Boxing is a great sport on almost all of the above criteria. Unfortunately, it’s not an option for those with a preference for keeping their blood and their spinal fluid separate.
I believe Alan Turing was a keen (and good?) player of one version of this game, where you have to run around the house between moves. (Of course this is really several different games, parameterized by the size of your house and what there is in the way when you try to run around it.)
While yoga seems like a salutary way of spending time, I woudn’t call that sport. Clear win-states and competition seems crutial to sport.
And that’s why sport for rationalists is someting so hard to come up with and so valuable—it needs to combine the happiness from the effort to be better than others, while battling the sense of superiority, which often comes with winning.
Sense of group superiority is to me the most revolting thing about most sports.
I don’t think that Yoga is the way to go. Yoga lives from doing certain things because they are traditions instead of having good reasons for doing them.
Feldenkrais would be an example of more modern body work that actually has a robust theory base behind itself.
Prasara yoga seems to provide advantages over completely traditional yoga but be phrased in way that’s still target at New Agey people. Feldenkrais having been created by a physicist should be more accessible to people who see themselves as rationalists.
I lately discovered Contact Improvisation. While a lot of the crowd that dances Contact Improvisation has a New Agey background, you don’t need to accept any spiritual ideas to follow the framework. The rules aren’t complex. I was able to have a good dance the first time I went dancing Contact Improvisation without taking a course. That’s partly because I do have other dance experience but there are other dances that I couldn’t dance intuitively.
For people without dancing background I would recommend to take a course in Contact Improvisation before dancing it freely.
Scott Sonnon, the man in the prasara yoga video, takes a rationalist approach to exercise.
Here’s Shiva Nata—a sort of yoga that involves combinatoric movements. It would be easier to structure as competition—the scoring could be based on the complexity of movement that a person could do accurately.
Here’s Shiva Nata—a sort of yoga that involves combinatoric movements. It would be easier to structure as competition—the scoring could be based on the complexity of movement that a person could do accurately.
I think that goal misses the point. From the article you linked:
Continuous spiral movements consist of two complete counter-directional sine curves. Therefore, performing such movements sets a series of alternating active and passive fragments of the energy flow. These energy impulses purify energy channels and balance the circulation of energy inside them.
Synchronizing spiral movements of the limbs with the breath creates a constant and intensive energy consumption from the surrounding space, translation of it through psychic-energy structure channels, and accumulation and radiation into the surrounding space.
Complexity isn’t the point but energy flow is. Those semantics are off-putting to rationalists. If you on the other hand simply drop the main part of the practice you are doing something like cargo culting. It might superficially look the same but you lose the essence.
I rather prefer to have bodywork that’s from the ground up based on a more modern framework.
I don’t think having competitions is necessary. But it might make sense to look at Tai Chi competitions. They don’t do their Tai Chi patterns and see who does them the most beautiful way but they do push hands competitions.
I wasn’t looking for something which was guaranteed to be good for people. I was looking for something which was harmless (probably), difficult, and possible to evaluate objectively—the first makes it rationalist, and the second and third make it a potential sport.
I can believe that it’s better for people to coordinate movement and breathing without buying into dubious metaphysics.
I can believe that it’s better for people to coordinate movement and breathing without buying into dubious metaphysics.
But it’s not only about coordinating movement and breathing. If you reduce yoga to those elements you lose something.
Modern body work usually is also about things like authentic expression of emotions. It’s about constantly discovering new ways to move your body.
I was looking for something which was harmless (probably), difficult, and possible to evaluate objectively—the first makes it rationalist, and the second and third make it a potential sport.
I had to check the dictionary. Webster has two meanings for sport: “a contest or game in which people do certain physical activities according to a specific set of rules and compete against each other” and “a physical activity (such as hunting, fishing, running, swimming, etc.) that is done for enjoyment”.
Boxing is a great sport on almost all of the above criteria. Unfortunately, it’s not an option for those with a preference for keeping their blood and their spinal fluid separate.
Fair point. Chess-sprinting?
Could prasara yoga be made into a sport? Should it be?
I believe Alan Turing was a keen (and good?) player of one version of this game, where you have to run around the house between moves. (Of course this is really several different games, parameterized by the size of your house and what there is in the way when you try to run around it.)
While yoga seems like a salutary way of spending time, I woudn’t call that sport. Clear win-states and competition seems crutial to sport.
And that’s why sport for rationalists is someting so hard to come up with and so valuable—it needs to combine the happiness from the effort to be better than others, while battling the sense of superiority, which often comes with winning.
Sense of group superiority is to me the most revolting thing about most sports.
I’d give it a shot.
I don’t think that Yoga is the way to go. Yoga lives from doing certain things because they are traditions instead of having good reasons for doing them.
Feldenkrais would be an example of more modern body work that actually has a robust theory base behind itself.
Prasara yoga seems to provide advantages over completely traditional yoga but be phrased in way that’s still target at New Agey people. Feldenkrais having been created by a physicist should be more accessible to people who see themselves as rationalists.
I lately discovered Contact Improvisation. While a lot of the crowd that dances Contact Improvisation has a New Agey background, you don’t need to accept any spiritual ideas to follow the framework. The rules aren’t complex. I was able to have a good dance the first time I went dancing Contact Improvisation without taking a course. That’s partly because I do have other dance experience but there are other dances that I couldn’t dance intuitively.
For people without dancing background I would recommend to take a course in Contact Improvisation before dancing it freely.
Scott Sonnon, the man in the prasara yoga video, takes a rationalist approach to exercise.
Here’s Shiva Nata—a sort of yoga that involves combinatoric movements. It would be easier to structure as competition—the scoring could be based on the complexity of movement that a person could do accurately.
I think that goal misses the point. From the article you linked:
Complexity isn’t the point but energy flow is. Those semantics are off-putting to rationalists. If you on the other hand simply drop the main part of the practice you are doing something like cargo culting. It might superficially look the same but you lose the essence.
I rather prefer to have bodywork that’s from the ground up based on a more modern framework.
I don’t think having competitions is necessary. But it might make sense to look at Tai Chi competitions. They don’t do their Tai Chi patterns and see who does them the most beautiful way but they do push hands competitions.
I wasn’t looking for something which was guaranteed to be good for people. I was looking for something which was harmless (probably), difficult, and possible to evaluate objectively—the first makes it rationalist, and the second and third make it a potential sport.
I can believe that it’s better for people to coordinate movement and breathing without buying into dubious metaphysics.
[Tai Chi competitions](http://www.wustyle-europe.com/competition2014.html include form competition as well as push hands.
But it’s not only about coordinating movement and breathing. If you reduce yoga to those elements you lose something.
Modern body work usually is also about things like authentic expression of emotions. It’s about constantly discovering new ways to move your body.
I had to check the dictionary. Webster has two meanings for sport: “a contest or game in which people do certain physical activities according to a specific set of rules and compete against each other” and “a physical activity (such as hunting, fishing, running, swimming, etc.) that is done for enjoyment”.
I don’t think that competition is needed.