Somewhere around 1993, I had the honor of being recommended for Rokudan. At the time I was also freshly out of academia, having gotten my masters and then my PhD and then a brief stint as a research assistant professor.
When I went to school, martial arts and my classroom work were - to me - part of the same thing. It's no accident that I ended up in biomedical engineering. I was good at math, chemistry, and biology, and I was always interested in sports and music. Martial arts was part of my athletic progression from baseball to track to something I could spend a lifetime enjoying. And the deeper I got into martial arts, the more I began to appreciate the whole "Shaolin" paradigm of martial learning.
In China, people who spent time learning at the temple practiced the fighting arts, meditation, medicine, and calligraphy. There was no distinct line in-between one domain and the next. The idea was to develop the whole individual. So for me, my University experience which also included martial arts training and teaching was intended to be a broad one that touched every aspect of my life.
It was natural then as I progressed through the ranks to look for parallels between the certifications of my academic accomplishments and those in my martial experience. It's common for instance to consider a Shodan to be something like a high school diploma. It's a rite of passage, but certainly not a learning endpoint. Upper levels of rank then represented a deeper knowledge. Majors in college represented various martial specializations such as work with weapons, tournament experience in striking and/or grappling venues, interest in kyusho/tuite, reality-based self-defense, military or law enforcement training, martial arts and medicine, kinesiology, etc. Certainly there is no limit to the breadth and depth of one's training other than the physical limitations that a human brings to the learning table.
Shortly after I got my PhD, the invitation for the Rokudan test came. It was at that point that I began to consider a common practice in Uechi Ryu karate of assuming various master titles (Renshi, Kyoshi, Hanshi, Hanshi Sai) automatically came with the rank. That didn't work for me. I wanted to live a different experience, and I wanted to make myself the prototype. So with George's encouragement and guidance, I proceeded.
When I was getting my PhD, it was made very clear that there was classroom work and then there was the dissertation research. The classroom work led up to eligibility to take the comprehensive exams, which certified me as knowing what I needed to know to take the next step. But a pass on the comp exams was considered "necessary but not sufficient" to get the PhD. For that, independent work that resulted in a dissertation defense was necessary. A PhD (or an MD) uniquely qualifies someone as a trained scientist. I can't just know stuff. I have to demonstrate that I have what it takes to contribute new knowledge to my field.
Renshi, Kyoshi, Hanshi, and Hanshi Sai similarly are not ranks. They do not represent having learned material and having done the time. Rather from my previous experience in Japanese martial arts, it has always been my understanding that they were titles which acknowledged having made significant "contributions" to the art. It's one thing to be an incredible martial athlete and fountain of knowledge. It's quite another thing to be one of the few who leaves some kind of legacy which leaves the art better off than before they first donned a gi or training suit.
So... Using my masters and PhD experience as a working model, I made myself a test case for a new martial title paradigm in IUKF. I didn't really have to look for anything new to do, although that could have been an option. Rather I gathered creative work I had already done, documented it, and submitted it to George as a kind of martial arts thesis. In this particular case, it was choreography. I had created a kicking form for my students to train them in all the basic kicks they may see in various martial arts. I also choreographed 12 bunkai (partner ditties) for the 13 hojo undo. I made these training requirements for my Uechi students at UVa, and had several years of experience to see how my work might help train a good martial artist. George accepted my work, submitted it to people who already had ranks of at least 6th dan, and solicited their approval. By the time I went up for my Rokudan, the Renshi work was completed and approved. After passing my Rokudan test, I felt worthy of the gold stripe I subsequently had sewn on my belt.
It took about 15 years for IUKF finally to acknowledge that this might be a good thing for the organization. So with the IUKF board's approval, Joan Neide and I worked up a draft document to submit to Godans with 5 years time-in-grade so they could ponder what past or future contributions that they might like to consider to make themselves eligible for a Renshi title.
I am more than excited about this process. It was a dream I had back in 1993, and I wanted to "walk the talk" for that dream. And now that dream is becoming reality. From this point forward, IUKF has officially dispensed of the "automatic title award" tradition. From this point forward in IUKF, rank will be a necessary but not sufficient condition for eligibility of an IUKF title.
More importantly, IUKF will be establishing a process to both encourage and document contributions to the practice of Kanbun and Kanei's style. There will be no more "dead style." Much has been done by the elders who passed this art on to us. It is up to us not to drop that baton. Rather the seniors who represent IUKF will be expected to leave legacies no less significant than the ones left by those whose paths they have walked.
For those who are approaching Rokudan and above, RELAX! By the time most people reach these milestone ranks, most have something to show for their efforts besides great technique, time in grade, and years of teaching experience. Some have written books. Some have authored articles. Some have conducted Forums. Some have formed organizations, or planted the Uechi flags in new countries. These people then will be offered a process to document their contributions, and they will be posted on the Uechi-Ryu website for all to see.
For those who have yet to make significant contributions, a process is set up to help them take these additional steps. Nobody who wants to go down this path will be left without a means to get there.
I hope this is the start of some lively discussion and work ahead. And I thank my peers and seniors for everything they have done and are doing to help realize this dream for the art we love.
- Bill
IUKF PROJECT - Rank vs. Titles
Moderator: Available
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
IUKF PROJECT - Rank vs. Titles
Last edited by Bill Glasheen on Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
Paul Haydu
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 11:59 pm
- Location: Del Mar, California
Bill, you have initiated an import thread which I hope will draw out robust discussion from our members and friends. This is a great chance for all those interested in Honorary Titles to share their ideas and concepts on the role of titles within our art.
