Tai Chi

FlowState said:

I already addressed that implicit point. Because users care about categorizing their activities correctly, even if there are no sport-specific "benefits" for doing so.

dpawlyk said:

No one is arguing otherwise.

"If one does Tai Chi and not MMA, why can't you use the MMA to categorize your Tai Chi activities?"

To be clear, I think MMA would be an incorrect categorization of Tai Chi.

If someone did Tai Chi, they wouldn't describe that as doing MMA, in an ordinary convo. Same as if I played pickelball, I wouldn't describe it as tennis.

Just because the only "close" option to Tai Chi has "martial arts" in the name, doesn't mean that it's a good option. As I argued above, Cardio might be a better option for Tai Chi than MMA, if one cares about "correctness".

Having said that, I understand your suggestion of using MMA basically as a "placeholder" for OP's preferred martial art, in the absence of a better option. 

dpawlyk said:

Seems more likely that someone doing Tai Chi might do other cardio stuff they want to keep separate than also doing MMA.

Like I said, I get the argument. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what I think. Let's see what OP thinks, if they happen to chime in.

(However, I was under the impression that they were aware of the MMA option, hence their specific suggestion of adding "Traditional Martial Arts". If that assumption is correct, then it seems to me that OP has already chosen not to use MMA. Ofc they could always change their mind, even if that's the case)

dpawlyk said:

FlowState said:

To be clear, I think MMA would be an incorrect categorization of Tai Chi.

It doesn't really matter.

You're right that it doesn't. Like I said, it would be interesting to hear what OP thinks of this workaround. I'm just curious, I'm not trying to prove anybody or any POV "right" or "wrong".

FlowState said:

If someone did Tai Chi, they wouldn't describe that as doing MMA, in an ordinary convo

??? No one is suggesting they would do that. It doesn't likely they'd call it cardio either. So, cardio has the same problem.

FlowState said:

To be clear, I think MMA would be an incorrect categorization of Tai Chi.

It doesn't really matter. Cardio isn't correct either. Categorizing it as "traditional martial arts" doesn't that much sense either.

dpawlyk said:

Categorizing it as "traditional martial arts" doesn't that much sense either/

Like I said, my impression was that the adjective "traditional" [*] was chosen specifically to distinguish the proposed generic martial arts category from MMA - I think their intent is this "Traditional Martial Arts" category would *not* include MMA. That is also the basis for my guess that OP is already aware of the MMA category and doesn't want to use it.

I could be wrong tho.

[*] MMA in its current form has arguably only existed since the 1990s (at least the term name "mixed martial arts" has only been in use since the 90s), which is why from a certain POV, the "other" martial arts - some with hundreds of years of history - could be termed "traditional martial arts". Yes, I realize MMA incorporates some of those "traditional" martial arts", but hey, language and ontology are fuzzy.

It doesn't really matter to anybody if he doesn't want to use it. (It's fine to want a category for it.)

I'd say he is likely stuck dealing with what exists.

============

He proposed "traditional martial arts".

You are proposing "general martial arts" too?

With "general martial arts", what would go into "traditional martial arts"?

Both of these (together or separate) just lead to other problems.

If one is going to propose a change, categories really should be added discipline (Judo, Karate, etc,)

You might have the problem of the list getting too big and unmanagable.

(I have no idea why MMA was added over any of the others.)

FlowState said:

Like I said, my impression was that the adjective "traditional" [*] was chosen specifically to distinguish the proposed generic martial arts category from MMA - I think their intent is this "Traditional Martial Arts" category would *not* include MMA.

This just creates the same sort of problem. Both of them are too broad.

FlowState said:

That is also the basis for my guess that OP is already aware of the MMA category and doesn't want to use it.

Not really anybody else's problem. They are stuck at the moment with using an existing category. They are free to use some other category if MMA is a problem for them.

FlowState said:

[*] MMA in its current form has arguably only existed since the 1990s (at least the term name "mixed martial arts" has only been in use since the 90s), which is why from a certain POV, the "other" martial arts - some with 100s of years of history - could be termed "traditional martial arts". Yes, I realize MMA is composed of some of those "traditional" martial arts", but hey, language and ontology are fuzzy.

I realize all that. It's pretty-much irrelevant, unfortunately.

(Not sure why MMA was chosen over the others.)

"Traditional martial arts" is not a good proposal since it's not that unlikely that some one would participate in one of the others along with Tai Chi.