Something that was nagging me for some time was if Hick's was correct then how can we function in our day to day lives. Found this on Hock's website. Let me know what you all think.
http://www.hockscqc.com/articles/hickslaw.htm
Is Hick's Law Obsolete?
Moderator: Available
Is Hick's Law Obsolete?
I was dreaming of the past...
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Good article, Mike.
This is a classic example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. Someone without a background in physiology reads an article about a highly controlled experiment done in a laboratory, and tries to apply the results to the real world without really understanding the limitations of the original experiment. I try to discuss many of these concepts with people who have bought the dogma from RBSD "experts", but they fall on deaf ears because I've never seen the elephant.
Whatever... The truth eventually rears its head - in spite of efforts to the contrary.
The general principle holds, Mike. If you have more options, it takes longer to decide.
BUT...
My sense is that Hick's equation applies to higher brain function for choices in an untrained scenario.
I have not bought into the mish-mash of modern RBSD dogma. But the folks in that arena have their heads and hearts in the right places. It's just going to take a while to evolve a bit more.
FWIW, you don't see a lot about Hick's Law in Grossman's book. I think he understands the limitations of the experimental research it is based on.
Here's what I believe, Mike. And my working paradigm seems to fit in to the evolving scenario.
1) There are no quick solutions. As much as people argue with me again and again about it, you don't get something worth having in a short amount of time.
2) The best application of KISS - the moral of the story behind Hick's work - is in teaching someone a handful of basic principles. STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM FORMULA TRAINING!!!! It's all fine and well if you have a very specific task in mind such as a drug raid on house X. Otherwise, give the person the basic tools they need and let the training dictate the responses.
3) Your lower brain really does have the right idea. Therefore your upper brain training shouldn't go against it. Rather it should modify an already basic functional skeleton. An example would be teaching someone how to fall. The lower brain says stick the hand out to save the brain. The upper brain should be taught to turn the reach into a slap. NOW we're talking... That can happen then totally without conscious thought. When you get the two brain parts working together, you truly can be one of those gifted athletes who watches themselves respond in amazement.
4) Trust the lower brain's ability to make snap decisions. If you think of training as software in your upper brain RAM, your lower brain is your ROM. It's all there at birth, the way your ROM has the core of your OS when you boot your computer up. And it's a pretty good set of tools - providing you were born with a full deck. (Some folks were always meant to be kicked out of the gene pool...)
5) Train the upper brain to do more with less. I call it RISC martial arts. If you want a fast microprocessor, one way to do it is with a reduced set of instructions (hence Reduced Instruction Set Computing or RISC). There's no reason you can't then do anything you want with that small set of instructions.
In martial arts, some core like Sanchin is key. Make everything you do connect to it in some way - to a fault. If you can't find a way to bring new material in to fit with your core, talk to someone who see's the patterns (such as yours truly). If you still can't, then abandon the material. You can't absorb everything.
But you can fight at about any level if you find ways to connect your basic principles of movement.
My 2 cents and some change...
- Bill
This is a classic example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. Someone without a background in physiology reads an article about a highly controlled experiment done in a laboratory, and tries to apply the results to the real world without really understanding the limitations of the original experiment. I try to discuss many of these concepts with people who have bought the dogma from RBSD "experts", but they fall on deaf ears because I've never seen the elephant.
Whatever... The truth eventually rears its head - in spite of efforts to the contrary.
The general principle holds, Mike. If you have more options, it takes longer to decide.
BUT...
My sense is that Hick's equation applies to higher brain function for choices in an untrained scenario.
I have not bought into the mish-mash of modern RBSD dogma. But the folks in that arena have their heads and hearts in the right places. It's just going to take a while to evolve a bit more.
FWIW, you don't see a lot about Hick's Law in Grossman's book. I think he understands the limitations of the experimental research it is based on.
Here's what I believe, Mike. And my working paradigm seems to fit in to the evolving scenario.
1) There are no quick solutions. As much as people argue with me again and again about it, you don't get something worth having in a short amount of time.
2) The best application of KISS - the moral of the story behind Hick's work - is in teaching someone a handful of basic principles. STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM FORMULA TRAINING!!!! It's all fine and well if you have a very specific task in mind such as a drug raid on house X. Otherwise, give the person the basic tools they need and let the training dictate the responses.
3) Your lower brain really does have the right idea. Therefore your upper brain training shouldn't go against it. Rather it should modify an already basic functional skeleton. An example would be teaching someone how to fall. The lower brain says stick the hand out to save the brain. The upper brain should be taught to turn the reach into a slap. NOW we're talking... That can happen then totally without conscious thought. When you get the two brain parts working together, you truly can be one of those gifted athletes who watches themselves respond in amazement.
