The metaphor of fascia

[Wuming]

Interloper,
Yes, I remember Justin. Justin and Buck seem to fixate at looking for "scientific studies" to verify what we're discussing. Both of them come out of that "skeptical" community. The skeptical community is good at defending the status quo, and of looking to _existing research_. In a way it's similar to the argumentation you see from Erik Mead, where he goes on and on about rules of evidence and so on. Mead is trying to apply the type of debating rules you see in the courtroom to the discussion.

The problem is this-- both the "skeptics" and Erik are using heuristic rules, i.e. rules of thumb to analyze the situation. In the case of "skeptics" community, it certainly has done good work debunking some of the ridiculous claims of ESP, spoon bending and so on. However, most of their rules for judging evidence are things like "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" and "show me a scientific study." All of those work fine in most cases-- except in cases where there is something that genuinely is beyond the current status quo understanding. When faced with that, the "skeptical" community falls flat on its face, which is what we have seen in the discussion of genuine internal martial arts. This is because, the things that are trained by genuine internal arts are not clearly understood by the current status quo of sports science/anatomy. IF they were clearly understood, then one would be able to train to develop the unique skills in any relatively mainstream gym. Obviously that is not the case.

In the case of Erik, you see someone desperately trying to apply the courtroom rules of evidence to the research of internal martial arts training in aikido. What Erik fails to understand is that the courtroom rules are really again, rules of thumb. The rules of evidence work to allow non-experts (judges and juries) to pass judgment on whether a particular piece of information is credible. In the main, that comes down to determining the status quo opinion in a particular field. It has very little to do with conducting actual experiments. Like the "skeptical" rules, Erik's preferred analytical method falls apart when confronted with something that is outside the realm of status quo opinion. The use of rhetorical skills is not the same as bench science. None of Erik's narratives can really be falsified-- in fact, he steadfastly avoids anything that could falsify his contentions. One example of how we could conduct a test of whether the fascia that covers the muscles is really moving under the skin: we could take someone who claims to be able to feel stuff move under the skin, and put needles into the subcutaneous layer. Then if the subject can actually move the needles, that would show that it is moving.

But, of course someone like Buck can always claim that "science doesn't support IMA, I don't see any studies." That's the worship of-science-as-source-of-authority, vice using-science-as-process-for-determining-truth. Now, if a person is using the former definition of science, then naturally there will be a firm rejection of any IMA training. On the other hand, those who embrace using science-as-a-process-for-determining-truth can go and look at genuine IMA training with an understanding that they are wandering off the map. While they are wandering, they can still embrace tools like falsification and quantitative testing. From the perspective of science as a process, then IMA are pretty exciting since it's an opportunity to advance the frontiers of human knowledge. There does seem to be a reluctance by some people to engage in IMA training without the sanction of a "higher authority." This is something of a derail (and I hope Tom will fork the thread if others want to take it in this direction), but this reluctance is indicative of a key characteristic of western technocratic society. The characteristic is that ordinary citizens are expected to bow down before a technocratic elite who tells them what they can believe. In this sense, (perhaps this is the influence of the early PR gurus like Edward Bernays) the technocratic elite replaces the priesthood. Average people in this scheme are the consumers of knowledge and not the producers of it, except when directed by a the technocratic elite. It's sad to see people who don't understand that they can participate in the self-directed production of knowledge. The only thing holding them back is their own crippled perspective. I think it's hilarious and a little pathetic to see people who are so in love with "empirical" methods fail to actually try and see what is happening beyond the computer screen.

There is also the argument that knowing which physiological systems involved won't help improve people's skills. I am not sure I buy that argument. This is because I have a difficult time seeing how IMA is somehow special and not susceptible to the same type of scientific inquiry that yielded higher performance in physical activities such as gymnastics, hockey and track and field.

Just to be clear: I understand that there is a school of thought that the use of specific, lineage-tested skillful means will allow someone to reach perfect understanding of the fundamental nature of existence. I disagree. There is a value in trying to be as objective as possible and find out what is happening. At the same time, people are inherently fallible and will never be able to reach a perfect understanding. Thus, I will settle for asymptotically approaching perfection, which is still infinitely far from it.

