A Rebuttal to my Critics:
“Through the constant process of learning, Bruce evolved a personal philosophy, the central theme of *which was the liberation of the spirit* through greater self-knowledge. To free one’s self from preconceived notions, prejudices, and conditioned responses is essential to understanding truth and reality.”—John Little (Bruce Lee, ed. Little, “Striking Thoughts: Bruce Lee’s Wisdom for Daily Living,” xv-xvi)
Let’s face it, there has been a shift in me since many knew me in high school, to early adulthood. And honestly, I would be terrified if that weren’t the truth. Stagnance leads to atrophy; and atrophy, to entropy. The fact is, we all ought to have changed since high school/early adulthood. “Change” is often a natural process, and change is neither good nor bad in itself. “Change” in the concept itself is neither “extreme” nor “minor” in our everyday use of it—what qualifies the "change" is the direction and its degree. But I have to say that my “change” has not been a change that equates the change of, and within, the many of those whom have been critiquing my “change.” Commonly, I hear this notion/accusation repeated in different ways, by the community at large, friends, by different people that I grew up with, (family when I’m not present—but is often later relayed back to me) that has become a cliché at this point, and the way I’ve “changed” is clearly negative (“too extreme,” “too radical,” “polarized,” etc.). Whereas those that criticize the “change” in me, implicit in their notion of my transformation is that they in actuality have not changed--(but if they have, which is unspoken in their critiques, it is clearly a positive, or a neutral-change, from their point of view).
However, it is absolutely clear to me, though it may not be to many of those who utter this accusatory cliché toward me, that many of these people have changed too—and a large handful of them have changed for the worse.
To be objective for a moment: there is a red flag when I hear this sort of judgement or retelling from someone else, right? There is this egocentric part of human beings that comes out in these types of situations where one person thinks they are right, in the face of masses who think otherwise. This person (especially in the context of a community) is a "Lone Ranger" in the face of their environment; they are "stubborn,” recalcitrant, against their social milieu. Often, we typically think of this person as delusional, or accuse them as not confronting something psychological within, or not confronting the truth, a moral truth. We see them as having some sort of narcissistic, psychological-hang-up in the face of evidence or reality even, or as someone with problems, as someone who needs help, for whatever reason(s).
Even though this is often the case, there are exceptions to this stubborn example I have described. For example, what if I told you, this person lives or lived in the rural conservative South? What if I told you this “Lone Ranger" was a person who was, and is existing/living in the era of Donald Trump?
Even before explicating the further details about what will come next, immediately, (at least at this point in America) the tribalism sets in, right? The proponents of Donald Trump form on one side, and immediately classify this person as "a liberal," or "brainwashed by the dems." On the other side of the polarization, there is the other groups of people, typically anti-Donald Trump that say what they say: namely he's a sexist, racist, and fascist-oligarch/authoritarian among other pejoratives. And I don't bring this up to tip toe. I do not word it this way to imply some sort of middle-ground fallacy: that we ought to "find a middle ground" just because Sally heatedly says that "the sky is blue," (“Donald Trump is an American hero, and what this country needs!”) and Gerald heatedly rebuts asserting that "the sky is actually yellow,” (“Donald Trump is anti-American […]”—and *idealistic interpretation of “American”*, in other words, America at its best—“[…]and *is absolutely not* what this country needs!”). It would be a fallacy to "compromise" the truth for a "middle ground" and settle with "green." No, absolutely not—I will not, and have not! I have taken a stand, and I continue to, we are morally obligated as decent people to take a stand against the large of what he stands for. And yet, while there may be some political case out there where the sky (as a metaphorical stand-in for an equivalent moral issue) actually is green like in South Dakota or Minnesota, or even Oklahoma on special occasions during a severe thunderstorm, in this case, the sky is either blue or yellow based on the evidence. [The exclusive-or was used here.] Thus, our analogies here amount to the following: we call out Donald Trump for populist fascism that even conservatives have pinned him with, we call him out for oppression, oligarchy, and dismantling democracy.
However, I think the most objective and sincere readers (for those still listening) will automatically see, with their lived wisdom, their insight, their goodwill, and their desire of knowing the truth, to how this particular modern American socio-political dynamic could certainly change our view of this this “stubborn” person with the alleged “narcissistic-psychological-hang-up,” or this “Lone Ranger” who was recalcitrant in the face of [mob] “evidence.” This person, this “narcissist,” this person “with problems,” this “Lone Ranger” was me--who after all was/is far from by himself/myself—though was largely isolated in the rural South. *In fact,* he was no “Lone Ranger”at all, *I was* simply courageous enough to take a stand in spite of losing my social standing, family, and religious community for it, and now we need others to do alike, and like those before me, that have inspired me (historical figures, professors, philosophers, theologians).
