Jiu-Jitsu: A Tension Between Art and Science?

For some time, I've been pondering whether Jiu-Jitsu is an art or a science. Now, before one is tempted to brush aside these thoughts and take the easy route by saying "It's both!," here me out.

I would describe a science as something that is mechanical, something that works consistently everytime, a clear-cut methodology that, if followed, can guarentee results. An art, on the other hand, while more relative and much messier, is more complex. In art, there is no methodology and there is no guarentee of success. (Hence, we all know how to do an armbar, yet it is often so difficult to actually use in open mat!). Is it not accurate to say that "applying" something is much different than "knowing" how to do something? Hence, we must begin to consider the context of each situation we find ourselves in when training ("context" meaning the many choices one can make in any given situation).

I share these thoughts because I have been thinking about the nature of my Jiu-Jitsu training for the past few months in relation to the the tension between art and science. I've always approached it as a science. My mind has always gone something like this: "If I learn steps 1, 2, 3, and 4, then know how to apply them when my opponent does steps A, B, C, and D, I should succeed!" Don't get me wrong, this works! And I don't argue it wrong to operate this way! But where do we go from there? When do we move away from a student of steps and become an artist?

It seems that a Jiu-Jitsu "artist" wouldn't think necessarily in steps (although the steps will be there-but in second nature form), but in concepts. When does an armbar cease to become something that you work for and become something that is fluid? Something that is not based on context (meaning what mistake your opponent makes) and becomes something that we can play with, find in un-find-able places, alter, and even help to evolve? Yes, at the smallest levels of these things, such dimensions of an armbar are still a science! However, I think that it becomes more than that.

I guess what I'm getting at is that the transformation from science to art (so it seems to me) becomes less of a learning experience where "I learn the steps of Jiu-Jitsu" and more of "Jiu-Jitsu is a fluid amalgam of concepts that are always in flux." It seems that the more I learn to think differently about Jiu-Jitsu, the more I am able to open up my mind during training. I think this is part of letting go of using brute strength and moving onto using the mind, instinct, and most importantly: your opponent's movement (therefore something that is fluid). Perhaps this is why we call it "martial arts?"

Anyway, this is really about me sharing my thoughts, or getting that which has been on my mind onto paper. Feel free to refute, add to, challenge, or offer a completely different framework for thinking about such a way of thinking about our discipline. Of all things, I hope this opens up discussion.

Ultimately, I think I'm saying that Jiu-Jitsu eventually becomes an art when we learn to think about it less as a step-by-step science, not because the science is not important, but because those steps become second nature and we are able to do more with these concepts we now know, even to the point of going beyond our initial, introductory learning. And importantly, doing so on our own!