I don't know how should I take your responding to aly even up to attributing my quotes to him?
By EMA and WMA I'm going to assume you mean eastern and western martial arts. If that is not the case please
hongi wrote:Also, why call EMA martial arts at all if it's a Western term being applied to Eastern concepts?
Because our dialog is in english? If we had used my local language we'd be discussing "fighting sports"
hongi wrote:1 What do you know of EMA?
2 I'm not trying to be offensive.
3 Have you ever seen someone fight in praying mantis style?
4 Ever met a practitioner?
5 If not, how do you know it's mystical?
6 What do you know about it other than the fact that it imitates the style of an animal?
7 I think the most important question should be whether it works or not. If it works, then it doesn't matter how
ridiculous it looks or where it gets its inspiration from.
Lets see here...
1 Lots. But I'd like to know more.
2 You are trying to be belittling, whether we find that offensive or ironic is another matter.
4 Yes, plenty. We have a local shaolin temple, I've met them and others both in social events and when they have
been demonstrating and teaching.
5 It has mystical components, especially wushu. There is very little competition, testing or double blind studies... Still it makes lots of claims.
6 What do you want to know?
7 Mantis only "works" when comparing to lesser training. When comparing to similar level of training in other
schools it is not a top contender. You are missing something key which most miss when it comes to evolutionary forces.
You only have to be competitive enough to spread. Then if it gets lots of practitioners it survives on that alone. If "works" and effectiveness truly was something key to martial arts we would see lots of them dissapear when faced with each other - they don't instead they seem to multiply. So "works" is not a key factor. If we did have real death matches that would change but thankfully we do not.
Also read up on what happened when Gong fu tried to prove themselves first in muay thai, then in K1, etc. Versus competitions is not in Gong fu favor.
However because of their mysticism and rituals they attract a huge crowd through that alone. Also the slow part of Tai ji attracts a completely different crowd than other martial arts.
Personnally for instance I would not select a martial art based on its effectiveness, that doesnt even make the top ten. Availability, fun, nice people, nice dojo, etc would come long before if it "works" or not. 剣道 is fun for instance, it is ridicolously outmatched by competitive fencing and you can't carry a bokken on a night out.
hongi wrote:Whereas in the West, people either stopped being Christians or the whole Christiandom thing went away.
Again incorrect data. Yuros are just as superstitious as the rest of humanity. Just because the flavor of religion have changed doesn't mean that its gone. You mentined new age, etc. Ironically asian/indian superstition is gaining in yuro.
hongi wrote:If they don't talk about how the Buddha guides your fist to the opponent's face, then I don't think you're justified in calling it mystical.
??? It is sufficient that they mention supernatural ki. Like shroom did.
hongi wrote:I didn't say that it has never been a part of Western culture.
No, you falsely claimed that "The only reason that Western martial artists bow on their knees or from their waist is because that manner of showing respect was imported from the East. This is why I consider it art."
Something which is much worse beacuase of its implications. Care to retract?
hongi wrote:As it is, I only bow when I meet other Koreans who are strangers. In fact, some people seem to get offended if they're expected to bow in places like Japan or Korea.
This has nothing to do with martial arts, where the tradition has remained. As well as theatre, ballroom dancing etc. You are again trying to dodge a false claim.
Alyrium Denryle wrote:that you learn a standardized set of techniques to kill or injure people using your body or an extension thereof
isn't injury a bit harsh? Wrestling or aikido is aiming for submission or points.
Alyrium Denryle wrote:As drainable bodily fluids. Thus not mystic. Just wrong.
Humors did have mysticism in it, a key point being that it only affected sinners or sin.
hongi wrote:Chinese philosophers and doctors wrote rather a lot on medicine. Chinese doctors thought of qi in the same way as Western/Muslim doctors thought of humors. Namely that is it exists and that there are ways to manipulate it physically.
The point is that EMA still use it. Plus humors was not incorporated into how one would fight. So comparing the two in this specific context is flawed.
hongi wrote:No one wants to train in a martial art that's a couple of decades old and was copied pretty much from somewhere else.
MMA, Israeli Krav Maga, fillippo modern Arnis, etc, how many more do you need? That you even wrote that sentence is a clear indication on how strong traditionalism is where you train.
hongi wrote:but it doesn't make you a big man to beat up on the EMA.
Who is beating up on EMA?
hongi wrote:And you know this because you're a l33t martial artist. I mean come on. I would never say such a thing about a martial art that I've seen a bit of.
Uhm, you did a very similar thing in more than one post showing clearly that you think that EMA influenced WMA, but miss how much they have gone back and forth, plus india and americas etc.
And if this is about mantis then you are way out of line, in that case style is more than substance, see my earlier ref.
It never could have been a top contender because its theme limits its execution. Moves that does not fit the theme were not included, so you'd have to train several of the 'styles' to get a better arsenal.
@Thanas re pope etc
Your examples are all large scale which are influenced by politics. Instead they clearly show that tech was used even when prohibited by the religion of choice. A very practical approach. A similar approach that the emperor of japan used vs the samurai class.