[A qualifier: In no way am I “tooting my horn” here—and in no way am I unique in this, but within our communities, it certainly can feel like we are the only ones, it can feel like everyone is against us).
Earlier when I said a “large handful of these people” or “many” of these people “have changed for the worse,” I do not mean that these people are irredeemable, or even that these people are less valuable than me. No, I see them as equally intrinsically valuable counterparts, even if I have compelling evidence to assert they are committing moral atrocities via either, active engagement or cowardice complicity.
Pre-Donald Trump, most of these people were largely, what we might call "apolitical." And the forthcoming evidence/assertion is sparing considering off the top of my head, I know of not one purely nonwhite person who has spouted this rhetoric towards me from my hometown: 99% of those people discussing my “change” are white people as well (which is statistically common in a white rural area of southeast Oklahoma). Pre-Donald Trump, many of them did not read the news; many of them did not watch the news. (And to push back against my own critique of these “change”-accusers who have apparently themselves changed for the worse here: there are a complex array of reasons for why that is the case, including the now *widespread* social media access, and a salience of its adoption by the public, and its (social media’s and the elites’ who run it) salience for profiting off of our use, and the capitalist invitation for the fusing of news outlets into it in an nearly inescapable way, and lastly, a salience of political memes that have proven to effect the beliefs of American citizens, etc.)
Actually, in retrospect, as matter of fact, if any of us were “political” in high school, in our teens, (or thought we were “political”), in actuality our politics were our parents views—not ours—again that is if we were political at all. This was immensely salient anyway. And I would say that stands generally for most kids pre-social media (and even up to an extent with kids living within the age of social media). Most of us were largely "apolitical" (which turns out to be a political position unintentionally, whether we like it or not) and that especially went for my former self, the old Dillon, the mostly-martial artist, perhaps undiscovered-thinker, that everyone wishes would re-possess his/this contemporary body.
However, the truth is, there is a political dimension to morality, and that is something that I have always held strongly even if tainted by southern Evangelicalism, as Protestant Evangelicalism is infamous (in largely all, but especially its racially-white conservative-cultural manifestations) for prioritizing the "individual" to the neglect, or complete omission of the "social-political" dimension of morality, the community in other words. And that “morality” is very saliently in white Protestant Evangelical circles tethered to religious rites, ceremonial practices like “going to church,” “looking like a respectable conservative Christian” and probably more importantly… an individual moral world (that does come into contact with the social world) as it is tethered to a “personal relationship” to the otherworldly.
Thus, I thought that I had my own political, religious, philosophical, moral worldview(s) almost all the way through undergraduate college (hyperbolic here, but having some truth), and as it turned out, I didn’t really start coming up with my own political views until my ethico-religous paradigm begin to fail the tests proctored by life's "hard knocks,” that is: until it began to fail on accounts of the oppressed of society; until it began to fail on accounts of inherited faulty or bad theology of my upbringing in that would come to a head in undergraduate.
[And for those who call out the exaggeratory nature, or for those who might call me “elitist” for suggesting these changes came about during undergraduate, Don’t get me wrong, there is no sharp “black and white” divide of, *pop*: for every person A-Z, they enter a certain threshold in undergraduate, and *transformation*: now, adult-political-views-fuse-into-consciousness* (robot voice fades out)].
No, I know of very little, if anything in reality, that works this way, especially when discussing the psyche/consciousness of human beings--a complex anomaly no one yet fully understands—and may never.
