>You might want to look up the following logical >fallacies: Hasty Generalization & >Unrepresentative Sample (for focusing on a U.S.->only sample),
Well, I purposefully only directed the scope of my article to the western world. In a sense it's an unrepresentative sample - but then so would an artice about heart disease in the western world. If the heart disease article purported to be just about the west, then snuck in data about the east, then there would be a logical flaw. Look, my article is about the west, and I never said it was about anything else. I'd love to go to Korea, but right now it's not in the cards. Why don't you come to the west and test your assertions about TKD, because my article is about the west?
>Slothful Induction (for ignoring evidence being >pointed out that contradicts your argument),
Well, I acknoledged your point that Hapkido might be different in Korea. I'm not so sure what other evidence you have presented that contradicts what I'm saying. Why don't you list it out in some bullet points for me?
>False Analogy (for comparing martial arts used >in competition to a self-defence scenario),
Well, If you look at the competitions I'm talking about (UFC pride, etc.), you'll see that there's a lot of actual contact going on. I'm not saying these contests are EXACTLY like a self defense situation that you might get into in a parking lot with a drunk. But I think you can see how they are similar in lots of ways. I think you are missing the point so I'll spell it out for you:
Lets contrast that with TKD and point sparring:
- They are making full power contact
- Pretty much any technique is allowed - very little restrictions to targets
- There really isn't any protective gear to speak of (okay, very light weight gloves).
>Fallacy of Exclusion (for willingly exluding >martial arts as it's taught in Asia, and for >omitting weapons self-defence in the original >argument),
- Lots of protective gear is worn.
- Full power not allowed.
- Certain strikes and targets no allowed (way, way more restrictive that in the UFC, etc.)
- Grappling, chokes, etc. , loint lockes, etc. no allowed.
Well, you got me there. I have no experience studing in Asia, so I didn't even try to write about it. I was too lazy to write about weapons.
Obviously, you like to write and know something about these areas. Why don't you write an article about them?
>Composition (because Taekwondo practitioners >practice high kicks, that's the martial art's >focus),
Well, it's certainly something TKD spends a lot of time doing, isn't it? I'd say that 80% of the strikes in TKD are kicks (that % is a direct quote from an olympic TKDer I heard on a NPR interview). From what I've seen and experianced of TKD the fast majority of these kicks are above the waist in practice sessions. In competition, they are all above the waist. Basically, TKD is doing 80% of it's strikes as kicks, and the majority of them are above the waist. So, yeah - I'd have to conclude that high kicks are a really big part of TKD. In fact, I'd bet if you came up to 10 random TKD students and said "what sets your art apart from all others" - the answer you'd get the most would be something about the high kicks.
>Undistributed Middle (for comparing Karate and >Taekwondo because they both have routines),
Well, there's more to the comparision than that. During WWII the Japanese stopped the practice of Korean martial arts, and encouraged the practice of Japanese ones. After the Japanese were gone, the Koreans didn't want to practice something Japanese - so they renamed what martial arts they were practicing. Tae Kwon Do IS Karate that has been modified a bit. The Koreans added to it a bit, and changed it a bit (the high kicks, for example) - but it's very, very similar.
In fact, in the USA - almost all TKD schools I have seen have a big "Karate" sign out front. Look at the forms! Download some Shotokan karate forms off the web, and take a look. Tell me there aren't lots of similarities!! It's not just the fact both do forms, it's that the forms are very similar.
The techniques are very similar - the punches, the stances, the blocks, etc. The kicks are very similar as well, but TKD obviously has more varied kicks.
>Limited Scope (your scenarios are much more >limited than "self defence" in general),
I guess. I'm lazy and didn't feel like writing something huge. I still feel the points I made stand.
>and Non Sequitor (because a form isn't useful by >itself in a fight, practicing the form is >detrimental for self-defence purposes).
Well, in the sense that forms practice takes away from practice that can be targeting self defense moves, yes it is. If an average student has time for 3 hours of classes a week and 3 hours practice on their own - and they practice forms for 1/3 of that time, then they have lost those 2 hours where self defense moves could be studied.
Also, it could be argued that the moves in the forms teach bad habits for self defense. In a very, very stressful situation people revert to what they have trained the most. Also, when startled as well. So if in a class 90% of the time a technique is done a certain way, and 10% of the time it is done the "self defense way", which way do you think will come out under stress?
>Go look those up, then respond, if you like. But >until you correct your errors in logic, there's >no point continuing this.
Well, I've tried my best. Why don't you make a serious effort to address my points above?
[ Parent ]