4) Trust the lower brain's ability to make snap decisions. If you think of training as software in your upper brain RAM, your lower brain is your ROM. It's all there at birth, the way your ROM has the core of your OS when you boot your computer up. And it's a pretty good set of tools - providing you were born with a full deck. (Some folks were always meant to be kicked out of the gene pool...)
5) Train the upper brain to do more with less. I call it RISC martial arts. If you want a fast microprocessor, one way to do it is with a reduced set of instructions (hence Reduced Instruction Set Computing or RISC). There's no reason you can't then do anything you want with that small set of instructions.
In martial arts, some core like Sanchin is key. Make everything you do connect to it in some way - to a fault. If you can't find a way to bring new material in to fit with your core, talk to someone who see's the patterns (such as yours truly). If you still can't, then abandon the material. You can't absorb everything.
But you can fight at about any level if you find ways to connect your basic principles of movement.
My 2 cents and some change...
- Bill
-
Stryke
I like Stryke's version better. "If you can't find a way to bring new material in to fit with your core... then abandon the material," sounds awfully dogmatic. Can you give us an example of some things you've chucked out?Stryke wrote:excellent post BillIn martial arts, some core like Sanchin is key. Make everything you do connect to it in some way - to a fault. If you can't find a way to bring new material in to fit with your core
If you cant , then look at your understanding of mechanics and see what your missing .
Edit: I also wonder how much cross training in dramatically different arts would be affected. For example I prefer snapping roundhouses to swinging roundhouses (I don't care what anyone says; I get some wicked goddam power from them) but I absorbed swinging roundhouses anyway. Now I can use them (probably poorly) if I want, but more importantly I can defend them better. I'm sure someone has a better example.
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Easily.TSDGuy wrote:
"If you can't find a way to bring new material in to fit with your core... then abandon the material," sounds awfully dogmatic. Can you give us an example of some things you've chucked out?
I abandoned my practice of Yang style tai chi because the footwork was different. It's a bit of an either/or proposition (to me) with being on the toes vs. the heels. While I saw the value of practices such as push hands, I found I could get the benefits of tai chi out of aikido and still use the same fundamental mechanics I learned through the study of Southern Chinese martial arts.
My main goal in cross training martial arts is to simplify and clarify. I am not collecting "stuff." I am trying to develop a deeper understanding of the core principles which I practice in my martial studies. I want ten different views and manifestations of one principle rather than ten different techniques. IMO the former situation gives me both access at the moment of truth and flexibility of response w/o delay via the principle of Hick's law.
IMO, this approach eventually leads the artist to a new state of martial being. Rather than having a fixed response to a given stimulus, the martial artist eventually "gets" the whole idea of adapting to and dealing with the threat. It's like the day a musician goes from playing classical to playing jazz. At some point, your body just makes it up as you go along. But it is far from random. You are speaking a language with vocabulary and grammar rules. The trained eye can see principles of movement and confrontation dynamics at work.
- Bill
You don't think you became better at MA or footwork by learning that approach? You learned NOTHING from being on your heels?
Meh, throwing things out because it doesn't fit into your world sounds like a good way to never grow. Very black and white. It's like a Freudian psychoanylst dismissing the fact that MAYBE SOME mental disorders are caused by brain chemistry. It's nothing he can relate to in his world, but he'd be a better doctor if he learned some chemistry.
Meh, throwing things out because it doesn't fit into your world sounds like a good way to never grow. Very black and white. It's like a Freudian psychoanylst dismissing the fact that MAYBE SOME mental disorders are caused by brain chemistry. It's nothing he can relate to in his world, but he'd be a better doctor if he learned some chemistry.
In my original round house example, I spent years learning snap roundhouses. I eventually learned (the very basics of) a MT-esque swinging kick. It didn't fit into my "core" at ALL. But I combined the two into something better that works for me. My roundhouses are still snaps, but throughout matches, they vary from 90/10 snap/swing to 40/60 snap/swing depending on what I need at the time. For example extremely close roundhouses have a heavy element of 'swing' in them because there is no room to do anything else. If I'd thrown away the swinging because it didn't fit into my core, I'd be missing out on a hell of a lot. Better to modify the core to be more effective.
And again, my roundhouse isn't very good since they're not too crazy to not incorporate both.
And again, my roundhouse isn't very good since they're not too crazy to not incorporate both.
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
I'm not necessarily going to give you the answer you want.
Look... I'm the king of cross training. As a college student, I took 190 hours when it only took 130 to get an undergraduate. I had to switch schools because my first one wouldn't even let me double major when I wanted to do a triple.
If a person doesn't care where he/she is going, then the route to get there doesn't matter. If all you want to do is study whatever comes across your path, then go for it. You can have a lot of fun just doing and learning. A lot of people do that.
I did that for quite some time in martial arts.