You have created something of a template for us to follow. Uechi-ryu will be the beneficiary, since there is a great deal of creativity and innovation being used in many dojo day-to-day, but much of it may not be documented or shared with the entire Uechi community. By creating a “library” of accomplishments that have been refined enough for submission to the IUKF Titles committee, we will all benefit. Any art must grow and evolve, or else become ceremonial only. We have the technology, and now the means to share the wealth of concepts and developments.
Bill, you are to be congratulated for submitting yourself to an organized and rigorous process, in order to gain your Title. With you and Joan Neide as mentors, all senior students will now have the opportunity to achieve great things, and to be recognized for it!
Paul
You have created something of a template for us to follow. Uechi-ryu will be the beneficiary, since there is a great deal of creativity and innovation being used in many dojo day-to-day, but much of it may not be documented or shared with the entire Uechi community. By creating a “library” of accomplishments that have been refined enough for submission to the IUKF Titles committee, we will all benefit. Any art must grow and evolve, or else become ceremonial only. We have the technology, and now the means to share the wealth of concepts and developments.
Bill, you are to be congratulated for submitting yourself to an organized and rigorous process, in order to gain your Title. With you and Joan Neide as mentors, all senior students will now have the opportunity to achieve great things, and to be recognized for it!
Paul
-
Gene DeMambro
- Posts: 1684
- Joined: Sat Dec 12, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA US of A
As it should be, Bill. I do offer smal commentary on vocabulary,a s it were.
I never liked the word "honorary" or anything even remotely synonymous used with the martial arts. It implies something given, but not earned. It appears that is what you are trying to do here, Bill.
So, in my mind, it is important these titles are awarded based on certain things like academic scholarship, spirit, long term teaching experience, as well as technical ability.
But, I leave it up to the Rokudans to determine the course to proceed.
Cheers,
Gene
I never liked the word "honorary" or anything even remotely synonymous used with the martial arts. It implies something given, but not earned. It appears that is what you are trying to do here, Bill.
So, in my mind, it is important these titles are awarded based on certain things like academic scholarship, spirit, long term teaching experience, as well as technical ability.
But, I leave it up to the Rokudans to determine the course to proceed.
Cheers,
Gene
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Gene
I used the word "honorific", rather than "honorary". There is a substantive difference. Check it in the dictionary.
"Title" works better in the context. I changed the word to that.
For what it's worth, there was an interesting article I recently ran across in the WSJ which brings this whole rank and title inflation issue to an extreme light. Apparently the Germans are very protective of their certifications, titles, and honorifics - to the point of absurdity. Misuse there can cost you a year in jail. Meanwhile people put "Master" in front of their name here in the U.S. with no reputable process behind it. Talk about a tale of two countries...
- Bill
» Soon In Germany, U.S. Ph.D. = Dr.
Officials move to allow U.S. doctoral graduates to use the title "Dr." in Germany.
March 14, 2008, 12:20 P.M. ET
I used the word "honorific", rather than "honorary". There is a substantive difference. Check it in the dictionary.
"Title" works better in the context. I changed the word to that.
For what it's worth, there was an interesting article I recently ran across in the WSJ which brings this whole rank and title inflation issue to an extreme light. Apparently the Germans are very protective of their certifications, titles, and honorifics - to the point of absurdity. Misuse there can cost you a year in jail. Meanwhile people put "Master" in front of their name here in the U.S. with no reputable process behind it. Talk about a tale of two countries...
- Bill
UPDATE ON THIS STORYMarch 7, 2008, 4:05 pm
Who Are You Calling Doctor?
Posted by Jacob Goldstein
A handful of scientists who earned PhDs at places like CalTech are facing criminal charges in Germany for using the title “Dr.” Apparently, German law forbids using that honorific unless you’ve earned your doctorate at a university in EU.
At least seven researchers at Germany’s prestigious Max Planck Society have gotten in trouble recently for breaking the law, which carries a maximum fine of a year in jail, Chemical & Engineering News reports. There’s a way for foreign-trained doctors of philosophy to get special permission from state-level officials to use the title “Dr.”, but the hotshot Planck researchers weren’t clued in.
“This law caught everyone by surprise,” Bernard F. Schutz, a director at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics, told C&EN. Schutz, who received his PhD from CalTech, is one of several researchers who have removed the “Dr.” from their business cards and Web sites in order to resolve legal disputes. (The absence of Schutz’s honorific is conspicuous on this Planck page.)
“The whole situation is absurd,” Jonathan Gershenzon, told C&EN. Gershenzon, who earned a PhD from the University of Texas at Austin, was charged in January with impersonating a doctor.
» Soon In Germany, U.S. Ph.D. = Dr.
Officials move to allow U.S. doctoral graduates to use the title "Dr." in Germany.
March 14, 2008, 12:20 P.M. ET
-
Roy Bedard
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Sun Sep 20, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL USA
- Contact:
Getting to the point
Getting to the Point
Rank and Title are important to different people for different reasons. As I read the debate, it becomes clear that the battle for correctness lies in coming to an agreement for the very purpose of having rank and title. It is our task to determine, organizationally what these two terms are intended to mean, what they reflect, and why they are important to people who seek them.
