The continued Evolution of Aikido

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[Tony Wagstaffe]

I've had some encounters on "the street", and it's never been one or two. :D From what I understand, most attacks are sneak attacks, and not by anyone especially well built or trained. That's been my experience.

Sorry Charlie...

Best,
Ron

This has been my experience to..... It much depends on whether its an opportunist's or group working on a random "easy" target with intention. ie
He's on his own lets see if we can rob him or do a "runner" or both otherwise known as "bilking" in the Hackney Licensed trade.....
One of the downsides of the job, which 99% of cab owners will experience at least once in their life as a cabbie......
Let alone the assaults verbal and physical encountered most weeks at the weekends.......

Tony

[GeneC]

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/
PM me here when you're ready.I'm not looking for privacy, I'm looking for a decent signal to noise ratio, so what is needed is you not trolling this forum, not me PM'ing Mr Parland.

Oh, I get it, you're not joking. Ok, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree( btw, I'm gonna click on a link you provide, yeah right).Btw, you can start holding your breath, waiting for me to PM you.

[Joe McParland]

Oh, I get it, you're not joking. Ok, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree( btw, I'm gonna click on a link you provide, yeah right).Btw, you can start holding your breath, waiting for me to PM you.

Gene, I'll vouch for the link. I'm a member there as are a few others around here. It's free, like here, and you can browse without registering. In fact, you're much more likely to find people sympathetic to the view that "aikido is nonsense" and more benign variants there than you will here. But it's also true that it's verbally no-holds-barred while here things are quite civil. If they agree with you, they'll throw you a parade; if they disagree, well, you'll see... :dead:

[Come to think of it, I'm surprised this thread hadn't yet invoked the Jun ex Machina a few pages back to remind people to be civil... Must be the holidays and all ;) ]

[Joe McParland]

Wondering.... are you into Zen?, if so, what's your opinion about Yamaoka Tesshu's Tachigiri No Seigan:

"The disciples of Yamaoka made a vow to engage in the following progressive training:

1st stage- Two day commitment to engage in 200 contests per day, alone, and without stopping against 20 opponents who are permitted to rest and attack in rotation. Prior to committing to the 1 st stage, the disciple had to carry out the training for 1000 days without fail.

2nd stage - Three day commitment - same as above.

3rd stage - 7 day commitment - same as above.

4th stage - 1000 days training without stopping, from 4 am to 8 pm each day, competing against 100 opponents per day."

Source: An Introduction for a Round Table Talk about Zen and Aikido Training, by T. K. Chiba, 8th dan (http://www.aikidoonline.com/index2.asp?location=/Archives/2000/oct/feat_1000_tkc.html)

Sorry, Demitrio---I didn't mean to let this question slide; I got caught up with some other things. I won't side-step a challenge ;)

First, yes, I am an avid student of zen; however, you should assume I am as flawed in that study as I am in aikido. I make no claims.

As for the question: One way to put out a fire is to throw a bucket of water on it. Another way is to throw a bucket of gasoline on it.

I suspect that by the last encounter on the last day of this training, the student would say he lost any thought of competition long ago.

I have heard of a particular line of zen that practices a few solo bokken kata continuously during a substantial sesshin, with the usual little breaks for rice and water and a few hours of sleep. [I don't remember the details; I'd have to research.] This practice starts with no adversary but the self; the other starts with adversaries. I suspect all the adversaries disappear in time ;)

Thank you for the Chiba link, by the way. I enjoyed reading that.

[GeneC]

Come to think of it, I'm surprised this thread hadn't yet invoked the Jun ex Machina a few pages back to remind people to be civil... Must be the holidays and all ;) ]

Like I said, I won't stand and go toe to toe with a MMA punk on 'roids and/or a criminal felon. Other than that, why I declare, don't you think this is civil enough?

[Joe McParland]

Maybe it can, but I'd think maybe in a different venue. For instance, In Marine Corps bootcamp, one of the things they did was, I walked into a room, there is a table and a chair and an M16 laying on the table. I was told to sit down and dis-assemble the M16. As soon as I sat down, the lights went out and they lit a whole pack of firecrackers at each end of the table and started yelling at me to hurry. Well the first time I couldn't even hardly move, but I (we) quicky learned to ignore the commotion and use the light from the firecrackers to dis-assemble and re-assemble the weapon.