Eventually though this laissez faire attitude will put you in the position of forgetting material as fast as you learn it. And with application time (kumite or on the street), you'll probably find yourself regressing to something that you are most comfortable with. Been there, done that. You have nothing to show for all that training when it comes time to put it all together.
I'm totally for trying new things - particularly after you've achieved minimal status (shodan perhaps) in one art. But a thinking person eventually wants to get the spices to blend. And you aren't really going to be remembering and applying what you learn from myriad sources if you don't find a way to connect the dots.
I connect dots in ways that make some of my smarter martial art peers and mentors think I'm on LSD.
Still... One needs to build a structure to have access to all this knowledge "on the fly." My structure may not be your structure. But it's a structure, and I can transition from one art's material to the next seamlessly. That's the key. I can do striking techniques on my back, and grappling techniques on my feet. And I can fight from my back to my knees to my feet w/o a pause. How do I do that? Because I can take the core principle of a technique and apply it in many domains.
After a while, I start to know what I need and what I don't need. I've gotten everything I need out of TKD, thank you very much. Been there, done that. My experience has been distilled into my own choreography which I use to connect their dots with my dots. Next...
Yes, if you train long enough you will experience a few paradigm shifts. But thinking people will do that faster than the people who just go through the motions without trying to integrate and filter the material.
In the end, this constant input, organize, and reject process should create a very strong structure. The structure can and should morph all the time with new information.
Occasionally you do need to take two steps back to take the next step forward. I just did that in the last few years. It happens as a natural consequence of living, aging, and learning.
- Bill
Look... I'm the king of cross training. As a college student, I took 190 hours when it only took 130 to get an undergraduate. I had to switch schools because my first one wouldn't even let me double major when I wanted to do a triple.
If a person doesn't care where he/she is going, then the route to get there doesn't matter. If all you want to do is study whatever comes across your path, then go for it. You can have a lot of fun just doing and learning. A lot of people do that.
I did that for quite some time in martial arts.
Eventually though this laissez faire attitude will put you in the position of forgetting material as fast as you learn it. And with application time (kumite or on the street), you'll probably find yourself regressing to something that you are most comfortable with. Been there, done that. You have nothing to show for all that training when it comes time to put it all together.
I'm totally for trying new things - particularly after you've achieved minimal status (shodan perhaps) in one art. But a thinking person eventually wants to get the spices to blend. And you aren't really going to be remembering and applying what you learn from myriad sources if you don't find a way to connect the dots.
I connect dots in ways that make some of my smarter martial art peers and mentors think I'm on LSD.
Still... One needs to build a structure to have access to all this knowledge "on the fly." My structure may not be your structure. But it's a structure, and I can transition from one art's material to the next seamlessly. That's the key. I can do striking techniques on my back, and grappling techniques on my feet. And I can fight from my back to my knees to my feet w/o a pause. How do I do that? Because I can take the core principle of a technique and apply it in many domains.
After a while, I start to know what I need and what I don't need. I've gotten everything I need out of TKD, thank you very much. Been there, done that. My experience has been distilled into my own choreography which I use to connect their dots with my dots. Next...
Yes, if you train long enough you will experience a few paradigm shifts. But thinking people will do that faster than the people who just go through the motions without trying to integrate and filter the material.
In the end, this constant input, organize, and reject process should create a very strong structure. The structure can and should morph all the time with new information.
Occasionally you do need to take two steps back to take the next step forward. I just did that in the last few years. It happens as a natural consequence of living, aging, and learning.
- Bill
-
Stryke
I`m sure Bill can do Sanchin with his weight on the balls of his feet , on his heels , or anywhere in between
and thats kind of my point , the difference with the Sanchin and Tai chi sounded one of technique rather than principles , were talking grounding right ?
but you do need to be able to walk before you can run , thats why having one base to bring everything back to is so important . If your learning from a principle base , cross overs not so hard .
are techniques going to seem contrary form a technical point of veiw , sure , but the principles are constant , were sinking or floating , spitting or swallowing etc etc , no matter how we do it technically . Principles arent principles if they dont survive technical variation .
If you understand principles IMHO you can assimilate and steal most anything , but having a platform to compare it too and absorb is necessary IMHO .
and thats kind of my point , the difference with the Sanchin and Tai chi sounded one of technique rather than principles , were talking grounding right ?
but you do need to be able to walk before you can run , thats why having one base to bring everything back to is so important . If your learning from a principle base , cross overs not so hard .
are techniques going to seem contrary form a technical point of veiw , sure , but the principles are constant , were sinking or floating , spitting or swallowing etc etc , no matter how we do it technically . Principles arent principles if they dont survive technical variation .
If you understand principles IMHO you can assimilate and steal most anything , but having a platform to compare it too and absorb is necessary IMHO .