Traditionally, having a title conferred upon you is an honor, an affimation by a group of peers or reputable people within an organization as a recognition that your time, grade, effort, and overall accomplishments are worthy of title, and that you are unique in your contribution. The motive for title should be 'the intent to reward' by a group to an individual rather than 'the intent' to achieve by that individual from the group. If title is 'sought after' as a direct reward it loses its power as a ubiquitous motivator and its validation as an indicator of the immense appreciation that others have for that person's talents. Title is far more nebulous than rank, in that it is a collection of proofs that come at different times for different people; if ever at all. Though time and grade may have something to do with the awarding of title, those are only contributors to a greater discussion of why one is worthy to recieve a title and to be recognized by their peers as one who is deserving. For this reason, title should not be stylistic, and should be capable of being awarded to members both inside and outside an organization upon compelling reasons. Though it would be rare for a group of Uechi-Ryu practitioners to award a title to a non-Uechi-ryu person, it is conceivable that such an event could happen, if certain facts and circumstances could be justified to support the reward. Much like an honorary degree from a University (absent the common financial exchange between a University and the recipient), the title is intended to be an honorary decree that the recipient is distingusihed, accomplished and worthy of recognition commensurate in stature with others who also have been recognized in the past.
On the other hand rank is a milestone for the individual. A firm set of rules that point to achievement and validation that an individual has met certain standards which were in place as their journey began. To achieve rank, one must meet those standards; accomplish certain goals and objectives. In the case of the martial arts, it is performance; mixed with time and grade which demonstrates that those milestones have been reached. Starting at white belt and proceeding through the Dan ranks, there should be concrete standards that define a rank within the organization, so that all things considered, it can be assumed that if one holds a certain rank, they are capable of certain skills and have paid the price of time to mature those skills to a level of quality that is recognized for that level of award. Unlike title which is bestowed by a group upon an individual, rank is sought after by an individual from a group. Regardless of motivation, (sense of accomplishment, ego, political aspiration, credentialing, etc,), rank in a style is concrete, pre-defined and is achievable. For this reason, rank is only as valid as the organization which is rewarding it. It should be the organization that is important to the student, when describing the achieved rank. This is precisely the reason that rank should only be valid to individuals who are members of the rewarding organization.
Finally, for rank or title to have any meaning, the organization MUST be considered legitimate within the greater scope of the martial arts community. Legitimacy comes with numbers, the only definable proof of an organizations strength and worthiness, based upon consensus. The part of this discussion that we gloss over is that a weak organization, results in weak rank and a decreased value of title since these are all inextricably bound together. To increase the value of this discussion, we have to address the strength of the organization. I'd like to segue for a moment to this idea, that we need to start by building our numbers, offering an olive branch to our dissenters who may chose to accept or reject, but most importantly organize ourselves from within - so that our rank and titles have true meaning and something for those who possess them to be proud of. This begins with people joining the IUKF, supporting its mission and deciding for better or worse that they will remain a part of it. I would like to see it shaped from within and allow only members who have a stake in its progress to be able to contribute to its evolving design. Sure we can listen to outside opinions, but they only become valid when there is ownership.
Roy
_________________
Rank and Title are important to different people for different reasons. As I read the debate, it becomes clear that the battle for correctness lies in coming to an agreement for the very purpose of having rank and title. It is our task to determine, organizationally what these two terms are intended to mean, what they reflect, and why they are important to people who seek them.
Traditionally, having a title conferred upon you is an honor, an affimation by a group of peers or reputable people within an organization as a recognition that your time, grade, effort, and overall accomplishments are worthy of title, and that you are unique in your contribution. The motive for title should be 'the intent to reward' by a group to an individual rather than 'the intent' to achieve by that individual from the group. If title is 'sought after' as a direct reward it loses its power as a ubiquitous motivator and its validation as an indicator of the immense appreciation that others have for that person's talents. Title is far more nebulous than rank, in that it is a collection of proofs that come at different times for different people; if ever at all. Though time and grade may have something to do with the awarding of title, those are only contributors to a greater discussion of why one is worthy to recieve a title and to be recognized by their peers as one who is deserving. For this reason, title should not be stylistic, and should be capable of being awarded to members both inside and outside an organization upon compelling reasons. Though it would be rare for a group of Uechi-Ryu practitioners to award a title to a non-Uechi-ryu person, it is conceivable that such an event could happen, if certain facts and circumstances could be justified to support the reward. Much like an honorary degree from a University (absent the common financial exchange between a University and the recipient), the title is intended to be an honorary decree that the recipient is distingusihed, accomplished and worthy of recognition commensurate in stature with others who also have been recognized in the past.
On the other hand rank is a milestone for the individual. A firm set of rules that point to achievement and validation that an individual has met certain standards which were in place as their journey began. To achieve rank, one must meet those standards; accomplish certain goals and objectives. In the case of the martial arts, it is performance; mixed with time and grade which demonstrates that those milestones have been reached. Starting at white belt and proceeding through the Dan ranks, there should be concrete standards that define a rank within the organization, so that all things considered, it can be assumed that if one holds a certain rank, they are capable of certain skills and have paid the price of time to mature those skills to a level of quality that is recognized for that level of award. Unlike title which is bestowed by a group upon an individual, rank is sought after by an individual from a group. Regardless of motivation, (sense of accomplishment, ego, political aspiration, credentialing, etc,), rank in a style is concrete, pre-defined and is achievable. For this reason, rank is only as valid as the organization which is rewarding it. It should be the organization that is important to the student, when describing the achieved rank. This is precisely the reason that rank should only be valid to individuals who are members of the rewarding organization.
