Although
the term martial
art has
become associated with the fighting arts of eastern
Asia,
it originally referred to the combat systems of Europe as
early as the 1550s. The term is derived from Latin,
and means "arts of Mars",
the Roman god
of war.[1] Some
authors have argued that fighting
arts or fighting
systems would
be more appropriate on the basis that many martial arts were never
"martial" in the sense of being used or created by
professional warriors.[2]"
Are
these correct definitions of martial arts? Well, yes and no.
Nowadays,
martial arts has been watered down so much that alot of times there
is no real self-defense. For example, aikido is by far the worst
martial art for self defense so I don't see how it is a martial art
going based on the fact that martial arts originated for self-defense
or attack. While I could go on and on about various martial
arts that have become more interpreted dances rather than fighting
systems, we are seeing a great split of the martial arts today. If
you look at the wikipedia article, it states that some authors argued
that fighting arts or fighting systems would be more appropriate on
the basis that many martial arts were never "martial" in
the sense of being used or created by professional warriors.
If
that's true then....why not call it dancing?
No
way man! My aikido is not dancing!
But
you just said that those martial arts were never martial.....
This
is the main problem. People don't want to admit that they don't have
fighting skill. Punching the air, kicking imaginary people, fighting
with very very limited rules does not make you a fighter nor a
martial artist. Yes, discipline and medidation are very important for
growth and development. However, you are not a martial artist if you
can't fight.
Have
a great day,
Martial
Arts Tutor
No comments:
Post a Comment