skill always triumphs against the senseless brutality of unlimited aggression some persons or peoples seem to have. Not an amazing insight perhaps but it has a certain poetic elegance to it when your personify the concepts.
Thanks, Daniel. You’re spot on. I was adding to your Judo point (i.e. the respective value of the philosophies), rather than trying to overturn it. Kano was a fine scholar. Ueshiba, for all his gnomic pronouncements, was not. The first was a high-minded realist, the second something of a mystical guru. And if I can be cautiously controversial for a moment, I believe this difference plays out in their martial arts.
Luis, I hadn’t thought of the Ares/Athena distinction. But, yes, it says a great deal that Athena’s patronage of Odysseus.
Thanks for responding! I just purchased your book on Kindle, and have been “flipping” through it. I liked your interview, and have no major quarrel with any of the points you raised.