Aggressiveness toward Strangers

[AdrianK]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17868-gamers-are-more-aggressive-to-strangers.html

So here's a study I found a little while back, I thought I'd post it up here. Its not a study on Martial arts, but on gaming. However, I feel it applies to sparring and competitive activity in the gym.

The basic gist is that people engaging in a competitive activity are far more aggressive toward people who they don't know. Whether this competitive activity involves fighting, sparring, gaming, etc. the same basic idea stands.

Now, I'd say most of the respected posters on this board believe in sparring against people outside your school, but I feel this study reinforces that idea that simply sparring against people you know, can be detrimental to your development and skill in the martial arts, as the level of aggression between the two(or more) is significantly less.

What do you think?

[Yoshiyahu]

About Seven months ago. My Girl and I along with two other friends went to play Laser Tag. I haven't done that since I was a kid. But there were some young people there too. Some of the workers about ten of them who were on break went in too. Along with a guy who was hunter. He was an middle age white man who took his daughter along with him. But it was an extreme rush. However I enjoyed Shooting everyone. My whole zone was to kill everything that moves. I occasionally shot friends, I remained low, ducked behind corners to hide my sensor vest. I ended up being ranked #1. It was an extreme rush I enjoyed killing the strangers especially the thrill of shooting others who had experience in this game was exhilirating. I would say if you get a chance you and buddy try it sometime...its the best.

[anerlich]

No disrespect to either you, AdrianK, or the scientists, and the testosterone effects are interesting, but to me this sounds like validation of the obvious.

I thikn of you're competing with a stranger, the urge to establish dominance is a very primitive one. With someone you know, that's been established to a major degree, and so the stress levels are less, plus you're usually reluctant to go to the point of affecting whatever relationship you may have.

I've been rereading surfing champ Kelly Slater's biography recently. He has some interesting observations about competing and beating close friends and others. He is/was supercompetitive, however, and I'm not sure his actions/reactions are anywhere near the middle of the bell curve.

[Yoshiyahu]

Please give more insight anerlich to what you mean concerning the bell curve...

Very interesting observation. How ever your statement concerning friends and relationship is kinda of point with AdrianK.

No disrespect to either you, AdrianK, or the scientists, and the testosterone effects are interesting, but to me this sounds like validation of the obvious.

I thikn of you're competing with a stranger, the urge to establish dominance is a very primitive one. With someone you know, that's been established to a major degree, and so the stress levels are less, plus you're usually reluctant to go to the point of affecting whatever relationship you may have.

I've been rereading surfing champ Kelly Slater's biography recently. He has some interesting observations about competing and beating close friends and others. He is/was supercompetitive, however, and I'm not sure his actions/reactions are anywhere near the middle of the bell curve.

[CFT]

Being near the middle of the bell curve means being nearly average.

anerlich is just saying that Kelly Slater is most likely not Mr. Average.

[Yoshiyahu]

Being near the middle of the bell curve means being nearly average.

anerlich is just saying that Kelly Slater is most likely not Mr. Average.

Yea I gathered that but in one instance he said "With someone you know, that's been established to a major degree, and so the stress levels are less, plus you're usually reluctant to go to the point of affecting whatever relationship you may have."

which i believe to be saying virtually the same thing as the article. Maybe I missed something. Please share if you think I did?

[CFT]

Yea I gathered that but in one instance he said "With someone you know, that's been established to a major degree, and so the stress levels are less, plus you're usually reluctant to go to the point of affecting whatever relationship you may have."

which i believe to be saying virtually the same thing as the article. Maybe I missed something. Please share if you think I did?I read it as: "You already know yuor friends/training partners. Who is better, etc. You're not necessarily striving all out to dominate each other. e.g. you won't get fighter's from the same gym competing against each other in comps.

But with someone ultra-competitive like Kelly Slater, he will strive against friend and foe alike. But such behaviour is likely not the norm".

[karateguy]

It boils down to human nature, we are compelled to dominate.

[anerlich]

I could give you my insights about the bell curve, but then you could do your own research for a change ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution

How ever your statement concerning friends and relationship is kinda of point with AdrianK.

No sh1t, Sherlock. And your problem with that is ... ?

[AdrianK]

I agree Anerlich that it is a completely obvious conclusion. However, I always feel that given the unreliable nature of personal experience, that any claims or ideas I have, no matter how obvious, should always be backed up by scientific fact.

And even if the majority never will be, I appreciate studies like this that can relate to even a fraction of what I consider, logical ideas.

[anerlich]

I agree Anerlich that it is a completely obvious conclusion. However, I always feel that given the unreliable nature of personal experience, that any claims or ideas I have, no matter how obvious, should always be backed up by scientific fact.

And even if the majority never will be, I appreciate studies like this that can relate to even a fraction of what I consider, logical ideas.

Absolutely. It was still very interesting even if the conclusion matched expectations. And there's no such thing as too much validation. Thanks for posting it.

[Yoshiyahu]

I could give you my insights about the bell curve, but then you could do your own research for a change ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution



No sh1t, Sherlock. And your problem with that is ... ?

Oh the way you worded things seem as if you were disagreeing with the study. But then you turn around agree with it? An by saying one guy is not the norm. That is still agreeing with the study? I guess I missed your point entirely?

Do you agree with the study or not?

[anerlich]

I guess I missed your point entirely?


So it would appear.

I don't "agree" or "disagree" with empirical results.

[lawrenceofidaho]

I don't "agree" or "disagree" with empirical results.

Well said, Andrew.

[MartialDev]

The core question for martial artists, I think, is at what point do we start provoking the conflicts we "need to defend against"? What precisely is the difference between a pervasive martial presence, and a simple case of bad attitude?

As an aside, aggression is clearly not skill, as any of us can easily beat up the average "aggressive gamer"... :D

[Sihing73]

Hello,

You know, I kind of look at this from the opposite side.

If a person has confidence in their own level of skill then they have nothing to prove and perhaps will avoid a fight rather than engage in one. Having said that, we are all human and have our bad days, I had one last night ;) I had a person who followed my car to the clinic where I was taking my daughters to be seen. I took them to the door and then stood there waiting for him to do something. Now, I was wrong to do this as I should have just ignored him, but my point is that while I would have welcomed the chance to "discuss" our differences, I felt no compulsion to approach him. I was not afraid, just did not see the point. Plus, I always think of the legal ramifications, or at least try to.

I am reminded of a story about a karate master who came to America. He was somewhat small and non-threatening in appearance. He related that one night he was confronted by a huge drunken man who insulted him and may have even pushed him. The master stated that he looked at this large, drunken man and thought of a hundred ways to hurt or maim him. Then he thought of the reasons not to and, here is the point, confident in his ability to harm the man if he needed to, say no reason to do so. The master appoligized to the man and walked away.

I believe there is a difference in the mindset of a competitive fighter and one who is out to not only learn but to master their art. The person seeking mastery is more concerned with competing within themselves and will have the confidence to not engage in meaningless combat. My very first Wing Chun instructor compared Wing Chun to a deadly snake. He stressed that if one had to fight one should kill or maim the opponent. With so few reasons to cause such harm I found little reason to actually fight.

When I teach I stress there are three ways to deal with any attack:

Avoid

Evade

Intercept

With todays legal environment evasion or avoidence seem to be the best approach, imho.

Just my opinion but I would be curious to hear everyone elses thoughts.

Disclaimor: As I said I am human and my actions are sometimes the opposite of what I profess above. I make no excuses, just admit I am flawed.