Finally, for rank or title to have any meaning, the organization MUST be considered legitimate within the greater scope of the martial arts community. Legitimacy comes with numbers, the only definable proof of an organizations strength and worthiness, based upon consensus. The part of this discussion that we gloss over is that a weak organization, results in weak rank and a decreased value of title since these are all inextricably bound together. To increase the value of this discussion, we have to address the strength of the organization. I'd like to segue for a moment to this idea, that we need to start by building our numbers, offering an olive branch to our dissenters who may chose to accept or reject, but most importantly organize ourselves from within - so that our rank and titles have true meaning and something for those who possess them to be proud of. This begins with people joining the IUKF, supporting its mission and deciding for better or worse that they will remain a part of it. I would like to see it shaped from within and allow only members who have a stake in its progress to be able to contribute to its evolving design. Sure we can listen to outside opinions, but they only become valid when there is ownership.
Roy
_________________
RRB
Okay,who stopped payment on my reality check?
Okay,who stopped payment on my reality check?
-
Dana Sheets
- Posts: 2715
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am
From wiki: Japanese honorifics
"Shōgō
Shōgō (称号, Shōgō? "title", "name", "degree") are martial arts titles developed by the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai. The Kokusai Budoin,
* Renshi (錬士 : れんし, Renshi?): instructor.
* Kyōshi (教士 : きょうし, Kyōshi?) refers to an advanced teacher.
* Hanshi (範士 : はんし, Hanshi?) refers to a senior expert considered a "teacher of teachers". This title is used by many different arts for the top few instructors of that style, and is sometimes translated "Grand Master".
* Meijin (名人, Meijin?): awarded by a special board of examiners. See also Meijin.
Other titles
* Kyōshi (教師 : きょうし, Kyōshi?), which in everyday Japanese can be a more modest synonym for sensei, is sometimes used to indicate an instructor.
* Oyakata (親方 : おやかた, Oyakata?), master, especially a sumo coach. The literal sense is of someone in loco parentis.
* Shihan (師範 : しはん, Shihan?), merely means chief instructor; unlike the titles above it is not related to grade.
* Shidōin (指導員:しどういん, Shidōin?), intermediate instructor, also unrelated to grade."
Does anyone know the history of how the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai teaching honorifics system came to be automatically paired with the Uechi-ryu grade ranking system?
"Shōgō
Shōgō (称号, Shōgō? "title", "name", "degree") are martial arts titles developed by the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai. The Kokusai Budoin,
* Renshi (錬士 : れんし, Renshi?): instructor.
* Kyōshi (教士 : きょうし, Kyōshi?) refers to an advanced teacher.
* Hanshi (範士 : はんし, Hanshi?) refers to a senior expert considered a "teacher of teachers". This title is used by many different arts for the top few instructors of that style, and is sometimes translated "Grand Master".
* Meijin (名人, Meijin?): awarded by a special board of examiners. See also Meijin.
Other titles
* Kyōshi (教師 : きょうし, Kyōshi?), which in everyday Japanese can be a more modest synonym for sensei, is sometimes used to indicate an instructor.
* Oyakata (親方 : おやかた, Oyakata?), master, especially a sumo coach. The literal sense is of someone in loco parentis.
* Shihan (師範 : しはん, Shihan?), merely means chief instructor; unlike the titles above it is not related to grade.
* Shidōin (指導員:しどういん, Shidōin?), intermediate instructor, also unrelated to grade."
Does anyone know the history of how the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai teaching honorifics system came to be automatically paired with the Uechi-ryu grade ranking system?
Did you show compassion today?
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
What a wonderful post, Roy! Thanks for getting a discussion started.
Here's the one element that sticks in my craw, and has caused me to initiate a process I felt so strongly for that I put myself through it. I will start this element by re-posting an article from the Wall Street Journal published a few weeks ago.
I happen to have a bit of an inside track on this, by the way, because my company won the government of Germany in a contract, and one of my students opened a dojo in Germany while working there. Pause and reflect on the first thing I said, Roy. I know you can relate. We won THE GOVERNMENT OF GERMANY? Yep... They are that organized. In this case, it was their health care system. Even though it isn't a single payer system, it is organized in a way that only the Germans can organize things.
To an extreme.
To the point that one day you get a big "Whoops!" in the process.
The honorific issue with U.S. trained PhDs is getting resolved in the courts, and I will be called "Dr." probably the next time I go over there for business.
Meanwhile... I do not refer to myself as "Dr." on this side of the pond. And why? Because people who have no business referring to themselves as such are putting it on their business cards, their websites, their marketing literature, etc. And they are demanding that others call them such. There is no central clearinghouse for such in the United States, and there probably never will be. The honorific consequently has lost its value. So on my curriculum vita, you will see my education. That says what matters. And to the rest of the world, I am "Bill". That is the only way - for now - to disassociate myself from a mess.
The Okinawans take their martial arts seriously. Up until recently, they were very careful about how they addressed such issues. Culturally they had their house in order. But no longer. Now in the Uechi world, Rokudans automatically refer to themselves as "Renshi Rokudan", and nobody bats an eye. There is no process - period. Get your rank, assume the title, and visit your seamstress.
