idk why martial arts is called that; it, in my opinion, isn’t really that much of an art… in fact, it appears more like an application, taken from the knowledge of several sciences (biology, physics, etc.). Maybe it would be considered an informal type of science, but still one nonethless (Maybe for most, but i remember a show in which some scientists testing out the lethality of certain martial artists and compare them to each other).
Art? It’s not a type of aesthetics, in my opinion. Nor does it seek to appeal to our emotions or senses. (although it could appeal to our senses, even though it’s primary functionality is not designed to aesthically please).
I would say that its primary function has something to do with functionality, whether it’s “bettering oneself” or increasing the chances of surviving a fight and killing/maiming/disabling/etc. the enemy.
I’ve studied martial arts, and to me, its been taught as more of a science. The instructors would show me how to apply it, and what it would do, or explain what it could do, or explain what it was designed to do (if the technique in question was too dangerous to use on another human being in training or sparring).
Yes, some could say that martial arts have codes, traditions, and institutionalized rules and whatnot. But that doesn’t seem like an art. I guess martial arts could promote creativity, even though many types martial arts are somewhat “traditional,” and don’t really promote creativity.
Granted, it can be somewhat informal as a science. But it still seems like more of a science to me. Maybe others could shed some light on to this?
