> Bruce Lee: Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch (jab, uppercut, etc) . Now that I un

> Bruce Lee: Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch (jab, uppercut, etc) . Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch. I think a lot of that "shaking of the bin" to compress objects brings you closer to the final and concise level of talking about punching. That middle section is verbose, petty. A great example of this is Nietzsche's "god is dead, and we have killed him." He just skips over the details, and nerd-bait debate about atheism that had been ongoing since Spinoza. There's no contribution he could have made to that debate. All had already been said. Nietzsche assumes the readers' familiarity, expresses his own take and opens up a possibility for a "what's next." If Nietzsche had one more sentence, the entire impact would have been destroyed. A more typical form of writing at this time would have been "By rationally examining the philosophical basis for belief in god..." This predictably yields a relitigation of the debate... the Richard Dawkins route, a very different book.