Although, there are some things that we (philosophers, scientists, theologians, psychologists) do understand about it, we at least understand that the system/the phenomenon/the condition of (psyche/spirit/soul/consciousness), operates at least in part through habit and conditioning—and one need not be any of the previously mentioned titles to understand this. In a very minimal sense, at least this much is true of the phenomenon. Bruce Lee, the layperson’s philosopher influenced by the East and the West, recognized this much when he wrote: “The mind is like a fertile garden, it will grow anything you wish to plant—beautiful flowers or weeds.” (Bruce Lee, ed. Little, Bruce Lee: Jeet Kune Do: Bruce Lee’s Commentaries on the Martial Way, 364.) Or perhaps again in the same text when, Bruce wrote, “Recognizing that the power of will is the [uncompromised—pun intended] supreme court over all departments of my mind[,] I will exercise it daily when I need the urge to action for any purpose; and I will form habits designed to bring the power of my will into action […].” (359) And perhaps implicitly, and reciprocally, Bruce recognizes the way the unconscious or subconscious parts of ourselves that store information here. This is especially true when he wrote, “Subconscious mind: Recognizing the influence of my subconscious mind over my power of will, I shall take care to submit to it a clear and definite picture of my major purpose in life[,] and all minor purposes leading to my major purpose, and I shall keep this picture constantly before my subconscious mind by repeating it daily!” (361) So, no, I don't mean to say it happened abruptly, it has been taking place for a long time, little by little. But I don't think much of its happening in college is coincidental—especially if one has any rudimentary understanding of philosophical education.
However, there were certainly things that challenged me in undergraduate, namely philosophy, namely lived experiences. To name a few: dating/marrying into the Black community—(with longstanding anger and welling sadness I acknowledge/have long acknowledged as a historically/contemporarily nationally and internationally oppressed community). Another, traumatically losing my wife which was practically my everything at the time, facilitating in the shattering of my composition, my epistemology, and my worldview. All of these factors played individual roles, and at times synergistically worked together to give me an existential death-rattle, one serious enough to physiologically/psychologically/spiritually/epistemologically shake me to the core enough to test some of my most sacred, intimate, and protected beliefs in which my identity was founded upon.
My "change" has not been one of being merely carried where the wind takes me, or culturally assimilating to the convenience of the environment around me--in largely what is often an unconscious fashion--which is part of the human condition, right? Even Bruce Lee recognized this. As he wrote about his transition from being a Chinese man in a racist America, to becoming a star, he noticed the unconscious assimilation even in himself. He wrote, “Don’t court the flattery or approval of others. […] Everybody comes up to you and its Mister Lee. […] But if you have no name, they all say, ‘Boy, look at the disgusting juvenile dilenquent!’ I mean, too many people are ‘yes, yes, yes’ to you all the time; so unless you realize what life is all about and that right now some [capitalist] game is happening… […b]ut most people tend to be blinded by it, because if things are repeated too many times, you believe them. And that can become a habit.” (Lee, 350) Thus, there is a sense of this, that we cannot avoid, if not through the beating down of the predatory-capitalist mundanity, which effects much of everything else, then through our DNA as we are social creatures by our nature.
On the other hand, my “change” however, has been painstakingly torturous, slow, cruel, isolated (at times), and accompanied with loss, and anguish. My change started with Christian religion (even if a culty-religious form of it), as much as I resent the damage it has probably forever permeated into my psyche, and as much as I resent the role it has had in creating my own unjustifiable anguish, and agony in vain, religion/psychology/spirituality/philosophy was part of the transforming process.
And yes, I can hear the objector… the culty-religon part of my upbringing wasn't *all bad* either, even if the original springboard was *severely tainted.* As a matter of fact, I was always an outcast within the cult because I never fit their conservative mold and there were many times I felt within, divinely inspired to do particular things, *and the particular* things that would eventually lead me *here*--even if the transformation process began when I was still in the cult during the time.) Don’t believe that’s possible? Read about Malcolm X’s transformation in prison, in the early cult days of the Nation of Islam! In other words, despite having a damaged spring board, (even though I was reading the same book they were, often seeking counsel from the same "elders," "Deacons," and "Evangelists" that they deemed “respectable”—which somehow was still not good enough, as I followed their advice in action), some sort of transcendent Truth allowed me to break through those spirit-crushing ceilings and walls built for me. I still came out with some authenticity (or “authentic human expression” as Bruce Lee would say it) about who I was/who I am. (You know, I dressed like a Midwestern Hardcore-scene-kid; I had long hair full of locks; I was studying philosophy; I was perceived as "rebellious" from within; you know, all of the things I *was* or were charged with that never go well with a conservative cult-culture of "obedience" and/or Pure Divine Command Theory/Ethics, “Biblical Innerrancy,” you get the picture).
Nevertheless, I say all of this to say, my "change" in which my hometown people now see, was a slow and painful process, that I spiritually/intellectually/philosophically brought upon myself--to the extent that as anybody wills anything upon themselves--with the help of the Transcendent/Immanent, and in, and among the professors and people I met along the way, through self-liberation, through education, through torturous reading and introspection (even when I wasn't good at reading or focusing), through consecutive 12-15 hour days of straight wresting with texts (these days 14-17 hour days) and putting my identity on the line with each sentence, each paragraph, page, chapter, and book: through philosophy, through theology/theological studies, through history, through immersing myself in the community and company of the oppressed and societal outcasts.
