*throws a chair at Casey*

That's how I subtly let people know their comments are unwelcomed.



With 35 different definitions of what "master" means, it's no wonder some people dislike using the word, while others don't. Like you said;



However, the definition I, myself, associate with the title master is this one;



I've always associated "masters" with "mastery", or those who have "mastered" the art in question. A few years of paying club fees shouldn't equate to mastery, nor should simply buying into a franchise.

I guess it depends on what the word master means to you, the individual. As you understand it, "workman qualified to teach apprentices" is the most appropriate, while I see "A person eminently skilled in something, as an occupation, art, or science." to be more fitting. If we can't agree on what "master" means, we probably can't agree on when it is appropriate to use.


By the way, did you see my last question? When you meet a new teacher, does he introduce himself as, "Master Smith" or simply "John Smith"?

By the way, did you see my last question? When you meet a new teacher, does he introduce himself as, "Master Smith" or simply "John Smith"?

In my rather limited experience in HDGD here in the US I have seen that it depends on whether or not the master is Korean.....

Still, there's no mention of "near perfection" as a requirement in the definition you provided. I point that out only because it sounds as if that's an expectation of yours in order to be worthy of the title. Maybe I'm misreading you?

Isn't the concept of mastery relative - relative to what has already been demonstrated by someone else? If so, then even the individual(s) who are serving as the premium model likely have room for improvement. They may even have a lot of room for improvement. What if they're really ineffective, but just happen to be the best at the discipline? It's all relative. Are they still considered a master?

How is mastery to be quantified or measured for the purpose of being able to determine that an individual has reached mastery? Making it a requirement that an individual has achieved 4th dan in order to carry the title of "Master" is an attempt to do just that: to make it somewhat objective. Sure, it's not a perfect system, but it's about all we have at this time.

I see the application of the title in much the same light as "Professor," "Colonel," "Doctor," and so on. Maybe it's not so much a matter of how far the individual is from near perfection as it is how far they've come since their beginning and the disparity between them and novices in their field.

What about "Grand Master?" Where does this title fit in to the discussion?

As I think of the title "Master", I consider it along the lines of a level of respect rendered to someone. Positional authority, if you will. When I meet someone, most times by introduction from a mutual friend/aquaintence telling me they are a master, I will give a level of respect commensurate with others I have known by that title. Where that particular individual's esteem goes from there is entirely based on what I feel they rate. Initially, I respect only what I am told about the person. As time goes on, I can decide for myself whether that person rates the level of respect given, deserves more or less. After being in the military for 16 years, I have met many people who earned my respect and were a credit to their rank. I have also met those who should have been treated the way they treated those below them. You still would address them as "sir" or "ma'am". That is what etiqutte and rules demanded, but you never had any respect for them.

Somewhere along the lines, someone decided that the "master" deserved the title. It is really the credibility of that individual bestowing the title which will determine if the "master" has earned the title. I look on myself as a seeker of knowledge and skill. I hope someday that I may earn the rank of master, but I'm sure that I'll feel uncomfortable with the title. It is the same with many folks in accepting a compliment. They are generally easier to give than to receive. That being said, there will always be those who feel that they have earned the title. They are the same ones who would feel that the compliment was not generous enough.

With a few exceptions, I really don't mind or care what someone is called. It is the person inside the uniform that earns or loses my respect.

I see "Master" as a title, like sir or doctor. An external label applied to one by others and typically denotes an advanced level of expertise.

It's by no means "end-level" or the pinnacle of an area of study. In scholarly circles a Masters degree follows a bachelor's and precedes a doctoral degree.
(In that analogy one could view a Grand Master as someone with a Doctorate in Gumdo )

I am entering this a little late but here is my two cents worth. I would have to agree with Mr. voss and Mr. bonnyman. My wife agrees with me in that it is a title that more advanced and experienced TSD Masters felt like my sabumnin earned so it was given to him. I am a minister here in Charleston and don't have any issues at all calling him master as that is a title he has earned. I also don't have any problem calling my doctor "doctor" Patel as he had studied many years and has become very proficient in a ceretain area of medicine, completed all of the examinations and has been awarded that title.On the other hand, some of my family does not agree. As my mom puts it "I only have one Master and that is Jesus". I think there are probably two camps on this issue. You either have an issue with it and can't get past calling sombody Master, or you see it for what it is which in my mind is a title that is earned after years of hard consistant work to grow in your art.

But, what if that person didn't earn it?

With so many people calling themselves "Master <Blank>" after a few seminars and a downpayment, doesn't that sort of cheapen the word "master"? If everyone is considered to have become a "master" of Haidong Gumdo after only a few weekend seminars, then I guess we're all masters.

In all seriousness, I simply find the term "master" to be lame cliché mostly found in 1960's Kung Fu movies, backyard YouTube samurais and self-proclaimed 16 year old ninja masters. I'm not denying that there certainly are exceptional masters of Haidong Gumdo; I just find it tacky to use such an overused word to describe them.

