Big questions and a new word
Published: Sat, 12/17/16
While listening to the Radio 4 sports bulletin at 8.30 in the morning the reporter was asked who was going to win the next day’s Grand National. The reporter replied that it was going to be a small person riding a large and expensive horse. In fact, anyone who followed racing with any interest probably did know the name of the horse and jockey which was going to win, just as they also knew the names of the ones who were going to lose. If you follow football then you probably know the name of the player who will score the first England goal in the next world cup tournament. Come to think of it you probably know the name of the player/s who will score both of England’s goals in the next world cup.
When it comes to sport there are things that are pretty much determined, such as the date of major sporting events and who is eligible to participate. Who actually wins is supposed to be unpredictable otherwise it would not be very interesting. This widespread fascination with sport of all kinds raises an interesting issue. Sport reflects the question; do we live in deterministic universe where everything is ultimately predictable? Or do we live in a random universe where everything happens by chance? The problem is that we have the word determined, we have the word random but the universe actually functions somewhere in between and we don’t have commonly used word to describe that in between state. Sport is a useful example of something which needs to be determined sufficiently for it to actually happen, yet has a random enough outcome to actually make it interesting.
So, is there a word for that state between random and determined? In Perry Marshall’s fascinating book Evolution 2 the author appropriates a metamathematical term “Ergodic” which can be defined as meaning “irregular regularity”. A football match is a good example in that the pitch, number of players and rules of football are the regularity. The play on the field and final score is the irregularity. It could be suggested that sport is the attempt to create the ‘ideal’ ergodic experience, a situation determined enough that everyone knows exactly what to expect and yet random enough for the game itself to be exiting. The same applies to entertainment. You can watch your favourite TV show knowing pretty much exactly what you are going to see and yet hoping that the plot and storyline of that particular episode will excite and interest you. If you actually think about it there is also a major flaw in the concept of creating
artificial ergodic experience. The existence of free will actually depends upon ergodic experience. Mass entertainment, whether through sport or television, tries to creates the illusion of randomness. However, the intention of those directing the experience is to create a highly predictable source of revenue at best and method of social control at worst. Something to think about when you next sit down the watch the ‘big game’.
In martial arts training there can be two extremes: Creating ‘realistic’ training for dealing with ‘random’ acts of violence. Or, preserving a traditional system unchanged from the intention of its founder by perfectly reproducing the authentic techniques and methods. Neither extreme is possible. You cannot prepare for something totally random because you will have not idea what it will be. At the other extreme entropy will always degrade a tradition that is not regularly revitalised with new energy and ideas. So, rather than being obsessed with either randomness or determined to adhere absolutely to tradition, accept the fact that you live in an ergodic universe and your training and practice has to reflect the fact. So, at one end of the scale there may be an experience such as working the doors as Geoff Thompson did. This may provide opportunities for unpredictable violence which will test and develop fighting skills.
However the context is still structured and prior training recommended. At the other end of the scale very repetitive training in techniques and methods may seem boring and old fashioned. However, if the instructor is any good and students dedicated to regular practice, then fascinating insights into the art will occur on random, but possibly, frequent occasions. Insights that may well equip the practitioner for dealing with random events. Then, somewhere in between there is the combat sport which seeks to develop good martial artists by subjecting them to a random experience of fighting within a reasonably safe and structured context.
There is no right or wrong way to train and practice. But it is necessary to realise that there is no absolute randomness or determinism in any situation. All martial arts (and all of life experience) is ergodic in that you are always experiencing a process which is both random and determined. When you train for ‘randomness’ remember that you are always doing it in a determined way. When you train according to rigid patterns and traditional forms be open to random insights and enlightening experiences. When you spar don’t imagine that the holy grail of martial arts mastery is in training for and winning tough competitions. Competition is just another way of experiencing the ergodic nature of life itself.
regards
Graham
PS I have long been aware of this concept of being between random and determined in Stav training. The web of Orlog is an expression of the ergodic principle. In the new year I have three events scheduled which will explore principles of training with weapons, unarmed and working directly with the runes. See programme at http://iceandfire.org/calendar.html