Kung fu is a generic term for Chinese martial arts. So the term include styles like Shaolin, Preying Mantis, Monkey style, Taichi, Hsing I, Pa Kua, Liuhebafa, Hung Gar, etc. Similarly, Karate, Judo and Aikido are styles within the Japanese martial arts.
For music, science, math and almost all other type of modern studies, you first develop a ‘Base vocabulary’ and when you get good at it, you then develop your own style which then makes it an art. Don’t you find it odd that you get into style BEFORE you even know your basics or understand fully what you are getting into? For some reason, a lot of people are willing to discard common sense when there is a mystical coating.
I created the martialgym program to open up the vocabulary, approach, explore different sequencing of training and use science and an exploratory mindset as the base. While I have ties, respect and preferences towards my ‘home style’ LHBF, I don’t feel bound by how I was taught or by any specific disciplines I was exposed to during my journey.
Yes, taking an open-ended approach does create complexities, as an example, material can be different based on who I am teaching. However, for the participants, the advantage is huge, if they are motivated, sky is the limit. In a lot of ways, my ‘non-style-bound’ approach is very similar to the change from a ‘Product oriented’ approach back in the 60-70s to a more successful ‘Customer oriented’ approach of modern corporations.
Exercise:
– quote other things (just a couple will do) that we do in our classes where our non-traditional approach feels right to you. Give examples of how the selected principle/approach has demonstrated successes as applied in other fields.
– if the above is too difficult for you, give me other examples where learning style first does not work well.
Comments are closed.