Post by Keyboard Warrior on Jul 25, 2013 17:24:34 GMT -5
When a particular subject is breached over and over again, one begins to notice particular patterns and inconsistencies in one’s argument. When the subject of MMA vs TMA is discussed, that is exactly what happens. I've began to notice a series of logical fallacies when it comes to the excuses that traditional martial arts community uses on a regular basis to defend their fraudulent practices. These are just a few of them.
“These arts are as old as time, so they must work.” This is a fallacy known as an appeal to tradition, which is the defense of something, merely because it’s something we've always had, or always practiced. But the fact remains that just because something has existed for a long time, doesn't mean it’s always true or correct. Christianity has been around for 2000 years, and it’s no truer now, than it was back then. For 1400 years, we followed a geocentric model and believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. Terrible concepts, ideas and practices can easily be passed down through the ages. In the end, people pass down things that are important to them, or have meaning to them, such as their Kung Fu or Ninjutsu training. It doesn't mean it works, by any stretch of the imagination. Not to mention the fact that someone with martial arts training may never use their training at any point in their life, therefore never verifying their application.
“My style is too deadly for the Ring.” This is a combination of an Appeal to Ignorance and a Red Herring. Appeal to Ignorance basically states that you can’t say something doesn't exist, because there is no evidence to suggest that it doesn't exist. An obvious example is the existence of God. Except here with Traditionalists, they themselves are the reason that there is an absence of evidence in the first place. By refusing to participate in sparring and competition, they don’t have to validate the application of their arts, and continue to peddle their fraudulent practices. It’s also a the classic case of a Red Herring, because it also serves as a great distraction from the bigger issues, and it takes our eyes off traditionalists. After all, who would want to fight someone in the ring that was deadly, and who would want to fight someone knowing that you were too deadly? Too deadly? More like too convenient.
Regularly when this subject is brought up, and I point out a piece of evidence, or something that’s basically hard to refute, I’m met with a “you are Ignorant” or a good ol’ fashioned “You have no understanding of martial arts” These are both clear cut cases of ad hominem. Seems silly that we resort to personally attacking one another, and making such wide and sweeping generalizations, like that I have no understanding of martial arts, because I choose to question an art and its application. This brings up the fact that conformity is rewarded more than rebelling and asking questions, in the martial arts community. But that’s a subject in of itself.
“There are rules in MMA.” This is more stupidity than it is an actual fallacy. Traditionalists have created this idea in their heads that MMA and other modern systems are plagued by rules. But are Traditionalists practicing by poking each other in the eyes, full contact? Are they hitting each other full contact in the testicles with no cups on? No? Then those are rules. Traditionalists live in this fantasy land that they aren't part of this construct of rules, when the reality is that they are part of it than anyone else, by adhering to more rules of gym decorum, such as uniforms, bowing, character development, etc…
“If you trained in a traditional style, but you don’t like traditional styles, you didn't train in a real traditional style.” This one is my favorite of all time. I trained in traditional martial arts for 10 years, and of course, because I rebelled against the traditional ways, my training comes into question by Traditionalists. This is called the No True Scotsman Fallacy. This basically asserts that no true member of a community would do such a thing, such as denouncing traditional martial arts. It’s a way to distance themselves, a way to destroy your credibility, and as a way of redefining the category of something, so that you were never really part of it to begin with. It’s probably the cleverest of the excuses I've heard. It’s also the most desperate.
What are some of your favorites excuses, and why are there so many of them?
“These arts are as old as time, so they must work.” This is a fallacy known as an appeal to tradition, which is the defense of something, merely because it’s something we've always had, or always practiced. But the fact remains that just because something has existed for a long time, doesn't mean it’s always true or correct. Christianity has been around for 2000 years, and it’s no truer now, than it was back then. For 1400 years, we followed a geocentric model and believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. Terrible concepts, ideas and practices can easily be passed down through the ages. In the end, people pass down things that are important to them, or have meaning to them, such as their Kung Fu or Ninjutsu training. It doesn't mean it works, by any stretch of the imagination. Not to mention the fact that someone with martial arts training may never use their training at any point in their life, therefore never verifying their application.
“My style is too deadly for the Ring.” This is a combination of an Appeal to Ignorance and a Red Herring. Appeal to Ignorance basically states that you can’t say something doesn't exist, because there is no evidence to suggest that it doesn't exist. An obvious example is the existence of God. Except here with Traditionalists, they themselves are the reason that there is an absence of evidence in the first place. By refusing to participate in sparring and competition, they don’t have to validate the application of their arts, and continue to peddle their fraudulent practices. It’s also a the classic case of a Red Herring, because it also serves as a great distraction from the bigger issues, and it takes our eyes off traditionalists. After all, who would want to fight someone in the ring that was deadly, and who would want to fight someone knowing that you were too deadly? Too deadly? More like too convenient.
Regularly when this subject is brought up, and I point out a piece of evidence, or something that’s basically hard to refute, I’m met with a “you are Ignorant” or a good ol’ fashioned “You have no understanding of martial arts” These are both clear cut cases of ad hominem. Seems silly that we resort to personally attacking one another, and making such wide and sweeping generalizations, like that I have no understanding of martial arts, because I choose to question an art and its application. This brings up the fact that conformity is rewarded more than rebelling and asking questions, in the martial arts community. But that’s a subject in of itself.
“There are rules in MMA.” This is more stupidity than it is an actual fallacy. Traditionalists have created this idea in their heads that MMA and other modern systems are plagued by rules. But are Traditionalists practicing by poking each other in the eyes, full contact? Are they hitting each other full contact in the testicles with no cups on? No? Then those are rules. Traditionalists live in this fantasy land that they aren't part of this construct of rules, when the reality is that they are part of it than anyone else, by adhering to more rules of gym decorum, such as uniforms, bowing, character development, etc…
“If you trained in a traditional style, but you don’t like traditional styles, you didn't train in a real traditional style.” This one is my favorite of all time. I trained in traditional martial arts for 10 years, and of course, because I rebelled against the traditional ways, my training comes into question by Traditionalists. This is called the No True Scotsman Fallacy. This basically asserts that no true member of a community would do such a thing, such as denouncing traditional martial arts. It’s a way to distance themselves, a way to destroy your credibility, and as a way of redefining the category of something, so that you were never really part of it to begin with. It’s probably the cleverest of the excuses I've heard. It’s also the most desperate.
What are some of your favorites excuses, and why are there so many of them?