Knowledge vs. Experience, Higher vs. Lower Level, Etc.

[Antonius]

This thread was split from the "Strategy and Tactics for Combat" thread, which can be found here:

http://www.wongkiewkit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4663

I'd like to mention that the words "high level " and "low level" (chosen by me in the title) are not meant as insults, but rather to give perspective to the topic at hand.

I'd also like to mention that the original thread was closed to enable forum administrators to tidy up the thread by splitting it into different threads, which I have now done. This should enable forum visitors to more easily follow and enjoy the discussion.

One more thing. Moderating is not easy. It took me over 30 minutes just to split this thread because I had to read through each post and decide on its relevance. Often, while Andrew and I are simultaneously engaged in lively discussions (in addition to the lives we actually lead outside of this forum), the complex moderation duties, like splitting threads, get temporarily set aside.

I closed the thread because moderation was already long overdue, and because I knew that I had a busy weekend ahead and would not have time. If that caused some disruption to the flow of things, then I apologize. But quite frankly, I feel that a 2-day pause is nothing. If anyone feels that a 2-day pause is too long, then they should probably take a step back from the forum anyway.

Also, in response to the claims that Andrew and I coordinated an unfair closing of the original thread -- please. Folks, I am a busy man, and I don't even have two children, like Andrew. That is all the explanation you need. Had Andrew and I coordinated, had there been some sort of a conspiracy, we would have done a much better job of it all.

I hope that this discussion can now proceed productively.

[Sifu Stier]

Given the fact that the term "low level' has repeatedly been used in several threads on this forum specifically in reference to the esteemed opinion of Shaolin Wahnam Sifus regarding my alleged skill level and experience, it is difficult to believe that it is now used merely as a generic term. Shall I post a list of all the times that this term was used in reference to me?

At the very least, it is therefore inappropriate for the title of this thread now, since anyone who has followed these topics will likely assume that I am still targeted by its use here, whether my name is posted again in its use or not. Keep digging, brother! You've nearly hit rock bottom now.

Sifu Stier

[Antonius]

Dear Sifu Stier,

If I were comparing Shaolinquan to Goju-Ryu Karate (which I have a black belt in), I would use the term "low level" to talk about Goju-Ryu, and "high level" to talk about Shaolinquan. That is my opinon. It is my sincere believe that, when compared to elite arts like Shaolinquan, Taijiquan, Baguazhang, and Xingyiquan, arts like Goju-Ryu Karate are low level. Of course, I also understand that many people, including some of my former teachers, will object to this statement. Nevertheless, I choose to speak my honest opinions.

I am not calling the art of Shen Men Tao low level. It is an art comprised of arts that I myself consider to be of the highest level. Nevertheless, your explanation of certain principles and techniques strike me (and others) as being of a relatively lower level that what Sifu Wong teaches. We might be wrong, but that's how they appear in words.

For example, if someone comes on our forum saying that external force is superior to internal force, we would be honest and call that a lower level. Of course, the techniques and principles you discuss are of a much, much higher level than that. It's all relative.

Compared to many arts (like Goju-Ryu), the techniques and principles you discuss are high level. But compared to what we've learned, they appear to be of a lower level. Of course, you are welcome to disagree, and to clarify any misconceptions or misunderstandings we might have about your techniques and principles. In fact, I hope that you will do exactly that.

In the end, the goal of all this is to help people to better differentiate between higher and lower level techniques and principles. We may never agree on what is higher or lower level, or we may agree on some things, but not others. All this is fine. It is the process of discussing the topic that is valuable for readers. We all obiviously have a passion for our chosen art. But I think that readers can greatly benefit from reading a discussion among people who are passionate about different arts, even if they disagree.

Best,

[Sifu Stier]

Why do you even bother to post such totally predictable and completely meaningless apologetics? Like I don't understand what your agenda priorities are in regards to me by now? Please...give me a break here!

Time to stop digging, brother! You've already hit rock bottom from my point of view!

Sifu Stier

[Andy]

Why do you even bother to post such totally predictable and completely meaningless apologetics? Like I don't understand what your agenda priorities are in regards to me by now? Please...give me a break here!

