THINKING HATS.

ARE WE TALKING ABOUT AN ATTACK IN A SOCIAL CONTEXT OR A PHYSICAL CONTEXT?

If we buy into the concept of our different personalities as being separate people, to help keep the conversation relatable, we can think of the differing personalities as wearing different hats; at some level, we all understand this idea, so let us put on our THINKING HAT.

Situational awareness needs to be in the hands of someone other than the KUNG FU HAT, because the KUNG FU HAT is all action all day; he only turns up when Kung Fu is required, so it is the everyday hat that needs to assess any situation and, when called for, it is the EVERYDAY HAT that will hit the switch on the Bat Sign.

This is why quietly sitting and thinking about Fist Logic is so important.

More than any other Martial Art that I have experienced, with the possible exception of Western Boxing, “the sweet science,”,  Wing Chun demands that we are deeply connected to the theoretical side of the style; the principles and strategies are what separate us from other arts, and not any sleight of hand or Chi Sau trickery.

I mean this in a most basic, generalised way: deeply understanding why, when and where we would use Wing Chun, as opposed to different teachers’ ideas around how.

Wing Chun is a “Concept Driven, Counter Attacking “ Martial Art, do we know what these terms mean?

CONCEPT DRIVEN: My teacher, Sifu Jim Fung, would say repeatedly that everything we do physically is a “means to an end, and not an end in itself”, This is a pretty nebulous statement that can change depending on the concept of the conversation, but at its most basic it is about achieving the goal and not about any technique, action or movement. 

Different goals would require different answers, so Wing Chun is about good decision-making and about staying tight with the principles and strategy of Counter- Attack.

COUNTER-ATTACKING:  This is where things get tricky.

What does it mean to be ATTACKED?

By definition, counter-attacking is a direct response to being attacked; if we are not sure what an attack is, we are in all kinds of trouble.

Are we talking about an attack in a social context or a physical context?

If someone abuses me for supporting my football team, am I using Wing Chun thinking when I push them down the stairs?

And more importantly, will a N.S.W. Magistrate see things the same way?

Is making a conscious choice to step into a combat environment with another person, be it a ring, a mat, or a car park, in any way similar to unasked-for random violence with a potentially unknown assailant?

We need to understand the difference between social violence and antisocial violence.

If you choose to fight, you are never being attacked; you are simply being, quit fairly and in accord with the rules, even if they are unwritten rules, a willing participant.

This is the core of the dilemma.

Was your definition of an attack before your involvement in the Martial Arts Community the same as it is now???

How about your definition of a fight then vs now?

The person we were before we engaged in Martial Arts is the WHITE HAT of normality; everyone everywhere wears this hat. This is the baseline that society in general deems normal; we will be measured by this baseline if we end up in a court of law.

WHITE HAT thinking;

Fighting is two people, or more, physically, verbally, or emotionally causing harm to each other.

Attacking is one person enacting unwanted violence upon another person with the sole intention of causing harm.

Counter-Attacking: responding to an unwanted attack as immediately as possible with the intention of turning the tables and becoming the attacker, with all the connotations of being an attacker, including causing harm.

Whether we agree with these definitions as Martial Artists is unimportant, but it is a landscape we need to safely traverse.

Responding to an attack by another person is, by definition, defensive.

So, on top of what the White Hats think, we need to find our own definition of Self-defense.

When have we successfully defended ourselves?

Is the bad guy dead?

Broken and bleeding?

Unconscious?

Bruised and embarrassed at picking on the wrong guy as they watch us walk away?

Wing Chun’s Fist logic is vague on this front.

What Leung Jan considered Self-Defense in 1860s Foshan was beyond doubt a far way removed from what Yip Man thought of as Self-Defense in post W.W.2 Hong Kong, which is even farther removed from Self-Defense here in Australia in 2026.

What we decide is the end of a violent encounter becomes a personal decision that should be based on the societal consequences we will face from that decision.

Never forget that pleading “Self -Defence” is admitting that you are guilty but explaining why you had no choice, and hoping that a Magistrate sees things in the same light.

So what does Counter-Attacking mean to us?

This IDEA/OPINION, once we have formed it, is the goal of the training we are involved in.

As I have said many times, we should begin our thinking from where we want the encounter to finish and work backward to where it began, and not begin from a position of ‘he does that, so we do this’, a position that completely takes away the option of not engaging at all, of de-escalation, of talking it down.

This position of ‘fronting up and standing our ground’ is based in fear and a lack of confidence in our ability, and it poisons our training.

Ironically, choosing not to FIGHT, because if we do not try to avoid and evade, we are CHOOSING TO FIGHT- is easy when you believe you have the skill to shut this guy down and walk away.

When we talk about this at training, we are already in our KUNG FU HAT; as such, we are preaching to the choir, so we need to spend time thinking about this when we are in WHITE HAT MODE.

It is WHITE HAT THINKING that decides how we engage with an angry person.