What is the value of such a title? It is worth less than the gold thread people are putting on their belts. In other circles such as the JKA which I was once associated with, Renshi meant something. It has zero INCREMENTAL value in the Uechi world. It is synonymous with Rokudan. Period.
That is a loss - a loss that is the consequence of a neglect in process.
I agree with this statement, Roy. But here are the problems.
If groups can come and go on the whims of whatever "strong individuals" decide they want to take their ball and go elsewhere, then the title concept collapses. All one has to do is find like-minded people, and you get whatever titles (or ranks) you want.
Part of the "problem" of rank is being addressed in Uechi Ryu. A rank is tied to the performance of specific pieces of material in front of a panel defined by the organization. It is also tied to a specific time-in-grade.
In my world of evidence-based medicine, we have a name for a practice that comes from tradition and folklore. We call it the ABOGSAT approach. (Endorsed by A Bund Of Guys Sitting Around A Table). ABOGSAT is meant to be a pejorative, because it is by nature highly subjective. The more fluid those "Guys" are (meant in the non-gender sense), the more meaningless the endorsed practice.
Part of the "problem" of title can be addressed by ANY group if they articulate the "contribution". The title then becomes much more independent of the "group" - however (dis)reputable. Like currency to gold, the title is tied to the contribution. It retains its value beyond the life, nature, or size of any group because the contribution is timeless and undeniable.
B.F. Skinner and most economists for that matter would argue that people are selfish. They behave in a manner that is in their self interest. What? You argue that altruism is an example that sends Skinner out on his ear? Not so... Indeed the gift is in the giving. We now understand that charity, altruism, and "selfless" actions reward the giver. They extend life, improve health, etc., etc.
It's a rather "socialist" notion that I respectfully reject, Roy.
But to your point...
Between 1993 and today, IUKF has been batting my idea around. I had probably the best discussion on this very thing with Joan Neide (my partner on the titles project) and the board. And how did we resolve this?
What we are doing instead is starting anew with an objective process. The process will do several things.
Furthermore... Any group that seeks evidence-based techniques, strategies, teaching approaches, and organizational processes will - in my opinion - be the groups which survive in an ever-changing martial world. Organizations are joined not because the members hope their numbers will mean something. They are sought after because members receive value from the company they choose to associate themselves with - no matter the numbers or the personalities involved.
Be respectful of the past? Absolutely. Be respectful of peer organizations? I support that. But also be a friend of what the (wo)man on the street knows is the right way to go about things.
- Bill
Here's the one element that sticks in my craw, and has caused me to initiate a process I felt so strongly for that I put myself through it. I will start this element by re-posting an article from the Wall Street Journal published a few weeks ago.
Wow! How could something so absurd happen, you say? Well... Apparently there are cultural differences involved. The feelings don't quite translate - mostly because things are done differently in Germany vs. the United States.March 7, 2008, 4:05 pm
Who Are You Calling Doctor?
Posted by Jacob Goldstein
A handful of scientists who earned PhDs at places like CalTech are facing criminal charges in Germany for using the title “Dr.” Apparently, German law forbids using that honorific unless you’ve earned your doctorate at a university in EU.
At least seven researchers at Germany’s prestigious Max Planck Society have gotten in trouble recently for breaking the law, which carries a maximum fine of a year in jail, Chemical & Engineering News reports. There’s a way for foreign-trained doctors of philosophy to get special permission from state-level officials to use the title “Dr.”, but the hotshot Planck researchers weren’t clued in.
“This law caught everyone by surprise,” Bernard F. Schutz, a director at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics, told C&EN. Schutz, who received his PhD from CalTech, is one of several researchers who have removed the “Dr.” from their business cards and Web sites in order to resolve legal disputes. (The absence of Schutz’s honorific is conspicuous on this Planck page.)
“The whole situation is absurd,” Jonathan Gershenzon, told C&EN. Gershenzon, who earned a PhD from the University of Texas at Austin, was charged in January with impersonating a doctor.
I happen to have a bit of an inside track on this, by the way, because my company won the government of Germany in a contract, and one of my students opened a dojo in Germany while working there. Pause and reflect on the first thing I said, Roy. I know you can relate. We won THE GOVERNMENT OF GERMANY? Yep... They are that organized. In this case, it was their health care system. Even though it isn't a single payer system, it is organized in a way that only the Germans can organize things.
To an extreme.
To the point that one day you get a big "Whoops!" in the process.
The honorific issue with U.S. trained PhDs is getting resolved in the courts, and I will be called "Dr." probably the next time I go over there for business.
Meanwhile... I do not refer to myself as "Dr." on this side of the pond. And why? Because people who have no business referring to themselves as such are putting it on their business cards, their websites, their marketing literature, etc. And they are demanding that others call them such. There is no central clearinghouse for such in the United States, and there probably never will be. The honorific consequently has lost its value. So on my curriculum vita, you will see my education. That says what matters. And to the rest of the world, I am "Bill". That is the only way - for now - to disassociate myself from a mess.
The Okinawans take their martial arts seriously. Up until recently, they were very careful about how they addressed such issues. Culturally they had their house in order. But no longer. Now in the Uechi world, Rokudans automatically refer to themselves as "Renshi Rokudan", and nobody bats an eye. There is no process - period. Get your rank, assume the title, and visit your seamstress.
