Quote:
Erick Mead wrote:
Lessee -- if 1 out of a 100 get it using those methods-- that's less than 1% successful (i.e. -- not "quite").
I'd say that's a margin crying out to be beaten.  |
Happy to restate/re-phrase again: only, say, 1 out of every 100 people studying an art are expressly imparted or pursue the adoption of an IT methodology. And it's that ~1/100 of a given population of martial artists that has successfully transmitted IT throughout the ages.
But today with proven IT methodologies available to the public, and far less filtering by the knowledge holders, will the success rates of the modern metaphor-based IT models, or Erick's model once it's similarly in play, be any better than the poor results historically attributed to P90X, becoming a multi-millionaire (let alone just starting and maintaining a business for multiple years), becoming a professional athlete vs. a weekend warrior, or any other human achievement that requires a relatively high degree of time investment, effort, talent and discipline? It doesn't mean the models and precedents are lacking: it's just that people are people, and not everyone has what it takes.
I don't think it'll take another few hundred years to vet your model. As has been previously suggested, let's check back in a few, say 5 - 10.