Time to stop digging, brother! You've already hit rock bottom from my point of view!

Sifu Stier

It's probably not wanted but I feel I need to add my tuppence to all this:

Of the two above posts, taking them in isolation, I find that Anthony's post is nothing more than a statement of facts, without agenda or guile.

Sifu Stier's response which I have quoted appears completely irrational to me.

Let me point out - I am a Shaolin Wahnam student, but a complete beginner and studying Cosmos Chi Kung. I have had the extreme luck to attend an Intensive Course with Sifu, but due to circumstances I have presently no contact with other Shaolin Wahnam students or instructors other than through this forum, so I do not feel I am 'taking sides'. Merely reflecting on personal experience vs Shaolin Wahnam philosophy and skills;

Simply, Anthony's post sums up my feelings (through what I have seen and reading/talking about Shaolin Kung Fu) in regards to other arts. I have trained in things like TKD and met i.e. 7th Dan Masters of various martial arts, but they all pale in comparison to Sifu's complete Shaolin philosophy. The terminology 'low level' and 'high level' are a natural conventional way to differentiate a lot of martial arts techniques out there compared to many of Sifu's teachings. These terms are not loaded in any way, although if I was a master of another art I may see it differently! It is just perspective.

However, regarding perspective - if Anthony's response vexed you Sifu Stier, then I suggest you take a step back because there is clearly nothing untoward contained therein. I enjoy reading your posts Sifu Stier and you are clearly knowledgeable, but for me your response in this case seems paranoid.

I think we sometimes forget that the internet is an artificial device and the communication engendered is not "real" socialising (the ~80 % component of body language is missing and many of the consequent checks and controls on behaviour are not there; witness the childishness of public internet communiques everywhere). Perhaps rather than getting so het up we should take a cup of tea, relax, then chat on the phone or arrange to meet up for dinner one day or something

Best Wishes to All,

Andy

PS I think that the high standard of this forum compared to others on the internet is a credit to Shaolin Wahnam. I would ask those recently critical of the forum to ask why this high standard exists.

[Charles David]

Sifu Stier wrote:

Why do you even bother to post such totally predictable and completely meaningless apologetics?

Perhaps you mean to say "why do you bother writing when you know that I'm not going to bother reading what you write?"

Anthony clearly addressed his reason for writing in the very post you were responding to:

the goal of all this is to help people to better differentiate between higher and lower level techniques and principles.

The answer is that there are many other people reading who will benefit even though you may not.

As far as meaning goes, Sifu Korahais' post was full of meaning. Most importantly to my mind is this:

your explanation of certain principles and techniques strike me (and others) as being of a relatively lower level that what Sifu Wong teaches.

Perhaps you could explain why you consider this quote meaningless. I see it as being quite meaningful.

You've already hit rock bottom from my point of view!

As has been said before, our perspectives differ. I would be more inclined to say that Anthony is "getting to the bottom of things", or working on a solid foundation for mutual understanding.



With A Taoist Grin,

cha,

[chris3212]

To add my thoughts...

In the end, the goal of all this is to help people to better differentiate between higher and lower level techniques and principles.

This has been in my mind since the beginning of this thread. I didnt think the Shaolin Wahnam students and Sifu's were calling Sifu Stiers techniques low level to anger him, but to show other readers (this was meant to be a thread for everyone) what Shaolin Wahnam considers low level compared to what they teach.

Best wishes,

Chris

[Kevin]

This topic of the difference between knowledge and experience brought something to mind that GrandMaster Wong stated once. I can't remember if I read it somewhere on the Wahnam website, or if it was from one of GrandMaster Wong's replies to an e-mail I sent him many years ago.

He stated that Mastery is a Path of Deepening, not Widening.

Priceless advice.

My best to all,

Kevin

[priya]

Simple

That post helped me immensely again - thanks!

So simple, direct and EFFECTIVE. That's the best part - not only knowing but experiencing that
Effective- ness.

Just a word of thanks and appreciation.

Priya