And I think that's because in person, all the reality filters have to drop and everyone has to deal with pure reality. Intellectual arguments just have to stop when they're physically and immediately shown to be nonsense. And then we can all have an great time together, making real and serious improvements in our lives and our shared art.
You say that as though true intellectual engagement is less sincere or honest than physical engagement. It is true they cannot substitute for one another, but they are necessary complements, and have been seen so since ancient times, in all arts of war.
Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won. Whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.
-- Sun Zi
Hou Shi (commentator) "In warfare, first lay plans which will ensure victory, and then lead your army to battle; if you will not begin with stratagem but rely on brute strength alone, victory will no longer be assured."
Intellect is also power, especially when training, and deciding how to train. Understanding is not merely physical, though that aspect cannot be diminished -- grasping the intellectual "what" of the thing -- as well as the physical display of it -- will enable its manipulation in ways that are not necessarily obvious from the method by which it is first learned.
But a refusal to play, carefully, with some of the the sharp knives in the intellectual drawer -- that just leaves us all with this gaping disconnect between action, understanding and explanation -- and that cannot be a good thing -- if for no other reason, than it simply feeds this very manner of false controversy that keeps cropping up on this topic.
Not here, and not now, thankfully.