What is the value of such a title? It is worth less than the gold thread people are putting on their belts. In other circles such as the JKA which I was once associated with, Renshi meant something. It has zero INCREMENTAL value in the Uechi world. It is synonymous with Rokudan. Period.
That is a loss - a loss that is the consequence of a neglect in process.
Ahh... there's that "contribution" word.Roy wrote:
Traditionally, having a title conferred upon you is an honor, an affirmation by a group of peers or reputable people within an organization as a recognition that your time, grade, effort, and overall accomplishments are worthy of title, and that you are unique in your contribution.
I agree with this statement, Roy. But here are the problems.
- "a group of peers or reputable people within an organization" Oops... In the United States and unfortunately in most of the martial world now, such an entity doesn't exist. If you don't like the way things are going for you, then you just break away and form your own group. In some styles for instance, you are a nobody if you don't have the maximum titles and ranks.
- It is the nature of the free market in the world today for there to be businesses and groups that come and go.
If groups can come and go on the whims of whatever "strong individuals" decide they want to take their ball and go elsewhere, then the title concept collapses. All one has to do is find like-minded people, and you get whatever titles (or ranks) you want.
Part of the "problem" of rank is being addressed in Uechi Ryu. A rank is tied to the performance of specific pieces of material in front of a panel defined by the organization. It is also tied to a specific time-in-grade.
In my world of evidence-based medicine, we have a name for a practice that comes from tradition and folklore. We call it the ABOGSAT approach. (Endorsed by A Bund Of Guys Sitting Around A Table). ABOGSAT is meant to be a pejorative, because it is by nature highly subjective. The more fluid those "Guys" are (meant in the non-gender sense), the more meaningless the endorsed practice.
Part of the "problem" of title can be addressed by ANY group if they articulate the "contribution". The title then becomes much more independent of the "group" - however (dis)reputable. Like currency to gold, the title is tied to the contribution. It retains its value beyond the life, nature, or size of any group because the contribution is timeless and undeniable.
This is an interesting thought, Roy. However... Have you ever read B. F. Skinner's Beyond Freedom and Dignity? You've just tossed the entire science of behaviorism out the window. (Behavioral therapy happens to be one of the few non-Rx-based approaches to psych management that insurers pay for, BTW.)Roy wrote:
The motive for title should be 'the intent to reward' by a group to an individual rather than 'the intent' to achieve by that individual from the group.
B.F. Skinner and most economists for that matter would argue that people are selfish. They behave in a manner that is in their self interest. What? You argue that altruism is an example that sends Skinner out on his ear? Not so... Indeed the gift is in the giving. We now understand that charity, altruism, and "selfless" actions reward the giver. They extend life, improve health, etc., etc.
It's a rather "socialist" notion that I respectfully reject, Roy.
But to your point...
Between 1993 and today, IUKF has been batting my idea around. I had probably the best discussion on this very thing with Joan Neide (my partner on the titles project) and the board. And how did we resolve this?
- I pointed out that MOST people who have gone as far as a Rokudan had ALREADY made an undeniable and significant contribution. The purpose of the titles process then was to work with the candidate to articulate the contribution, and put it on display (online) for all to see and appreciate.
- For those who had gone that far and had never made ANY contribution, but STILL wanted the title, well who are we or any organization to say that they aren't worthy of making a contribution? Really now! So the step for this subgroup was to provide a process (like a proposal and dissertation process in academia) for them to take the necessary steps whereby they could make a contribution that a review board could judge and deem a worthy contribution.
What we are doing instead is starting anew with an objective process. The process will do several things.
- It will give recognition of contributions where they are long overdue.
- It will encourage others to make contributions, thereby keeping Kanbun's legacy from stagnating and dying a slow death as the greater martial arts community around us continues to evolve at breakneck pace.
Furthermore... Any group that seeks evidence-based techniques, strategies, teaching approaches, and organizational processes will - in my opinion - be the groups which survive in an ever-changing martial world. Organizations are joined not because the members hope their numbers will mean something. They are sought after because members receive value from the company they choose to associate themselves with - no matter the numbers or the personalities involved.
Be respectful of the past? Absolutely. Be respectful of peer organizations? I support that. But also be a friend of what the (wo)man on the street knows is the right way to go about things.
- Bill
-
Roy Bedard
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Sun Sep 20, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL USA
- Contact:
Thanks Bill. A very thoughtful reply. However, as you might expect; a rebuttal.
Being familiar with the behaviorist model from a performance perspective, I recognize that it isn't altruism that encourages the process of achievement. In fact, that notion is the great failed experiment of Socialism. I have traveled those parts of the world many times and I am no fool when it comes to seeing how removing incentive is the primary cause of community cancer. However, using Skinner's model I have simply turned the notion of the selfishness around, and chosen to focus on the organization rather than the individual who is selfish in the need to award title.
You see, organizations grow and prosper because they have something to offer individual members. Whether it be coupons, insurance plans, protection, special rates at hotels, or in our case; titles, they have to use these perks as a form of currency - to solidfy the connection between the individual member and the org. Do I believe that people train and contribute without the belief that one day they might be recognized? No way! But suggesting that titles should be the motivator for performance is like saying that soldiers wade into battle, looking to get injured to recieve a purple heart or that actors devote lifetimes to the film industry in order to recieve their lifetime achievement awards (usually posthumously) I reject that idea.
