Here is my go at fileboy2002's post. It's just my look on those statements.
People punch that way precisely because they fail to ask, "why?"
That is generalisation. Practice needs theory, if you ask why you need to learn punching in a certain way and your instructor can't answer that then probably (s)he shouldn't be teaching. Or at least (s)he should try to find out the reason why.
Traditional martial arts instruction does not encourage critical thinking.
Another generalisation. I practice TMA and we in our school are encouraged to be critical. Why do some things work and some don't? What am I doing and why am I doing it this way?
The idea is that the art was perfected at some point in the past, and the task today is to preserve the sacred tradition.
Whose idea is this? We change constantly, we get older for instance. By the time that I'm 70 I might not be as physically fit as I am now at nearly 30. What do I do with that knowledge in regards to my training? I know that because I train in a certain school of karate that I am part of a tradition. That is because that is tradition that has certain methods of teaching. They paved the 'Way' so to speak with a curriculum and training aids like sparring etc. Why should I try to reinvent the wheel?You don't negate modern society aswell do you?
People just assume that because those silly movements are in the art, they must have a practical purpose. They don't.
If you consider kihon-choku-zuki to be a silly movement, you have to start asking yourself why you are supposed to learn it that way... (first)
They certainly have a 'practical' purpose. It's backed up by logic=theory.