Occam's Razor and Crabtree's Bludgeon

[HanshiClayton]

This essay has been on my website for years. It was another cornerstone of Chapter 6 of Shotokan's Secret, Expanded Edition.

===============
Assigning applications to Shotokan katas is an adventure in theory building, and as such may be guided by the rules of scientific theory construction. You should be familiar with the following two maxims: Occam's Razor and Crabtree's Bludgeon.

Occam's Razor: From William of Ockham in the 14th century, this rule of thumb says that it is a mistake to add "entities" to your theory when you don't really need them. It is generally paraphrased as, "The simplest explanation that fits the observations is the right one." I found application for it in H. Sandan, step 9-10. If step 9 is interpreted as a throw, then you have to invent a new enemy (a new entity) to engage in step 10. By Occam's Razor, the better explanation is that you stun the enemy in step 9, and then finish him off in step 10. Therefore, we conclude that step 9 was not originally a throw.

Many times a sensei will explain manji uke by telling you that one attacker is kicking from in front, and another attacker is punching at your head from behind. Somehow you are supposed to block both at the same time. Whenever a teacher invents a second attacker, you should immediately call on Mr. Occam. There is probably an explanation that does not require two attackers, and it will be a better explanation than the one you heard. (Hakkoryu jujutsu has at least two legitimate throws that use the manji uke posture: Hakko Nage and a variant on Tachi Te Kagami we know as Morote Te Kagami.)

Crabtree's Bludgeon: This is a reminder to revisit our sense of humility from time to time. It reminds us that "No set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated." It means that energetic scribbling will eventually connect all the dots. This is where we get Dinglehoppers.

None of us are innocent of this crime. I guard against it by referencing every application to a known technique in a historical fighting discipline. That way there is always a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, even if the rainbow itself may be all in my mind.
.

[HanshiClayton]

I taught a class at the UKAI bunkai seminar in Atlantic City in 2010. The lesson was "Crabtree's Bludgeon" and the point was that we can force combat interpretations on any set of body gestures.

My assistants and I taught the class a series of jujutsu-based combat applications, all of them real techniques, and all worthwhile to learn. Then I showed them the "kata" the techniques were from.

I started teaching the kata, and after about two minutes one of the students raised his hand. "Are we doing the Macarena dance?" he asked? "Yes!" I said, and cued the music. The whole class ended the session by doing the Macarena dance together.

The point of Crabtree's Bludgeon is that you can force jujutsu moves into any "kata," even one that is really a sexy Spanish dance. We can't say that we've found the "real" application just because it seems to fit the kata. For that we need a higher standard.