Imitation as an advantage.

Hi Dave, (sorry for the two questions at once!)

Something that's been interesting me. The imitation of the person who is on the receiving end in any violent situation.

I see it all the time both verbally where the person on the receiving end starts to do little more than just repeat the agressive comments of the other person and physically where the same thing happens.

Verbally.

"You fu*ken cut me up."

"Cut you up?"

"What you staring at ar$e-hole?"

"staring?"

etc etc

Then physically. Nine times out of ten someone gets punched and if able they punch back. They get butted and if able they butt back. They get kicked so they kick back.

Their brain seems to only be able to function in line with that they've been given and just that second experienced. (HE has done x so I SHOULD do X)

Aside from the obvous advantages in that imitation of the aggressor, there seems to be an inherent need because of that to have more available to you that just one thing. If you are a puncher.. and you ALWAYS look for that big strike then you are scuppered when and if that strike fails. If you are a grappler then you are similarly scuppered when you meet someone who grapples better than you do. In fact you are guaranteeing you will lose by putting yourself in their environment and "feeding" them what they actually need in order to win.

Would seem to logically follow that you need to know MORE not LESS?

I thought I was due another 'Chris special'

OK look at very young children.. 3-4 ish
When C1 pushes C2, C2 usually just takes it without any defensive action happening. Then C2 pushes C1 back.. the same happens.
C1 SLAPS C2, C2 takes it, then C2 slaps C1 back.

as you rightly say etc etc.

This isnt imitation per se. its MIMICKING.. now apes mimic, which is slightly different to imitating and copying.

The mimic is a more solid learning process in the simian brain.
COPYING is trying to do something EXACTLY the same
(like a kata).. Imitating is trying to BE (not do) some other animal..
MIMICKING is taking a skill and re-doing it with your own personal interpretations of it.

Of all animal species on this crowded globe, APES do it best...although it has to be said that the further up the evolutionary ladder the species the more it is an integral part of their development.

lower' species dont copy, mimic or imitate.. they are PROGRAMMED.. like most insects and many reptiles of the lower orders.

because speech is kind of there in the apes, they use sounds to 'gel' with actions and this increases the learning process.
we are a species that more than others separates speech from action as much as we can.

However the mimicking process is still there.. so because we havent LEARNED confontation in the way young of other species still do , and in fact 'ancient' man used to do, we havent got the subconscious confidence that we have been taughtit,
Young of many mammals play fight all the time, then when the confrontation is real, that learning process comes into play.

we on the other hand because of 'civilisation and ettiquette' STIFLE this learning process, therefore much of our missed learning is substituted with spectator (as opposed to being involved) learning.
BUT we dont practise it, so when it comes real, this mimickry is necessary, so we try to 'imitate' as you put it, the actions we havent practised.

Really if you do this its allowing a degree of 'control' to stay with the opponent.
the real answer is DETACHMENT.. treating the opponent as something YOU are controlling, not the other way round.

So YES in a way you need MORE not less, because this allows you to take the path of control, bit the path of mimickry

Thanks Dave,

Your response seems to link into the concepts on validation and confirmation we have talked about?

Also, if we look at how Karl operates for example that would be the "detachment" you mention in operation? He gives nothing to the other person by way of validation or confirmation. He doesn't seem to justify the other persons actions and he doesn't reward them in any way?

Can be very disconcerting I suppose?

Correct mate .. Karl is one of best examples of that principle I have ever had the pleasure to teach.