I'm sure he can do his katas on his heels too. Even if he doesn't practice this, I'm guessing Bill absorbed the tai chi heel stuff and became better because of it.
The line about throwing away anything that doesn't fit into your base is just plain disturbing to me. I have a vague idea of what is trying to be said and even I can barely fathom why anyone would say that, so some poor little white belt reading this is going to get the idea that dogma is good. Look what THAT has done to entire schools of MA students.
The line about throwing away anything that doesn't fit into your base is just plain disturbing to me. I have a vague idea of what is trying to be said and even I can barely fathom why anyone would say that, so some poor little white belt reading this is going to get the idea that dogma is good. Look what THAT has done to entire schools of MA students.
-
maxwell ainley
- Posts: 1690
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 6:01 am
- Location: england
You don't need to collect material or techniques like ceramic unicorn statuettes, but you do need to always be seeking out new ways of doing things and learning from it. Even if you decide your way is better, you still need to learn from it, and it will forever change your karate just a tiny bit. Always keep evolving.
In the end, I don't think you should be able to call what you do Uechi, I think it should be all your own. I don't do TSD anymore, nor do I do many techiques the textbook way from any style.
In the end, I don't think you should be able to call what you do Uechi, I think it should be all your own. I don't do TSD anymore, nor do I do many techiques the textbook way from any style.
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
TSDGuy wrote:
The line about throwing away anything that doesn't fit into your base is just plain disturbing to me. I have a vague idea of what is trying to be said and even I can barely fathom why anyone would say that, so some poor little white belt reading this is going to get the idea that dogma is good. Look what THAT has done to entire schools of MA students.
In an ironic way, you're proving my point.
I said something. It didn't fit in with your own paradigm. So what did you do? You discarded the idea.
Good for you!
Indeed. And it wouldn't be my own style if I was forced to absorb all your dogma, would it?TSDGuy wrote:
In the end, I don't think you should be able to call what you do Uechi, I think it should be all your own.
The whole point of my post was to talk about how a person gets around the limitations suggested by Hick's original experimental work and empirical equation. I suggested how it could be done.
1) Find a core set of principles, ideas, and movements. Drill them in.
2) Try stuff. Try all kinds of stuff. Find stuff you like.
3) Find ways to connect that stuff to your core. If you can't, either tweak the core, or throw the material away. Because if you can't get it to fit in with your basic core, it won't be easy to access when you need it most. You won't possibly have the strength and complexity of synaptic connections built in your brain to just let it happen "mushin style" when you need to act faster than you can think.
And...
As much as possible, learn about low brain responses. Make your core a reflection of those responses.
Just today I was all over my students about how they were doing their circles and "shuto wind-up" in the shuto-uraken-shoken hojoundo. They were cutting corners. No, no, no!!! I repeat something often stated to me by several Okinawan masters - "Kata is kata; application is application." I make them go through the entire circle, and show them how different parts of the circle represent various flinch positions. I show them how the shuto windup is another flinch. I show them how elbow in the center before uraken represents another flinch. Etc., etc., etc.
What do I throw away? Stuff that doesn't fit into this paradigm.
Are all martial movements created equal? Do all martial movements ponder what the lower brain will tell you to do before the upper brain has a chance to kick in gear? If not, WTF are you doing practicing something that the reptilian brain will sabotage when you need it most?
I rest my case - with a single example.
Meanwhile... By making my students do movements in a certain general way, and by making them see a half dozen things they can do with a single line of motion, I am teaching them to do more with less. I am teaching their bodies that all they have to do is minor adjustments off the major lines of movement that are seared into their brains with tens of thousands of repetitions.
I'm teaching them to do more with less.
I'm shaving off precious fractions of a second of reaction time at the moment of truth.
And I'm enhancing - and not fighting - what the reptilian brain tells them to do. The body does things before they think about it. All they need to do is think "Respond!" and they respond. Their upper brain only tweaks. No need to make anything up. Been there, done that. Sit back and enjoy the show.
Look ma, no Hick's Law in play!
Ever wonder how a jazz musician can improvize? I do. They know their schit so cold that they can run chord progressions together and let melodies fly without thinking. But is it random? ABSOLUTELY NOT! If what they did was random, it wouldn't sound as good as it does. They are following rules of music. Circle of fifths. Commond chord progressions. Harmony and disharmony. Consonance and dissonance. Rhythm and flow. Etc., etc., etc.
These musicians have burned the rules of making music into their brains. The pathways are all there. All they need to do is to get the ball to flow by tapping into their surroundings (the fellows they are playing with) and tweaking the flow so they respond accordingly.
That's martial arts, FWIW!
Does all music sound the same? If it did, then it wouldn't be called genres and styles of music. It wouldn't be THEIR OWN.
They absorb and they discard. And in the end, what they have is their own.
- Bill