Purple hearts and Lifetime achievment awards are titles, recognitions of contribution, not goals per se. That is the distinguishing difference between rank and title. The Title is the stimulus for the organization to promote lifelong devotion from its membership. It makes the title available and all are aware of how prestigious it is to have it conferred upon you. It is awarded on a case by case basis. It is the knighting of the warrior, for a collective job well done. Achieving the title is intentionally left abstract and slightly ambiguous. There are no rules or pathways to achieving it - it is a recognition of certifying authority that breathes life into its meaning
Testing however is the response to the defined stimulus of Rank. There are fixed rules that tell a martial artist what they need to accomplish to get the award. These rules are called in American parlance, standards - and it is the standards that define the organization. Standards need to be fair, well balanced, achievable and just to be considered legitimate. It is an if/then equation that encourages training and performance. It is the carrot you speak of in your post about skinner. If a student does these things, then they are awarded rank. Simple. It is inspiring and a legitimate need of our organization to award rank to our members; and it fits squarley into Skinners theory of stimulus response, award and punishment; which I am BTW a firm believer in.
We haven't gotten into the discussion of subjective decision making yet when it comes to rank - I have intentionally avoided it - but as we turn the corner into that conversation, I am ready to offer an opinion.
As always - thanks for the response.
Oh - and I think that in America a group of peers or reputable people within our style does exist. It is called the IUKF, and though it is not a perfect organization, I am as proud of it as I am being an American at this unusual time of confusion, loss of worldly esteem and respect, disintegration of economy, etc. Like the US, I defend the IUKF because my belief in it gives it the power it needs to survive.
Being familiar with the behaviorist model from a performance perspective, I recognize that it isn't altruism that encourages the process of achievement. In fact, that notion is the great failed experiment of Socialism. I have traveled those parts of the world many times and I am no fool when it comes to seeing how removing incentive is the primary cause of community cancer. However, using Skinner's model I have simply turned the notion of the selfishness around, and chosen to focus on the organization rather than the individual who is selfish in the need to award title.
You see, organizations grow and prosper because they have something to offer individual members. Whether it be coupons, insurance plans, protection, special rates at hotels, or in our case; titles, they have to use these perks as a form of currency - to solidfy the connection between the individual member and the org. Do I believe that people train and contribute without the belief that one day they might be recognized? No way! But suggesting that titles should be the motivator for performance is like saying that soldiers wade into battle, looking to get injured to recieve a purple heart or that actors devote lifetimes to the film industry in order to recieve their lifetime achievement awards (usually posthumously) I reject that idea.
Purple hearts and Lifetime achievment awards are titles, recognitions of contribution, not goals per se. That is the distinguishing difference between rank and title. The Title is the stimulus for the organization to promote lifelong devotion from its membership. It makes the title available and all are aware of how prestigious it is to have it conferred upon you. It is awarded on a case by case basis. It is the knighting of the warrior, for a collective job well done. Achieving the title is intentionally left abstract and slightly ambiguous. There are no rules or pathways to achieving it - it is a recognition of certifying authority that breathes life into its meaning
Testing however is the response to the defined stimulus of Rank. There are fixed rules that tell a martial artist what they need to accomplish to get the award. These rules are called in American parlance, standards - and it is the standards that define the organization. Standards need to be fair, well balanced, achievable and just to be considered legitimate. It is an if/then equation that encourages training and performance. It is the carrot you speak of in your post about skinner. If a student does these things, then they are awarded rank. Simple. It is inspiring and a legitimate need of our organization to award rank to our members; and it fits squarley into Skinners theory of stimulus response, award and punishment; which I am BTW a firm believer in.
We haven't gotten into the discussion of subjective decision making yet when it comes to rank - I have intentionally avoided it - but as we turn the corner into that conversation, I am ready to offer an opinion.
As always - thanks for the response.
Oh - and I think that in America a group of peers or reputable people within our style does exist. It is called the IUKF, and though it is not a perfect organization, I am as proud of it as I am being an American at this unusual time of confusion, loss of worldly esteem and respect, disintegration of economy, etc. Like the US, I defend the IUKF because my belief in it gives it the power it needs to survive.
RRB
Okay,who stopped payment on my reality check?
Okay,who stopped payment on my reality check?
-
Roy Bedard
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Sun Sep 20, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL USA
- Contact:
sorry Dana
Sorry Dana. We werent ignoring your question. Speaking for myself...I dont know? Its a great question.
RRB
Okay,who stopped payment on my reality check?
Okay,who stopped payment on my reality check?
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sometimes I wonder, Roy, why intelligent people get into passionate discussions about things that they agree on in principle. Why? The devil is always in the details. And multiple working paradigms exist in many situations.
I can't argue with most of what you have written. I'm on the same page.
I am
I happen to be a member of IUKF, and am proud to serve as a member of a team.
The one thing I'd like to offer is the very thing I offer in my working world. Customers (members) come when you have products and services to offer. The product and service should come first; the customer will follow. Build it, and they will come.
Part of what I do in my world is to create a fair market. I help build classification systems and mathematical models that mine data and predict the future. The information the software provides helps humans make information-driven decisions.
Humans and good organizations aren't slaves to models and processes. They exist to help good people make the best decisions they can. They exist to help those humans document their decisions. Everything can be audited either by formal watchdog organizations or the court of public opinion.
In this case, we aren't talking about rocket science. We link title to a well-defined contribution or history of contributions. We are documenting it all, and creating transparency of process.
