Originally Posted by
JLQ
But I know I can trust AndrewS's insight, at least, more so than others...
- Sure - your loss... ;D
This is because of familiarity...I am more familiar with AndrewS's understanding of anatomy and physiology. This is not meant as an insult to you or whoever else may have such an understanding, but theirs remains to be seen.
haha... nicely put
Let me rephrase my question, if a person only had 1 month of experience with wing chun and then told you that the wooden dummy, the pole, etc. is utter waste of time. What would you say that opinion is based on and how would your think of a validation based on a statement such as "well in my experienc" or "I believe"? (Bear in mind that the person only has had minimal exposure to the system).
Are you suggesting that I or Gert have only one month of experience?
If not, I don't see the relevance in your analogy.
I think voicing an opinion, good or bad, is perfectly alright - if it is supported by solid arguments. In that particular post of Gert, he did just that and I appreciate it - however I was - once again - pointing out that one should be a little more modest in ones way of critiquing thinks. Especially when one has no experience with it... Gert said in another post that he wouldn't want to trainin with weighted rings like Yip Man suppesedly did on the picture I mentioned. That position I can respect, although I don't agree with the reasons Gert provided, as he stated his opinion without any derogatory or condescending air...
His statements were no more derogatory or condescending than your response. As I interpet it, they were observations regarding WC as Gert knows it (however long or well he has trained), not how you know it.
So the question is, what puts you in the position to judge wheather or not someone else's WC is...shall we say, correct?
And how do you juge or test this?
Using terms like 'proper' and 'authentic' (if you knew this was a bad term, why did you use it?), leads me to think you are the one who comes across as arrogant.
- that was why I put the comment in about not knowing better words...
That's because there are no other words...unless you're looking for a colorful euphamism to disguise it. Your statement speaks for itself. Saying that a person like me can't use my experience and reasoning to deduce that the rings aren't that practical and can't know the 'truth' about them unless I actually train them is like saying that I can't judge that crack or heroin is bad for me unless I try it myself.
They are both true, I can't know for sure.
I don't do crack or heroin, never have, this is because I have a sneaking hunch that it's bad for me and could destroy my life...does that mean if I tried it, it would destroy my life...it's a matter of percentages right?
I believe the same of the rings, they may improve certain attributes involved in WC, but other exercises and more desirable training tools (the dummy) are better and I will devote my time to those.
Here's what I'm seeing, you are suggesting we (who oppose ring use) are arrogant because you think we don't understand and refute it in ignorance.
Vs.
I (since I can't speak for others opposed to ring use) believe you appear ignorant because you seem to deny us our intelligence (IOW, you think we don't know what we are talking about).
So, no good-guys/bad-guys here, just serious differences in opinion I guess...
Last edited by AmanuJRY; 06-07-2006 at 04:59 PM.
Sapere aude, Justin.
The map is not the Terrain.
"Wheather you believe you can, or you believe you can't...You're right." - Henry Ford