But this former accusatory narrative from my critics, of my "change," discussed by those of my old southern home and southern demographics, (contrary *to my* briefly mentioned account above) has come with such strong force and salience, that without introspection or critical evaluation, I had almost begun to believe that my change has been “as radical” as they say it has been. (And by this, I don't mean the pejorative way that they mean it, but simply "radical" in the sense of coming a long way from one point to another, as a distance marker, so to speak.) And I know I have changed a lot, there is no doubt about this. But is it really as radical, and unfamiliar as they say? When I start digging into my own history, things seem to become more clear. Things seem to become much less "extreme" and/or "drastic" in truth, versus the way that I am painted by those of the South, and friends of old.
Two Elements To Be Attributed to my Contemporary Philosophical Path:
For example, at the origin of who I am now, there are two primary elements that I commonly attribute to prompting my heart-mind on this philosophical/ethico-religious journey [maybe three if we were to count spiritual-psychological factors like growing up in a split family with wildly different paradigms and practices such as A.) Christian fundamentalist values and B.) A weird mix of conservative and hedonistic values]. 1.) The first can be attributed to Protestant Evangelical Christianity's the Church of Christ, (and even with its profound damage to my psyche, and critical damage to my social relationships, robbing me of much of my youth and my upbringing at large), the positive philosophical impact lies in the fact and reality that I had to wrestle with Christianity’s revelatory text, erroneously, under psychologically damaging and constraining impositions brought on by the CofC’s conservative culture, and Neo-fundamentalist notion of Biblical Inerrancy.
[Biblical Inerrancy within the Christian tradition, originally referenced by phenomenon, the original prophets (or whoever since some are unknown) writing down God’s message on parchment/manuscripts without corrupting the divine message, despite human finiteness and fallibility. But since the Neo-Fundamentalistic movement in the 1970s, it has sort of taken on a new meaning in Evangelical circles which ahistorically then came to reference "Biblical Inerrancy" as the idea that the contemporary Bible that any given person holds today--despite going through translation after translation (while no biblical or language scholar will tell you this process is flawless where 100% of original meaning is retained), despite the need to flawlessly endure throughout all of history's colonial projects--is a book that has been divinely overseen, divinely guided by God’s providence. And through all of these descriptive finite and fallible human affairs, complexities, governmental influence, etc., yet, still the revelatory text contains no errors; (i.e. in-errancy). *Or* a looser version of it was posited, that through all of the foregoing, it: B.) "...still contains no significant errors..." or C.) an even vaguer statement that implies something similar with the following that I had heard over and over from the pulpits growing up: "This Holy Book has all the answers that you will ever need in life--or only the important or relevant ones."]
Coming back from the tangent; the point: the fact that I was coerced to wrestle with the text (the Bible) under such strict, erroneous, and damaging constraints for years, and was coerced to do so in a way that placed such authority on the text that it outweighed my own internal moral intuitions, or internal moral compass, or even reason--(and obviously, a given of course, that it was a moral atrocity enacted upon me)--naturally makes one have an edge with wrestling with principles, weighing them against others principles, pinpointing messages in language, concepts, sifting ethical teachings, and so forth.
And the second component that was large inspiration for writing this blog, yet was also a significant primer for my philosophical/ethico-religious journey was 2.) Martial Art(s) and Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do.
In high school, as early as 2008, (without a doubt 2009-2010), you could find me carrying my copy of John Little's edited compilation of Bruce Lee's teachings titled, Bruce Lee: Jeet Kune Do: Commentaries on the Martial Art Way. This was a book, (one of the only books), I could be seen carrying to school, and walking from class to class with as I was reading and studying martial arts and philosophy even if I didn't really comprehensively know that I was studying "philosophy," or really even what philosophy actually was. This is evidence that my philosophical journey began prior to college (and also in part outside of Christianity although it is true that I was primed with Christianity before I interpreted Lee’s Jeet Kune Do). I knew that there was something transcendental about it. I knew that it was closely related to religion, or what religion was supposed to be, in an ideal sense, or at least in the sense of philosophy/religion as "a way of life."