I don't see anything wrong with a great teacher being addressed as Mister, or Sir. For Gumdoists who are more "traditional", Sabumnim, Sabunim, Kwanjangnim and even Seonsaengnim are the Korean equivalents. Why not use those?

Good point Mr. Bourque,
That is the title that my school and the organization we belong to uses so I will follow suit.
I also agree that it is too easy to recieve the title in some cases and that does frustrate me because it can give martials arts a bad name .I feel like some responsibility should fall on the prospective student to do some research on a school and organization, and respectfully ask questions before joining.

I will always do as I'm told and will always address an instructor/teacher as "Master Blank" when I'm told to do so. However, once I reach that stage of 4th Dan, I do have the choice of not introducing myself as a master, nor to have my peers or prospective students address me as master. When that time comes, whether or not I want to be addressed as Master or Mister or just plain ol' Charles is completely up to me.

As for now, it's Charles. I'm not comfortable having my peers call me Mister, especially when I'm probably one of the youngest ones here.

I wouldn't think of calling one of the "Pillars of the forum community" anything but Mr.

Well I would be willing to bet I am one of the lowest ranked on this forum so i try give respect to the higher rank.

If Charles is what you want, Charles is what you get.

Bow to sensei... BOW TO SENSEI!

All that "Pillar of the Community" means is that I have a big mouth.

oh, a big mouth. I thought it was in recognition of another physical attribute

In most organizations you'll have examples of good and bad. I've seen a lot of horrible vids on the net but also a lot of good ones too. The talent is out there. Buying into the federation and being awarded doesn't necessarily mean poor skill. There are those gifted individuals out there that take to the martial arts like a sponge. But I agree that those individuals are rare and there seem to be a proliferation of insta-Masters.

And while this seems to some to cheapen the art it's been the expansion strategy for the federation for quite some time. And with respect to increasing the shear number of schools, it's working. The quality will undoubtedly vary and likely be low at first. But the strong ones will grown and quality increase with time and effort.

A lot of us don't agree with rapid expansion and the corresponding lower quality that often seems to come with it, but I personally want to see the art grow to as many as possible. I don't however have the resources to do that. The federation does. So for better or worse, that's the way things stand.

I don't see anything wrong with established school owners from buying into the federation and being awarded dan level. It's similar to an educational institution awarding honorary degrees. I would, however, hope that it's conditional on subsequent intensive training or testing.




Interestingly enough, engineering associations enjoy a legal protection on the terms "electrical engineer", "mechanical engineer", etc, such that you cannot legally proclaim yourself as such unless you belong to an engineering association. Any person advertising or calling themselves an engineer without proof of their credentials can be subject to ligation by the association.

Now while I doubt the Federation would be able to adopt such ownership of the term "Master", since it's part of the common vernacular, it may be able to arrange something similar for the korean equivalent. This would most likely require partnership with the other major Korean martial arts (TSD, TKD, HKD, etc). However unlikely such a partnership may be it would help address the issue of the self-procalimed "Master" and allow only those certified by the federation to call themselves "Kwanjangnim", in so far as the Federation is willing to legally enforce it.

That won't work because the World HDGD Federation doesn't have the slightest form of quality control with it's "franchise masters". Simply put, if you have the cash, they have the belts. Why couldn't I just proclaim to be a 4th Dan of my own self-taught TaeKwonNinjaBowlingDo and apply for franchise ownership? (Bullshido.com is a great place to find these self-proclaimed masters.) I doubt I'd be rejected from the "franchise masters" program, unless of course, I didn't have any money or other collateral.

If you see a guy waving around a belt with a bagillion stripes, or a little patch that says "Grand Master" followed by 13 other patches, it's usually a clear indication that you should find the closest door and run through it.

However, there really isn't any need for a quality control program. Most of these Insta-Masters can be spotted from miles away. Here are a few common-sense ways to tell if a "master" is a fake.

1. His Gumdo looks like sh*t. (Sorry to put it bluntly, but this should be obvious.)
2. He refuses to tell you how long he has been studying Gumdo, or...
3. He refuses to show you his Black Belt Certificates.
4. He calls Gumdo an "Ancient Korean Samurai Art".
5. His car has a bumper sticker that says, "Freedom ain't free, but this ass-kicking is."
6. His belt has more stripes on it than he has fingers. (Not applicable if he has no arms... In which case he shouldn't be teaching anyway.)
7. His uniform is made from golden shinny threads that sparkle, and his sword has a spinner and a neon light.
8. He also has a 4th (or 8th... whatever.) Dan in 7 other obscure martial arts that no one has ever heard of.
9. Swears by the realism of Action-Flex swords.
10. Thinks Gumdo should have more screaming in it, à-la-XMA.


Heh, the above list was more for giggles, but the first three criteria are really musts. The problem isn't that teachers don't have experience. The problem is that some teachers will lie or avoid answering a simple question like, "When did you start training in Haidong Gumdo?". It's easier to keep students when they don't know you've only been to a few seminars, yet feel comfortable calling yourself a Haidong Gumdo Master.

Charles,
Some of those on that list sound like you may have encountered them before somewhere.......