[Void]

Zhang Yun, Wang Pei Sheng's student, wrote some nice things in the taijiquan section of his book. One thing that springs to mind with this thread is this:

'You should expect that longer and harder practice will not always translate into more rapid progress. Sometimes intense practice may even lead you further astray. Once you have gained a deeper meaning into the true meaning of the taiji principle, your practice cannot go wrong, but before you have achieved such knowledge, it is quite easy to make mistakes that can become hardened into habits by repeated incorrect practice.'

I find that to be very true.

Its very important to be clear about what you are training for. Its all to easy to move away from some potentials without even knowing it. The best way to be clear about some things is to have felt them.

[Interloper]

Wuming,
I wonder if it's really that they're "in love with 'empirical' methods" or whether it's more that they have such an adherance to their own experiences -- with all of the investment of time, sweat, tears and money -- that anything that would shake the foundation of their own dearly-held beliefs would lead to total collapse of the foundation that holds them up. Particularly in Erick's case, it seems almost pathological the way he clings to everything and anything BUT listening to what others are saying. He goes so far as to deny the reports of actual empirical data by others who corroborate the same idea, yet he cannot come up with his own empirical data that would support his own convoluted "theories."

And foremost, he will not actually go and experience anything firsthand for himself, though he has been generously offered that opportunity time and again. To me, this is the behavior of someone who is so fearful of his own "religion" being shown to be in error, that he will fight (verbally) tooth-and-claw to defend it, even in the face of overweening evidence to the contrary.

In my observations, this is not unusual in arts such as Aikido (as it largely exists today). What I find admirable and amazing is the number of sincere Aikido people -- many of them high-ranking -- who are looking outside their system's constraints and restraints, and seeking to take back their birthright of internal body method. But there will always be people who simply don't have that kind of strength and courage, nor the foresight.

[Interloper]

It's easy to make karate, or any other external form of athletics, sound like it utilizes IP. IME, these always seem to turn out to be superficial comparisons.

The concept of pushing a car doesn't mesh with the process of internal structure and power. The former is utilizing frame-bracing, with the discs between the vertebrae acting as shock absorbers doing the compressing, along with the joints -- a passive process. The latter is an active manipulation of frame and internal connective tissues to redirect force down to the ground and back up, while maintaining center/structural integrity.

If you are truly rooted, not braced, you will maintain structural integrity even if the object you are touching is removed. But take away that car, suddenly, from the bracing pushers, and they will fall flat on their faces.

[Interloper]

an active manipulation of frame and internal connective tissues to redirect force down to the ground and back up, while maintaining center/structural integrity.

Can you do that, Interloper?

I can, and truth is I am nothing special and am in no way one of those advanced phenoms. The above is Square One and the foundational base in the "developing of internal body skills.

Pushing a car is another matter altogether, though. I've always managed to get some nice, big guy to do that for me. Or "Triple A."

[Interloper]

I know. I just wanted to point to someone who's trained a little in these methods (not car-pushing ) and seen results.

That's what I figured. I didn't think you were calling me out.

[Void]

Goju ryu has some good stuff in it. Morio Higaonna is an amazing martial artist.

[Interloper]

Goju has roots in China and Chinese IMA, of course. As does Uechi-ryu. However, both Goju-ryu and Uechi-ryu have suffered the same fate as some JMA that have largely lost the knowledge and understanding of what was once a powerful underlying body skill. Those relatively few individuals who still have "it" stand out all the more against the backdrop of practitioners and schools that no longer possess the internal component of the art.

[C.J.Wang]

Goju ryu has some good stuff in it. Morio Higaonna is an amazing martial artist.

I agree (on both counts).

Internal connection/strength and the ability to use it in fighting is by no means limited to the Chinese "internal" martial arts. Ushiro Kenji is another karateka who demonstrates internal elements in his teaching and training.

I am not disagreeing with the fact that Higaonna and Kenji have tapped into internal strength. However, their applications -- at least the ones that they've demonstrated in public -- are still limited to the 1-2 punch/block techniques typical of Karate.

For those who are interested in what Goju once looked like, seek out high-level practitioners of Fukien White Crane, especially the Whooping Crane system from which Goju originated.

