Do all arts have an underlying philosophy?

[bowlie]

Im not looking for one, im just interested

 

[Ayin]

Taekwondo is an interesting one, with it's made up history and such it's an interesting example of an art being created for a purpose, and with a philosophy to match.

I would think most arts have a 'theme', though only a certain type have a full philosophy. Boxing's has classically been 'hit without being hit', most grappling arts have something along the lines of 'the soft overcoming the hard', ect.

 

[a guy]

Hurt the other guy at least a little more than he hurts you.

 

[thugpoet]

Yea for the most part.

 

[Steve08]

I would say yes; primarily that, in the attacking of an opponent, merely using one technique (whether it be a rear cross or double leg takedown) is often times not enough-- because if he knows what he's doing, he'll defend anything you throw at him but only if he can first see it coming-- and one must instead chain techniques together to draw the opponent's responses towards all of them until one such response finally creates the perfect opening for your own technique.

For example, every wrestler worth a shit knows the double leg, and the two basic defenses for it, which are to a.) sprawl if he shoots from range and you see it coming, and b.) stiff-arm the head to create space between him and your hips once he's actually in on your legs. However, a good wrestler would obviously not stop once his initial technique (in this case the double leg) was thwarted, and would instead merely switch off to another takedown (technique), and another, and another until he finally found one the guy couldn't react to in time. This situation is analogous to combination punching in boxing, or lock-flows in jiu jitsu, or clinch work in judo, etc...

I've heard this idea be described in the context of jiu jitsu as the process of "attack -> counter -> recounter" which pretty much sums it up, but my contention is that that process applies to literally any martial art whether it be striking or grappling, and so is probably the closest thing to a single "underlying philosophy" in martial arts. At least, the closest I can think of anyway (other than what a guy already said).

 

[Inquisitus]

So for my undergrad thesis im looking at the history of combat arts. I was wondering if you would say all arts have an underlying philosophy. Obviously things like taekwondo do, but you could argue that the philosophy to muay thai is to show dominance by not backing down. e.c.t.

Any human activity will come with it's own internal philosophy whether explicit or implicit. It's just some martial arts extended to areas beyond the art itself.

Think of hockey or baseball and the end of game handshake. Implicit is the philosophy of compete strongly but fairly and respect the competition. But those sports don't explicitly say things like seek perfection of character, be faithful, refrain from violent behaviour etc... like Shotokan karate.

Things like development of character are not the primary reason to do a sport whereas it is for Shotokan and a lot of the Japanese arts.

 

[Francis Rossi]

Taekwondo is an interesting one, with it's made up history and such it's an interesting example of an art being created for a purpose, and with a philosophy to match.

Yeah. TKD isn't really a traditional art. They were all suppressed during the Japanese occupation.

I guess most arts have some sort of philosophy behind them, even if it's just technical rather than a more traditional philosophy.

 

[Phil Galdong]

Not all.

 

[Phlog]

At the core of all martial arts and indeed all competition and interaction is Theory Of Mind. An understanding that the other has a mind like you and that you can appreciate and to an extent predict the others intents and actions.

Every decision, from how to train to what to train and the meat of what action to take is rooted in this.

It's essentially the basis for all our communication. Martial arts are almost languages in that sense.

Obviously discipline is another.

Fundamentally there is also the principal of exploration, learning and testing, this changes when initial practitioners die and the preservationists get hold. Then they can become more codified and traditional. Some even lose the testing part after a while, like it withers and dies.

 

[Tecks]

All the ones I've seen and read up on have a philosophy I would say.

 

[fluffball]

What is this underlying philosophy you're looking for?

And I don't get why you're using TKD as the benchmark. What does TKD "obviously" have that every art has?

 

[Phlog]

Probably because it was recently created and has a recorded mission statement. Krav Maga would be another obvious one.

 

[thehairyfairy]

To play the devil's advocate I'll say no. I think humans have a tendency to apply deep philosophical meaning to everything and anything they can, to justify their reasoning to do it.

 

[Yodsanan]

Muay thai is older and has probably more traditions then TKD.

 

[bowlie]

Its not really that im looking for a philosophy. Like i said, its for my thesis. Its on the cultural impact of placing such high esteem on combat sports in ancient greece. I want to argue that sports reflect and reinforce the values of society, so peaceful societies will have peaceful sports, and violent ones violent. I want to argue that the philosophy of the culture is reflected in the art. This is easy for ancient greek sports, but harder for things like boxing, that i might want to draw a parallell to.

 

[shinkyoku]

What is this underlying philosophy you're looking for?

And I don't get why you're using TKD as the benchmark. What does TKD "obviously" have that every art has?

I think Ill second this.
Some arts has some philosophy teachings grafted onto it from the regional religions, but are they really underlying for the art itself??

What are those underlying philosophical concepts??

 

[SummerStriker]

I think Ill second this.
Some arts has some philosophy teachings grafted onto it from the regional religions, but are they really underlying for the art itself??

What are those underlying philosophical concepts??

Martial arts based around group classes are not like individual fighter coaching, where anything goes. "It is like riding a bus. Everyone is going the same way and you aren't the one driving."

So the philosophy is the rout the driver is taking, and all the drivers get their training through the same channel.

When I go to wrestling class, it is clear that the people teaching think the way to go is to be aggressive and strong, and that you can't be aggressive or strong enough.

When I go to my kick boxing teacher, he thinks being aggressive before you hurt someone is a sucker's game and that the way to go is to get the other person to be aggressive so you can tell what they are going to do, and then to bend around that and defend yourself, always countering, because that is the superior way to conduct yourself.

When I go to Kenpo class, there is a feeling that the only people you will fight will be untrained, so the instruction is hyper aggressive. People walk around like they bruise the air. They like to break bricks and boards, perform high impact kata, and self defense techniques. It is mostly hitting, and the defense is still hitting.

Most martial arts instructors excel at arts that click with their personality, or they become true believers, and extend the fighting strategy of their art into their personal lives, as a general way of acting.

Wrestlers are standup, forthright, strong aggressive manly dudes. Kick boxers I trained with are passive aggressive, analytic, haughty, and mean spirited. Kenpo people are arrogant, tough, and self righteous. Here I'm talking about the leaders of the groups and people that have been there for awhile.

If you ask someone what the philosophy of the art is, they will give you some platitudes about standing up for the weak or not being a pussy. If you stick with a group for a while though, there is always a current that encourages people in the group to live and act a certain way, and that current is reflected in the training method. They don't have to know this for it to be true.

 

[SummerStriker]

Another way to think of it:

Martial arts are an art, not just because it is hard to know the best way of going about it, but because it gives an outward expression of things you feel inside. When you watch people excel at an art and they are expressing themselves, you can wonder if the art conditioned them to feel certain things, or if they gravitated to a way of doing things that suited them. In either case, the kind of people they are is linked to the kind of class they make.

 

[nomilkforsanta]

To help spread your DNA by learning how to control your body and brain.

 

[panamaican]

Like Summer Striker says but slightly differently, I think every martial art has an underlying philosophy. But more than the martial art, every instructor has an underlying philosophy.

So, you could learn the same art from different instructors and get a different philosophy from each of them. Superficially, they might all parrot the same theme ("hit without being hit" - probably as close to a universal theme in all of martial arts as there is) but personal emphasis would yield very different philosophies.