And the nice thing about the free market is that others can choose better ways - if they exist.
- Bill
I can't argue with most of what you have written. I'm on the same page.
I am
- A trained senior scientist
- A martial arts teacher and practitioner
- A father, and family person (the best that this flawed person can be...)
- A visionary (as defined by my ENTP personality)
- An MBA
- A lawyer
- A diplomat
- A politician
I happen to be a member of IUKF, and am proud to serve as a member of a team.
The one thing I'd like to offer is the very thing I offer in my working world. Customers (members) come when you have products and services to offer. The product and service should come first; the customer will follow. Build it, and they will come.
Part of what I do in my world is to create a fair market. I help build classification systems and mathematical models that mine data and predict the future. The information the software provides helps humans make information-driven decisions.
Humans and good organizations aren't slaves to models and processes. They exist to help good people make the best decisions they can. They exist to help those humans document their decisions. Everything can be audited either by formal watchdog organizations or the court of public opinion.
In this case, we aren't talking about rocket science. We link title to a well-defined contribution or history of contributions. We are documenting it all, and creating transparency of process.
And the nice thing about the free market is that others can choose better ways - if they exist.
- Bill
-
Gene DeMambro
- Posts: 1684
- Joined: Sat Dec 12, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA US of A
Hi Bill,
I am aware of the difference between "honorific" and "honorary". I don't recall stating otherwise.
I am quite fearful that anobserver to the process will say that "so-and-so's title is just honorary" or some other such pablum. Don't think it hasn't happened, because I have witnessed it first hand. When I asked whether that meant the recipient didn't earn their promotion, they backed down. I express my desire here that this process, for all individuals effected, represent something substantial. But again, from my first post, this is as it should be.
In any event, this is good.
Cheers,
Gene
I am aware of the difference between "honorific" and "honorary". I don't recall stating otherwise.
I am quite fearful that anobserver to the process will say that "so-and-so's title is just honorary" or some other such pablum. Don't think it hasn't happened, because I have witnessed it first hand. When I asked whether that meant the recipient didn't earn their promotion, they backed down. I express my desire here that this process, for all individuals effected, represent something substantial. But again, from my first post, this is as it should be.
In any event, this is good.
Cheers,
Gene
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
-
Gene DeMambro
- Posts: 1684
- Joined: Sat Dec 12, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA US of A
Interesting question, Dana. I don't have an answer for you. But, in the 1974 Edition of Uechi-Ryu Karate-Do (GEM's book), page 473 lists the promotion requirements for the All Okinawa Karate Do Federation. Article 4 of this section lists the degrees (Renshi, Kyoshi, Hanshi, Hanshi-Sei) and the requirements for each. Seperately, Article 8 of that same section lists ranks, and the requirements for each. Rank and title are distinct...at least as far back as 1967, which is date given for ratification of this document.
As for the Kokusai Budoin, their rank and title qualifications can be found here: http://www.imaf.com/policies.html#promotions
My guess is that these titles and honorifics are words that had varied meaning in the martial arts community going back for centuries, and IMAF, as well as other groups, attempted to codify as best they could.
Funny, that's what Bill's trying to do now!
Are the title requirements for IUKF posted anywhere?
Cheers,
Gene
As for the Kokusai Budoin, their rank and title qualifications can be found here: http://www.imaf.com/policies.html#promotions
My guess is that these titles and honorifics are words that had varied meaning in the martial arts community going back for centuries, and IMAF, as well as other groups, attempted to codify as best they could.
Funny, that's what Bill's trying to do now!
Are the title requirements for IUKF posted anywhere?
Cheers,
Gene
-
gmattson
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6073
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am
- Location: Lake Mary, Florida
- Contact:
Dana
I don't have the dates, but in both books (Uechi-ryu Karate Do and the Black Belt Test Guide) I published information on both "The Okinawean Karate Federation" and "The Uechi-ryu Karate-do Association". It is too long to copy, but here is the introduction:
In addition to my Rokyudan certificate I also received a Renshi certificate.
For whatever reason, the practice of candidates within the Uechi-Ryu Karate Association participating in this "Title" process ceased a short time after being implemented.
However, I thought that the process was one that should not be abandoned and was one of the first items on my agenda following the creation of IUKF
Again, I don't remember the years, but I do remember that Kiyohidi Shinjo and I, following our Rokyudan test, were requested to visit another local karate dojo, where we were to be interviewed and tested for our Renshi Degree. We filled out a form, answered some questions and performed kata and dan-kumite. This examination was given by the head of Okinawan Goju-ryu.Within the last couple of years, Master Kanei Uechi along with other karate Masters on Okinawa, realize they need to organize themselves in a loosely knit group that would spell out certain goals, while setting standards for themselves. The results are two charters; one created by the joint efforts of all the Masters (from all styles), the other, a more specific charter developed by the teachers of Uechi-Ryu. It is our sincere desire that all features of Uechi-Ryu unify their efforts in support of these charters."
In addition to my Rokyudan certificate I also received a Renshi certificate.
For whatever reason, the practice of candidates within the Uechi-Ryu Karate Association participating in this "Title" process ceased a short time after being implemented.
However, I thought that the process was one that should not be abandoned and was one of the first items on my agenda following the creation of IUKF
GEM
"Do or do not. there is no try!"
"Do or do not. there is no try!"
