Dr. Mike and Greg Souders

​I watched the conversation between Dr. Mike and Greg Souders last night and it didn’t really seem like it got anywhere. Dr. Mike didn’t seem like he really understood what he was arguing against, and Greg wasn’t able to articulate his points or see things from an alternate perspective in a way that allowed constructive dialogue. Information processing has its benefits, it’s certainly easier, and more digestible, it also makes learning very rigid. The rigidity would appeal to Dr. Mike. As a scientist, something abstract is not going to be his preferred way of looking at the world, not controlling variables is antithetical to what he knows and does. CLA is not a throw stuff at the wall and see what happens methodology which seems to be what people who have conversations with Greg believe. I can acknowledge that I could have a bias towards CLA, because I use it, and I see results from a performance perspective. I can use the database of grappling knowledge to make behaviors emerge in my students faster without explicit instruction. CLA sounds ridiculous until you see your students do something you didn’t teach them without outside interference. I understand reasons for both, and am not really sure why anyone cares what goes on from a teaching perspective in other gyms as long as it works.