= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Cheat codes - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (92)
I forget, what's our term for 'counter-arguments which are bogus and not actually why a person disbelieves what they disbelieve'? I'm sure we have one.
Anyway, this is a classic example. First, her argument is internally weak. What, the physical conditioning will be of little benefit? The hand strikes will simply not be useful? The reflexes cease to operate when she is in her mufti? The skirt reduces any footwork (not even talking about kicks here) to utter uselessness? And so on. Risible.
Second, not to insult your friend, but either she knows very little about martial arts or she hasn't asked anyone who does have a modicum. There are plenty of martial arts which have uniforms functionally identical to skirts. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakama#Men.27s_hakama :
(That's two empty-handed arts right there, which are both quite popular and common in the US.)
I suspect you are thinking of true rejection.
Well, I think it has something to do with the fact that she wouldn't wish to stop wearing skirts during practice either. I don't know if hakama "count" in her book.
That's... very strange. Sounds almost autistic, actually, in the refusal to wear something other than skirts. (Doubly so if hakama don't 'count'.)
I asked her about hakama. She had thought that they all had divided legs, but seems willing to accept an undivided hakama as a sufficiently skirtlike item.