[Bodywork]

I think people who train in the Internal arts are pedestrian and seemingly everywhere.
People who actually have internal skills are not that common.
People who actually have internal skills and can use them effectively in their own traditonal arts are not that common.
People who have internal skills and have experience and skill in fighting with them in non-traditional, MMA style combatives...are rare, perhaps exceedingly so.

It is for all of the above reasons that the topic remains so hotly debated....on the net. Personally, I have yet to see the concept of "internal power" successfully debated in person.
I wouldn't trouble myself with trolls. There are more than one on that thread and some "troll" in rather unconventional -even unnoticed- fashion but are trolls none-the-less, of a different type.
Good luck in your training.

[Walk the Torque]

The above is Square One and the foundational base in the "developing of internal body skills.

On this, we spent years 'testing postures'; with a partner pushing against various parts of our bodies to check on alignments, quality of power, stability, sprials etc etc. One of the best things I learnt from this was to have my testing partner suddenly pull his/her hands away (at the begining, middle or last part of the push) and see if I was falling forward. It really is one of the fastest ways to refine alignments. Err thats all

Conn

[Bhassler]

I think people who train in the Internal arts are pedestrian and seemingly everywhere.
People who actually have internal skills are not that common.
People who actually have internal skills and can use them effectively in their own traditonal arts are not that common.
People who have internal skills and have experience and skill in fighting with them in non-traditional, MMA style combatives...are rare, perhaps exceedingly so.

It is for all of the above reasons that the topic remains so hotly debated....on the net. Personally, I have yet to see the concept of "internal power" successfully debated in person.
I wouldn't trouble myself with trolls. There are more than one on that thread and some "troll" in rather unconventional -even unnoticed- fashion but are trolls none-the-less, of a different type.
Good luck in your training.

Hi Dan,

Surely there must be some little trick that people can do or some sort of concrete description of observable physical phenomena that an ordinary person could see or do that would distinguish between internal skill and... anything else.

Without it the whole thing just boils down to the implication that the reader probably does not have any internal skills of note and then further goes on to say that it has to be felt, and in order to do so one must seek out someone who has this mysterious "IT" that can only be alluded to but not effectively explained. How one is meant to find these individuals-- outside of a select few given by name, and often associated with the recommending party-- is also left a bit of a mystery, given that they are supposedly quite rare and the quality one seeks is also indescribable.

I certainly don't mean to argue the existence of IS or imply that you specifically are engaged in any sort of deception, I'm just trying to drive to something concrete that anyone can experience for themselves and that can be used as a launch point for meaningful discussion. As it is, we're discussing concepts and terms for which we don't have a common definition beyond "that which is undefineable."

[GrahamB]

Anyone interested in this thread should definitely check out the book "Turning Silk:" http://taiji.org/
While I could do without the hippy narrative of birds and bees getting it on, it's chock full of pointers concerning the physical connections being discussed in this thread, and for people that have their foot in the door conditioning-wise, she provides enough guidance to possibly get people to realize some things that might take longer otherwise.

Thanks for that link - really loved the extracts on that page. Plus anybody who lives in Tuscany is ok by me!

[BruceP]

Cerebral interference indicates right-weightedness
Physical interference indicates left-weightedness.

The reverse may also be true depending on the individual.

Learning to discern the slightest interference in the neutral frequency is one approach to glimpsing 'that which is undefinable' Locking on to the neutral frequency may be - in the beginning - more a matter of swerving from one side of the road to the other between right and left weightedness.

Standing, stationary ball and other symetry drills can be used in developing an educated 'ear' for the neutral frequency which is actually a harmonic attenuation of right and left weightedness.

Most folks have a tendancy toward one side over the other so it may be a matter of getting the mind in the right trim and rudder.
Once the harmonic is discovered, coming back to it may get easier if practiced on a regular basis.

Relax, discard self, and tension falls away. Intent can't spoil the party if self isn't there to egg him on.

We're talkin metaphors, right?

[somatai]

nice one shooter!

i see internal skill as ones degree of personal coherence/integration and an ability to relate to what is actually happening, this can only be done by organizing the physical body in accord with design and putting it under the domion of clear perception...yeah a lot of words i know, but there are very discernable physical signposts and skills one can verify to move in this direction.