Not really. A man can have two professions. I do medicine and karate and have taught both. I taught responsible karate. It was to be used for self defense and avoiadance was emphasized. That's taking care of my "patients."
Right, and I do agree.
But I doubt you are teaching them techniques that strictly kill.
I was attempting to point out the paradox between a healer and a death dealer.
If it is your "job" to be both, say as a SpecOps Medic, then it is understandable. However this person is not in such a situation, and I would argue that the Hippocratic Oath trumps the argument in most cases.
Personally, I would consider a teacher of any sort of strictly offensive death dealing arts who also claimed to be a healer to be abhorrent and a dishonor to their profession as such.
Note: To clarify, An M.D. who practices and teaches Karate for the mental, physical and self-defense benefits would not qualify from my blasting as negative judicator in this case. However, an M.D., who sells tobacco out of his home, or guns under the table, or for that matter a fighting art which emphasizes on only offensive rather than also defensive techniques WITH (This is important) the MINDSET that they be used and tested on the street, and even worse, selling this "technique" as one would sell Jelly beans, would indeed qualify.
Meta: "Revival"...Huh? So you knock someone out and use "Dim-Mak" to "revive" them, is that it? Sounds like a rather incredible claim to me."
IJ wrote:Why not? We use medicine to knock people out and revive them. Would have to discuss more to say more.
Meta: Agreed, but I was being overly sarcastic, because Dim Mak is, I feel, non existent in the context which the author is describing it. In most cases, it is my understanding that save blunt force trauma to the chest, one usually requires machines or drugs to stop/restart the heart, not a mystical; "touch here," then "twist the thumb there," then "rotate the left ear counter clockwise" and say: "Boo!!"
"A "Synergy" in itself is the combination of separate elements directed together for a new purpose or action. So, "Synergistic combinations" would be combinations of combinations? Hmmmm...Sounds....interesting."
IJ wrote:Synergistic combination is a reasonable phrase to distinguish combinations that have multiplicative activity over ones that are merely additive or even counterporductive. You may doubt their existence, but that's another story.
I'll submit to that explanation, since perhaps in that context, most of us deal with it on a daily basis.
However, for the purposes of this conversation, the author is obviously using words out of context to obfuscate the reader, and also to make it sound as if he knows what he is talking about.
IJ wrote:Who's read the book?
I think I'd recommend passing this one up.
For example, one does not need to read a book on using "Chi" to open a portal to another dimension in order to make an educated guess that, as the Scottish say..."EHHTS AH LOWD A' KRRAAHP! "
There's a bit of Metablade in all of us.