A Brief Excursion for Readers Ignorant of my Martial Art/Jeet Kune Do History:
For those who do not know my history, although those who think that I have drastically "changed" reading this *should* remember this very well, my path in this timeframe of my life was to be a professional martial artist—including everything said title usually entails for the modern to make a living or career out of said path. How I was pursuing this was through pancreation-like combat, and how this manifested in my era and geography was through something up and coming, at the time at least, called “mixed martial arts” which had its professional manifesting leagues: (WEC, UFC, Bellator, etc.). At the time, my path was to be a Martial Art Instructor, and a gym owner, and that was why originally, I started college majoring in Health Education and Promotion: Exercise and Health, as this was a compromise to the "Business Degree" that my parents desperately wanted for me. But before settling or compromising on this, I wanted to major in philosophy or psychology (as I was reading Bruce Lee at the time who studied Western and Eastern Philosophy/Western Psychology), but obviously, they did not see this as a lucrative or successful degree—which in comparison to everything outside of education in the capitalist world that largely seeks profit over ethics, is true. Eventually, following this trajectory, as briefly brushed upon above, I’d have an existential crisis, in undergraduate after suffering the loss of a wife, and that’s when I would eventually dedicate myself to philosophy/theology/psychology—or eventually just philosophy since it is the Mother of all of those fields that splintered post-Enlightenment.
Yet, because my intentions are not to spend time there, and chronologically before there, in undergraduate, and in the process of studying philosophy, my dedication to martial art/Jeet Kune Do and physical training began to wear on me. I began to experience what I perceived as a burn-out/unfullfillment/missing-out-on-the-more-to-life. This was especially so, right after some of first amateur or professional competitions were supposed to happen, yet those goals/dreams were deferred.
After a Long Hiatus from Jeet Kune Do, a Later Analysis on Bruce Lee's Philosophical Writings occurred in 2021: Coming Back Full Circle:
Because of my partial burn-out, and overall life-imbalance, as I was studying philosophy, I sort of strayed away from anything to do with Jeet Kune Do for a while. But the first time, I picked up Lee's writings seriously again was in 2021 when I was freshly out of graduate school at Oklahoma State University, and my last graduate seminar over East Asian Philosophy and Mysticism was still somewhat fresh on my mind, and I had started graduate school at Loyola Marymount University and was studying a lot of Mysticism in my Foundations of Historical Theology seminar, and this had been the first time I had thoroughly read Lee since probably high school/early college. Nevertheless, here is what I wrote in that reflection:
I’ve often spoke about how Jeet Kune Do (JKD) has been a significant contributor to my existential/spiritual/intellectual/truth-seeking/self-discovery (journey). I first read this book in 2008/09-ish, back in high school. And this book significantly shifted my paradigm back then. And Martial Art significantly shifted my life. But, there was a time where Martial Art had [simply] become too constricting, too suffocating, too rigid, [and] too ego-driven [artificially forced].
This 2021 self-reflection continues:
I’ve been going back and re-reading this book [Bruce Lee: Jeet Kune Do: Bruce Lee’s Commentaries on the Martial Way] today, that once upon a time changed my life, and (in part) led me to become the martial artist that I was, and the Martial Art Instructor that I became. And naturally, [upon reading and analyzing] I have also been self-reflecting today. And what happened to me, [referencing the burn-out, unfulfilling pursuit of Martial Art] was not the fault of JKD as I’m discovering (in totality—at least). Now, [don't get me wrong] there are certainly parts of Bruce Lee’s philosophy/martial art that I have outgrown and see the limits of. However Bruce *never* posited this stuff to be stagnant, static, rigid, and/or lacking dynamicity. In my reflecting, I’ve realized, with egoic desire, [combined with the lack of holistic life-balance and the human propensity for the familiar] I sacrificed my body, my spiritual well-being, my intellect, my wholeness, for habitual pattern, for desired-end, for static(ness), by training as hard as I did, and as much as I did, and repeating the same patterns for as long as I did, instead of a process, instead of wholeness—turning JKD into what it is not.” (Cook, Notes, 2021)
A Sense of my Olympic-Styled Training to Render the Reader an Idea of my past Level of Commitment:
