Self-Defense Training in the 

Traditional Martial Arts

by Nathanael Verbeke, 4th Dan

Home

Master Verbeke

Little Dragons

Children's Program

Adult Program

Tang Soo Do

Curriculum

Kobudo

Common Questions

Schedule

Price Guide

Contact Us

Philosophy of Self-Defense

                Sun-tzu wrote, “Subjugating the enemy’s army without fighting is the true pinnacle of excellence.” One can imagine he would be equally apt to remonstrate that the inverse is also true- engaging an enemy in battle and losing is the pinnacle of failure. This philosophy is also voiced by Hwang Kee, founder of the Moo Duk Kwan, when he wrote, “The ultimate objective of the skilled disciple of the martial arts is to obtain victory without combat. Once one has engaged in combat, however, he must win even against great odds.”

                In terms of self-defense (Ho Sin Sool) and its relationship with the traditional martial arts the meaning of these statements is multi-layered. On the surface the obvious interpretation is that a traditional martial artist should only engage someone in combat if all other avenues toward reconciliation have been exhausted. Under the surface, however, these statements make two direct points: One, if a situation is hostile enough to merit violence (which implies either the martial artist’s life or safety is jeopardized or an innocent victim’s life or safety is jeopardized) it is hostile enough for the martial artist to meet the threat with direct action designed to end the threat as quickly as possible; and two, it is understood that this direct action, depending on the capability of the martial artist, could seriously maim or kill the attacker.

                While this philosophy of self defense may at first sight appear extreme it is important to consider the following points:    

• Traditional martial artists are taught to fight only as a last resort

• When they do fight it is because the situation merits the response

• The chance of nullifying an attack without damaging the attacker increases with the skill level of the martial artist

• Traditional martial artists are equipped with a diverse array of techniques that allows them to meet different threat levels with Justifiable Degrees of Response

Justifiable Degrees of Response  

A Justifiable Degree of Response can be defined as a morally acceptable reaction to a negative stimulus. This stimulus varies depending upon the degree of danger, which can be determined by certain obvious factors. These include:

• Is the attacker intoxicated?

• Is the attacker verbally hostile or physically  hostile?

• Is the attacker attempting a robbery

• Does the attacker have a weapon?

• Is the goal of the attack to commit violence (rape, murder)?

          The martial artist’s response, determined by the amount of danger they perceive, thereby operates upon a similar scale of increasing force:

1.       Attempt to verbally calm the attacker.

2.       Attempt to subdue the attacker (joint locks and restraining techniques).

3.       Attempt to injure the attacker (striking to vital points).

            There are certain situations where an attempt to subdue the attacker should not be considered. For example, if a 100lb woman is being attacked by a 200lb man she should not attempt a restraining technique such as an arm bar or wrist manipulation because the probability of success is too low. Instead she should strike the attacker’s vital areas until presented with an opportunity to escape. Similarly, anytime an attacker is wielding a weapon extreme precaution should be taken to end the fight as quickly as possible, even if it means severely injuring the attacker. 

Back to Top                                                Next Page