2017, Volume 13, Issue 1

Mixed assessments as mental and pedagogic basis of innovative self-defence

Roman Maciej Kalina1, Bartłomiej Jan Barczyński1

1Department of Combat Sports, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sports, Poland

Author for correspondence: Roman Maciej Kalina; Department of Combat Sports, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sports, Poland; email: kom.kalina@op.pl

Full text


Background and Study Aim: The common perception of self-defence concerns motor actions in close contact with an assailant (with our without various tools, up to and including melee weapons, guns, etc.) Therefore, discussions and recommendations of experts focus on the efficiency of individual martial arts and combat sports. The aim of this paper is to argue for a widespread implementation in interpersonal relations some mixed assessments (”efficiency - ethical”) in any situation where any personal interests of a human being has come under threat due to violence or aggression of any entity (whether a person or a group), assuming that the person under attack has not provoked such acts.

Material and Methods: The statements in this paper are based on intuition, induction and deduction. The mixed assessments method refers both to efficiency (a set of praxeological assessments of proficiency) and a humanist system of “fair play” values. Such assessments concern actions at the micro level and only seemingly at the micro level.

Results: A pathological way of determining which martial arts or combat sports are more efficient are the fights of contemporary gladiators in MMA and similar formats. Man’s dignity is depreciated for the entertainment of the audience who crave for bloody combat. The reduction of ethics and aesthetics to the level of legalized barbarism does not fit into the definition of democracy, basic culture or justice. The crisis of the co-ordination of social actions, warned against as early as in 1925 by Alfred North Whitehead, is counterproductive to such an extent that most citizens of democratic countries have no means of self-defence not only against a terrorist attack (if they are ever in reach of one) but above all, against the every-day and long-standing intellectual violence, verbal aggression and institutional violence.

Conclusions: Reinforcing, especially by digital media, the concept that means of violence and aggression are the most efficient manner of reaching selfish goals by people or interest groups (at high impunity of the perpetrators) is the most prominent example that we live in the civilization of the interpretation of the law. Both individuals and large social groups are losing their sense of security and justice. This is dramatically intensified by the lack of widespread education to defence. A key element of such education is to monitor this state of affairs and to spread the methods of verbal defence. The permanent articulating of mixed assessments, with full awareness of how powerful media are, is a simple tool for transforming current relations between individuals and between them and institutions into a utopia of a just civilization.

Key words: aggressiveness, bravery, intellectual violence, martial arts bibliotherapy