inexperienced authentic knowledge vs experienced scholarly knowledge

So here is the situation... one charter is less experienced in warfare.. let's call him Jason. He has first hand knowledge of how an entire tribal sub-culture fights, as he was raised in such a place.

Then we have an experienced soldier who was not raised as such, but is trained in techniques based off the art forms of their martial arts and melee combat traditions.

Who should win realistically? the experienced guy that has more knowledge on the subject, or the guy that has less knowledge but he himself grew up and was raised in such a culture were he sparred authentically with the techniques.

In particular in the sparring match I am at this point(note that the blades are really dulled on purpose for safety):

Should Lee's grasp [on the machete] falter, or stay and strike Jason again to win the match?

Though the more general question is, authentic first hand experience over scholarly knowledge and second hand application with more battles under their belt?

It would be as if an experienced US troop who learned to apply a certain martial arts sparred with an average skilled expert in that said martial arts but who also had less over all experience.

Who would win, in general, in your mind with the title's set up?

edited 2nd Nov '11 7:55:44 AM by jasonwill2

Either win is fairly feasible.

I say it all comes down to how much the person has been exposed to the practice, and how comfortable that person is with it.

Also, a lot of other factors unrelated to experience come into play, such as health, and the terrain, and what they have on hand, which shakes it up even farther.

edited 1st Nov '11 11:59:16 PM by annebeeche

well in general really is what I was asking. in this case they are on a flat abandoned basket ball court in a city, and are in a ring for training.

Jason had more authentic exposure to it growing up but Lee has applied his scholarly and second hand knowledge of it more in the actual battlefield than Jason has.

I think it would determine more if it was the case that I viewed such outsider applications as corrupting it/ that the pure traditions are superior to adaptations of it. but that is slightly thrown out the window when before the sparing Lee talks about how the blade is the basis of war and how it goes from there how to strike from the farthest away (implying a strive to develop new ways to wage war and allow for guns to be intertwined with the traditions).

edit: also Jason's attitude in his inner dialog of the victory being easy would make his victory come off as a Mary Sue as well >.>

edited 2nd Nov '11 12:07:04 AM by jasonwill2

There's too many variables to consider here. A scholarly approach might win, because it's great for understanding the system and ensuring logical improvisation. On the other hand, a practical experience can transmit theory in less specific terms as well.

I'd say it might come down to composure. The one who can keep a clearer mind and fight more critically will probably win.

so an inexpereinced real deal vs. an experienced buff on any said martial arts can go either way? none of you have a bias for any direction?

as well, i made it a tie where Lee said to stop, becuase he wasn't going to lose the grip and it would devolve into Lee punching Jason in the head and Jason elbowing him in the head, and neither would win without head injury more or less lol

so I made it a tie!

edited 3rd Nov '11 4:36:13 AM by jasonwill2

The thing is, I'm not exactly sure what this means. Both seem to have a theoretical knowledge of what they're doing and both appear to be experienced in different ways. They're similar, but their similarities arise from different circumstances.

for one, the first person has a pure view of what the teachings mean in the way of life.

the second has an outsider view of it, and might misunderstand it's true meaning.

that's the difference, just look at how some anthropologists misinterpret Native American culture

many forms of combat are more than just fighting, they represent an important aspect of an entire people

Be that as it may, fighting is a psychological and mechanical process. If you can do it, you can do it. Whether or not you follow the philosophy is largely immaterial.

true, but the subtext needs to imply some view on the outsiders using it... since near the end of the book a match to the death for honor over a critical world (Mars, earth is there too but its over Mars) changing decision comes into play... the match is part of the tribal culture (honor duels are common but ones to the death are extremely rare).

so what about the subtext involved in this kind of clash? will not the winner make a difference in the same way that Han shot first made a difference?

edited 3rd Nov '11 5:02:04 AM by jasonwill2

Here's my take on it: The inexperienced native can win if and only if he can strike the decisive blow quickly, while the more experienced fighter is still trying to figure out the details of the technique. If the fight gets drawn out too long, the more experienced combatant will win because he knows all of the dirty tricks that are used outside "educated" technique and will have figured out which ones to use against the other's moves.

It's like the saying goes: "Age and treachery will always win out over youth and native skill."

edited 3rd Nov '11 9:28:25 AM by Specialist290

hmmm,

well in thus case specifically Jason is about age 23-24 and served un a 2-3 year war as a lad of 18-20.

Lee, as part of Nightmare has served in that war and also many Black Operations.

though given that the specific tribal people in particular (he and his parents faked being of one tribe when he's really one of a supposedly wiped out people, due to his real tribe's near complete genocide) Jason was born into, he might have some knowledge even Lee doesnt.

most tribes are kind of open towards revealing themselves other than in religion, it would be easy for one of the tribes to keep parts of their ways of war secret.

buut even then the fight is dirty and not entirely a pure tribal technique. aswell pragmatism is a tenet of most tribal fighting. the philosophy and basis involved in fighting only changes from tribe to tribe, the application of the entire culture is the same. these diverse tribals constantly clas culturally with the 'city folk' {parts of the planet that are most westernized due to American or EU presence in cities, but even then its 50/50 geographically, pop wise is a diff matter).

i think the authentic guy could win if he had some insight into the martial arts that the other more scholarly guy didnt more generally speaking though.

does anyone have any thoughts on my last point?

edited 3rd Nov '11 2:39:09 PM by jasonwill2

It would depend on how much theoretical knowledge versus how much practical knowledge came into play.

Hmmm... Given what you've written so far, it seems like Jason would surprise Lee somehow, and Lee would be forced to compensate (perhaps by using a surprise tactic or fighting dirty). Doing that might put the soldier in a moral quandry, if he's really devoted to his military or logical strategy. However, if they're on equal standing as far as health, and their respective knowledge each balances out the other, in addition to other factors, then either one could win.

I also have a few comments on your excerpt. While it's solid as far as evoking the visual imagery of their actions (which is a good thing), it's also a bit repetitive in terms of word choice. I noticed that you use "strike" a lot - "strike" has certain connotations, and other verbs related to fighting ("blow," "batter," "knock," "slam," and so on) would add some variety. Because they can't all just be strikes, at least it doesn't seem like it. The language is a bit repetitive, and it reads, at least to me, like you're physically telling the story to someone sitting next to you. It might not matter, but it feels a bit long-winded.

However, I think you're off to a good start, Jasonwill.