Combat Nature

"Combat oriented styles must train according to the true nature of combat." - The Book of Martial Power by Stephen J. Pearlman. The quotes begs the question, "What is the true nature of combat and how do we know it when we practice and train?"

Do we need to determine the definition of combat? Is it strictly about military involvement against some foe? If a wider definition is is physical altercation that results in damage or even death? 

If the nature of combat encompasses any violent conflict, the physical since you can inflict violence psychologically, then any fight be it social or asocial would be considered at least part of the nature of combat, right? 

Then we have to ask ourselves, martial artists/practitioners, is what we train relevant to the nature of combat? Should we change this to say in lieu of nature of combat to the nature of violence? 

Just some questions to consider when training in martial arts for the benefit of self-defense. Oh, is it appropriate to say the nature of combat in the quote if it is actually self-defense? Is there a difference between self-defense and combat? 

Do any of these questions actually result in a true benefit to the person seeking out self-defense? Personally I prefer the quote, "Violence oriented systems must train according to the true nature of violence." Then I would have to ask myself, does this truly reflect martial disciplines as related to self-defense of violent acts?

I guess it breaks down to this, "If we cannot translate the techniques we practice into the actual context in which they must be applied, we must question (1) the technique itself, (2) the training model, and (3) the nature of the context." Now, this can possible negate the whole question of the nature of combat. 

Bibliography:

Pearlman, Steven J. "The Book of Martial Power." Overlook Press. N.Y. 2006.