A bit of what I'm referring to, is essentially my whole being was infatuated with Jeet Kune Do/martial arts. I ate, breathed, slept, and dreamt, martial arts, and Jeet Kune Do. In high school, it was not unlike me to run 3-7 miles in the morning during cross-country season, outside of that season weight-lift in the mornings doing an intense workout called "the 300 workout" which would probably be called "crossfit" now, but was clearly before that had come to popularity. Afterward, at the end of school, during the after-school sports hours, I'd often do some sort of working out involving calisthenics (sit-ups with elbows, push-ups for punches, pull-ups, and toe-walking), sprinting, and this would last from 2-something to 5 or 6pm. And then, when I got home in the evening, I'd often do heavy bag work. After that, I might run a mile or two, and then right before bed around 6-8pm I would do at least 500 push-ups every night. This sort of work ethic continued. I would be sitting in church, doing eye-finger jabs on the backs of the wooden pews, training my fingers to hit hard objects, and training them to fold appropriately. I'd do strikes when I was in the doctor's office waiting for the doctor to come in (alone). In college, despite originally not wanting to go, and simply wanting to "start fighting," my collegiate training schedule was intense. My stepfather truthfully once said, that I "trained like an Olympic athlete"--and that was no hyperbolic assertion from a boastful father figure. In the beginning of my college years, it was Thai boxing on Monday mornings and nights, Jeet Kune Do on Tuesday mornings and nights, occasional training on Wednesday nights (MMA at some point, maybe Thai boxing/Pradal Serey at another point), Jeet Kune Do once again on Thursday mornings and nights, and Friday’s Open Mat, with often different weekend seminars, or different modes of training over the weekends, and/or weight lifting, and running. Concerning my training schedule in and outside the gym, "intense" was an understatement. Nevertheless, this is what I was referring to in my past self-reflection. I continued,
To be sure, reading this today, (after going through a Philosophy MA program, and in the process of another—Theology), I realize how much of Jeet Kune Do is still applicable to my life—and how much it has shaped me. (2021)
In Retrospect: An Explanation *in Part* for my Switch from Largely the Physical to the Mental:
Part of the reason for my burnout, beyond the immensely difficult training, came down to a spiritual-psychological imbalance, combined with an internal waking brought on by philosophy and lived experience, which in effect came to expose what was lacking in my life. Concerning the mind-body-spirit relationship found within the martial art tradition, I found myself immensely lacking in the intellectual, literate, philosophical, and overall mind aspect of the relationship, as I had rigorously trained my body in martial art(s) since high school and had severely neglected the mind. The passion and over-emphasis on fighting and martial art, clearly tilted the scales to imbalance. So, the fire that I once had for martial art(s) began to wane, whereas the flame I once had for martial art, began to shift toward philosophy and the mind side-of-things, and existential purpose. So in undergraduate, and onward, this was when I began to dedicate myself to the cultivation of the mind--even if it started in high school reading Bruce, and wrestling with the "rules" of cult-Christianity, as mentioned above. Yet, I said all of the foregoing to say, those Bruce Lee and Jeet Kune Do books that I was reading daily in high school/early college, by this point had, (and really still have until now) long been out of my normal reading material, (with the exception of that analysis in 2021).
Thus, given the above, of course, while Bruce Lee is one of my original primers and inspirations for philosophy, he was largely omitted in the philosophical discourse of Academia. In undergraduate I studied philosophers generally (a good mix of Western, Africana, and Eastern), Socrates, Plato, Augustine, Justin the Martyr, Aquinas, Descartes, David Hume, Confucius (Confucianism), Laotzu, (Daoism), Siddhartha Gautama (Buddhism), Philosophers of Race, Cornel West, etc. Philosophers of Religion, Eric Reitan, Plantinga, etc., Anthropologists like Earnest Becker, Nietzsche, Judith Butler, Biomedical Ethicist-Philosophers, Philosophy of Science, and all of those philosophers, etc. and so forth. Then my studying would go so much deeper, in graduate philosophy, and then again in graduate Theological Studies. The point is, once again, Bruce Lee had fallen by the wayside.
Now, in current times, after years of not reading Bruce Lee, (or formally training at a gym where I am exposed to his Jeet Kune Do philosophy, as I trained under the lineage of Bruce Lee for years, including with Bruce Lee's best friend in Tulsa, Oklahoma), and after picking Bruce's writings back up again, I am able to see a common thread from this “past Dillon” who underwent this pejorative "change" to the Dillon that is here now. And so when I see Bruce's words written, the exact words I was reading and inspired by in high school, I actually wonder if I really have even changed that severely because there is still very clearly a consistent stream and trajectory, a common thread linking the past self to this current version.
