johnwang wrote:Trick wrote:together with an touch of ShuaiJiao promotion
I try to promote science (格物), not metaphysics (玄學).
People believe in "object -> parts" approach such as: Taiji -> Yin/Yang -> 4 corners -> Bagua. But they can't prove it. This is metaphysics (玄學) - "internal".
By using the "parts -> object" approach, we all know that atom contains protons, neutrons, and electrons. It can be proved. This is science (格物) - external.
In the past 300 years, if Chinese didn't spent all their effort to dig into metaphysics (玄學) and ignored science (格物), China won't be almost divided by foreign power. By using the metaphysics (玄學) approach, the "internal" MA was created.
You have pointed out a duality in approaches, but I think that they go together. It has been shown that children learning to tie shoelaces learn quicker if they are shown the end bow (the whole object) in conjunction with the step by step instructions (the parts), rather than just trying to get them to follow the step by step instructions without them understanding the completed whole. I suspect that this would hold true for other activities, including martial arts instruction. Plus your science analogy is flawed in that atoms were discovered prior to the components (protons, neutrons, and electrons), which would be more the way that you describe for the “metaphysics” or “internal” way than what you describe as the “science” or “external” approach.
To sum up your points in this thread (correct me if I am wrong):
You think that SJ already contains “internal” principles, so the thread topic “Is ‘internal’ real that important?” is not really the correct question. You view the “internal” principles included in SJ as sufficient, and other “internal” principles that are not included in your SJ practice (and “internal” principles that you do not agree with BECAUSE they are not incorporated into your version of SJ?) are not important to you. So, the question you are asking is more about those “internal” principles that you do not use in your practice, and you are asking if they are important for other IMA practitioners and their styles?
Bowman, P. 2019 wrote: All martial arts and approaches to fighting are the manifestation of a kind of theory, or philosophy, or ideology, or fantasy. The moves, the training, the sparring, they all imply either a conscious or an unconscious ‘¬theory’ or ‘philosophy’ of all sorts of things: What violence is, what combat is, what works best, how bodies work and interact, what teaching and learning should be like, what society is like, what the place of the individual is within society, and so on. All martial arts, from the most supposedly ancient to the most avowedly modern, are based on tacit, implicit or explicit premises, hypotheses, arguments, theories, fantasies or philosophies about the world, society, and our place and responsibilities within it.
I know that you do not like to get too philosophical or theoretical, but to answer your concerns we would probably have to. Earlier I tried to point out the problem of trying to define a dividing line between two (or more) approaches to fighting (especially when many may view the options on a continuum). What matters to you differs from what matters to others. Other people view the differences differently than you do and have different opinions as to what is important and what “should” be incorporated into IMA. It partly depends on personal beliefs and experiences, and every individual is different psychologically and socially. For example, you have mentioned the idea of protecting loved ones from potential attacks, and having finishing moves, etc. I do not know how many times protecting loved ones has occurred in your lifetime, but I personally have needed to use my IMA training to defend myself from someone who tried to physically harm me only one time in over 40 years! Training as frequently and consistently as I have does not really make sense if protection from physical attacks is this unlikely in my life. For me, there must be other reasons for training. Therefore I emphasize other things than you do – I emphasize things like balance and self control rather than finishing moves and defeating others. For me personally, IMA training is challenging and interesting and fun, even if I only use sparring as a way to obtain feedback on my understanding of the art rather than to defeat someone else...