While this shift from the physical to the mental might sound strange, even this aspect seems to be in line to some extent with Bruce Lee. As John Little writes in Bruce Lee: Artist of Life, “It may surprise those who think of Bruce Lee primarily as a martial artist that his true passion was philosophy. Even more surprising is the extent of his knowledge of both Eastern and Western philosophy.” (Lee, Bruce Lee: Artist of Life, ed. John Little, 32)
Given the context with the thesis of this blog, I want you as the reader to be seriously reflecting about this question... was my “change” really that “radical” or “different” or drastically worse from the person I was/was becoming, to the person I am now/and am becoming? Think about this question as you read some of these passages that I was reading, as I carried Jeet Kune Do around as a holy bible in these times where an older version of myself existed that people wish they could repossess into this current body.
An Introduction to the Philosophical Teachings of Bruce Lee:
In this section, I will begin to share some of the content, which still underlies my thoughts, and my total being (or desired being) to this day, ideas/content I had forgotten could be attributed to Bruce Lee’s JKD concerning my philosophical path. Thus, the seeds were planted, my spirit was inspired, my social topics (during this era)were almost absolutely consumed by these matters in my day-to-day discussions, and his philosophical content will be considered in more depth as we continue along.
Bruce Lee and Martial Arts’ Era of Enlightenment:
To provide some context of Lee's teachings, it is important to note, that Bruce’s influence and contribution to the martial art world, in an analogy, was in many ways like the era of Enlightenment was to historical religions (particularly European religions), where martial arts traditions and dogma were put under scrutiny, and had begun to be systematically dissected, approached scientifically even in the case of Bruce Lee, and Bruce borrowed from other styles, and put together what he felt was the most effective, (and subjectively most effective for him), into an evolving “system” (and system is scare-quoted because that term should be interpreted loosely). Perhaps not exact, but this is similar to the way that John Dewey, and William James, among other late 18th, early 19th century thinkers, believed that one day many of our metaphysical-religious beliefs would likely, eventually, become subject to scientific testing, as pragmatist James, picked up this Enlightenment-influenced endeavor with the cross-cultural study of religious/mystical experiences in The Varieties of Religious Experience. Nevertheless, Bruce Lee was largely responsible for this happening in the martial art communities of the 1960s where these traditions that have been going on for hundreds/thousands of years, become broken; people began to find flaws, have doubts about their own traditions, and seek outside the tradition or authority of the Instructor. People like Bruce, for example, began teaching martial art tradition outside of the prescribed tribe, and ruffled many feathers this way. And clearly, for people from within these traditions, part of the doubting process renders a turn within, or in philosophy, Enlightenment's effect is called the “turn-to-the-subject,” where people go outside their previous “truth” or their "style," and begin learning from others, and borrowing from others. (This is why Bruce is the Father of modern mixed-martial arts). However, it must be said, this is also the downfall of Enlightenment, this is also the downfall of modern scientific approaches, it is a double-edged sword, just as Enlightenment largely did away with philosophical metaphysics, Bruce Lee’s Jeet Kune Do (JKD) largely did away with, in effect, much of traditional martial arts, and the cultivation of the mind, body, and spirit. It brought on the loss of something, the loss of a torch, the loss of the living embodiment/expression of thousands of years worth of technique and style revitalized, nurtured, honed, and sharpened in each living being. The way I see it these days, is that both, the adaptation, aliveness, and evolution that Jeet Kune Do called for, must work in congruence with long standing tradition if one is to encompass totality. The way I see it these days, is that both are needed for survival, and flourishing. And despite Bruce Lee’s language, philosophy, and teachings on JKD, like Martin Luther’s break away from the Catholic Church, he still was entrenched in the tradition to some extent. If this assertion is not clear, it will become this way the more you learn about Lee.
Quotes from the Layperson’s Philosopher: Bruce Lee, and Reflections on Them:
Bruce is quoted, in John Little’s edited book, Jeet Kune Do: Commentaries on the Martial Art Way stating,
There is no such thing as an effective segment of a totality. By that I mean that I personally do not believe in the word style. Why? because, unless there are human beings with three arms and four legs, unless we have another group of beings on earth that are structurally different from us, there can be no different style of fighting. Why is that? Because we have two hands and two legs. Now the unfortunate thing is that there’s boxing, which uses hands, and judo, which uses throwing. I’m not putting them down, mind you—but because of styles, people are separated. They are not united together because styles become law [psychological habit/principle/way of life]. The original founder of style started out with hypothesis. But now it has become the gospel truth, and people who go into that become the product of it. It doesn’t matter how you are, who you are, how you are structured, how you are built, or how you are made… it doesn’t seem to matter. You just go in there and become that product. And that, to me, is not right. (Lee, 27-28)
One might even, from this quote alone, be able to see my perennialist inspiration, or at least the roots of it. As the later, still developing fruit can be found here. Although for those unfamiliar with the term, a critiqued, some would even say significantly flawed, but nonetheless a great place to start concerning perennialism would be here concerning Huxley's perennial philosophy.
Here, we have finally come to the meat of Bruce Lee's philosophical teachings. However, due to the lengthy nature of this blog, I have been forced to demarcate it into two sections as of now. There is this blog of course, which is Part 1, and then there will be Part 2 coming next which dives more into the philosophical content of Bruce Lee, and maybe even provides a philosophical priming to some extent on what type of paradigm should be taken on to view these philosophical teachings of Lee, as Western philosophical discourse is largely different than the therapeutic-like, spiritual, perhaps even "mystical" (though their are founded critiques with that term) sage philosophy and the figures of the East (such as Lao-Tzu, the Buddha, Hindu sages, Confucius, etc.) all of which Bruce Lee's Eastern philosophy was significantly influenced by. Thanks for reading, catch me on Part 2 for the continuation.
End of Part 1.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Works Cited:
Anonymous. "Middle Ground."Logical Fallacies: Middle Ground. 2025, https://www.logicalfallacies.org/middle-ground.html. Accessed 18 May 2025.
Anonymous. Thriftbooks.com. “The Perennial Philosophy Book by Aldous Huxley.” ThriftBooks, ThriftBooks, 28 Feb. 2003, www.thriftbooks.com/w/the-perennial-philosophy_aldous-huxley/264639/?resultid=c781a20c-8bed-4ef6-a0c8-f510d979b795#edition=5479841&idiq=10357244.
Anonymous. Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics Is Destroying American Democracy: Goldberg, Jonah: 9781101904930: Amazon.Com: Books, www.amazon.com/Suicide-West-Tribalism-Nationalism-Destroying/dp/1101904933. Accessed 19 May 2025.
Cook, Dillon. “Cone’s Ecumenical Black Liberation Theology (BLT) Teamed with Marxist Thought as Moral Theology/Socio-Political Ethics: A Comparative Moral-Theological/Ethical Dialogue; Will Others Follow Suit?” Academia.Edu, 1 Jan. 2024, www.academia.edu/121712547/Cone_s_Ecumenical_Black_Liberation_Theology_BLT_Teamed_with_Marxist_Thought_as_Moral_Theology_Socio_Political_Ethics_A_Comparative_Moral_Theological_Ethical_Dialogue_Will_Others_Follow_Suit.
Cook, Dillon. "Notes." December 24, 2021. Thedilloncook's Instagram Post over Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do: Bruce Lee's Commentaries on the Martial Way. http://www.instagram.com/p/CX5H2WNNkzfUR4F_ao7yFYboy4nS6gY3ZczRqY0/?igsh=NTc4MTlwNjQ2YQ==. Accessed 18 May 2025.
Knutsen, Carl Henrik. “American Democracy Is in Danger, but Not Dead.” PRIO Blogs, 7 Mar. 2025, blogs.prio.org/2025/03/american-democracy-is-in-danger-but-not-dead/.
Lee, Bruce, and John R. Little. Striking Thoughts: Bruce Lee’s Wisdom for Daily Living. Tuttle Publishing, 2000. Print.
Murphy, Tim. “The Stagecraft That Ushered in the Trump Oligarchy.” Mother Jones, 20 Jan. 2025, www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/01/trump-inauguration-oligarchy-musk-bezos-zuckerberg-brin-billionaires/.
Nicol Turner Lee, Courtney C. Radsch, et al. “How Memes Are Impacting Democracy: The TechTank Podcast.” Brookings, 19 Mar. 2025, www.brookings.edu/articles/how-memes-are-impacting-democracy-the-techtank-podcast/.
Richardson, Jesse, et. al. "Middle Ground Fallacy." Logical Fallacies Website, https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/middle-ground. Accessed 18 May 2025.
Smith, Anna V. “Trump’s Impact on Indian Country over Four Years.” High Country News, 19 Mar. 2025, www.hcn.org/articles/indigenous-affairs-trumps-impact-on-indian-country-over-four-years/.
Attributions for Open Sourced/Licensed Content:
"Middle Ground Fallacy" by The School of Thought, Jesse Richardson, Andy Smith, Sorn Meaden, and Flip Creative
No comments:
Post a Comment