I have no problem with aikido under "combat conditions." (Some schools try to create this with different levels / intensities of randori practice.) Especially when I'm working with kids, I like to mix up randori. The last variation I did recently, for example, was the usual add-an-attacker bit until---surprise!---I added another defender to the mix without telling them :D

If I'm instructing and I see someone who's not focused on the mats, I've been known to sneak up and throw him or "kill" him with a tanto. Sometimes, if the partner allows it to happen for fun, the partner will be doing push-ups while the dead one recovers until they learn they're in this together. If I see competition developing, I'll try to channel it. I borrow some from military experience, some from zen experience, some from learning to deal with my own kids, and some from the seat of my pants ;) It depends on what I want to do that day, what level of focus is required, and sometimes how mischievous I am feeling.

If I could get away with firecrackers, I'd be the first to incorporate them!

In some sense, I don't want them to develop a preconceived notion even of what aikido practice is :D

[Joe McParland]

Like I said, I won't stand and go toe to toe with a MMA punk on 'roids and/or a criminal felon. Other than that, why I declare, don't you think this is civil enough?

Whether Jun appears or not is not my call :p

[Kevin Leavitt]

i'm leavittk over there. Been a while since I have been on Bullshido, but my former MMA training partner is one of the mods there.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Joe,

I got it on the competition thing, and I understand where you are coming from.

I go to Portugual every year to compete in the European BJJ Championships. (Won't this year though).

I never really know who I am fighting and all that, never really train to fight per se. I just get on the plane, go over, go through the process and fight.

When I climb in the ring, I am not thinking about anything at all. Not the crowds, and not my opponent per se...just entering and going for that first contact, then what happens, happens. No preconceptions.

You have to learn to deal with the pressure and the adrenal dump, it is a rush and it is real. When I finish, my body is smoked and my hands are smoked from grabbing so damn hard! I don't know why I do this in competition, because I never do it in practice!

I do agree, though, with your concerns as they relate to the practice of aikido. I think aiki is a very narrow set of parameters that is focused on training some very specific things...aiki.

[GeneC]

I have no problem with aikido under "combat conditions." ....In some sense, I don't want them to develop a preconceived notion even of what aikido practice is :D

Yeah, like I said before , maybe the "Combat mindset" is better trained outside of Aikido practice (altho martially effective training is deifinitely a must).

[GeneC]

Whether Jun appears or not is not my call :p

Oh, I know, I was just asking you.

[GeneC]

i'm leavittk over there. Been a while since I have been on Bullshido, but my former MMA training partner is one of the mods there.

Yeah, I did the MMA thing, it's a young man's game and I'm past my prime for that. AFA going over there, I'm no fool, besides, I get all the verbal abuse I need right here.( btw, is there any chance of you condensing, just a little?)[kidding].

[Kevin Leavitt]

Yeah, like I said before , maybe the "Combat mindset" is better trained outside of Aikido practice (altho martially effective training is deifinitely a must).

I'm confused, I thought you said aikido had to evolve?

Now you are saying that there are things that are better trained outside of the practice?

What are the boundaries you see surrounding aikido and why would a combat mindset be better trained outside of aikido?

[Kevin Leavitt]

Yeah, I did the MMA thing, it's a young man's game and I'm past my prime for that. AFA going over there, I'm no fool, besides, I get all the verbal abuse I need right here.( btw, is there any chance of you condensing, just a little?)[kidding].

Naw, I am going on 44 and still going strong, although those younger guys kick my ass every now and then these days.

That is sort of my concern with all this talk about effectiveness. Alot of it has to do with age and agility. To me, there is many more reasons to study than that.

Honestly I can't tell if you are serious or not with all the talk about mcdojos and what not. It sounds pretty absurb to me, but hey it is your concept so knock yourself out.

If you look at the founder's goals of aikido it has not much to do with the things you are talking about. Why on earth would you hang around a bunch of guys like us and argue in our own backyard about this stuff if you are not alligned with it.

I think that is the point about the recommendation to go to Bullshido. There you can find like minded folks and we can go on there as well and banter this topic alot more liberally than here on Aikiweb. We can call each other names, disparage each others skill sets, challenge each other to "throwdowns" and then call you a "momma's boy" when you backdown from the fight.

[Kevin Leavitt]

BTW, if you haven't figured it out yet. Most of the guys that are discussing this with you on here are not what most folks would consider aikibunnies. We take what we do very seriously and frankly will agree that there is much aikido out there that is not trained correctly. We just don't necessarily think that we need to move away from the philosophical base and current methodology to get there. We simply believe that AIkido needs to be trained correctly within the parameters established.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Gene, you want me to be short...read my tag line below. I put it there for a reason a couple of years ago.

[GeneC]

I'm confused, I thought you said aikido had to evolve?

Now you are saying that there are things that are better trained outside of the practice?

What are the boundaries you see surrounding aikido and why would a combat mindset be better trained outside of aikido?

No, I never did say Aikido HAD to evolve. I did say all things will change, no matter what. I did say that if there's room for improvement, there's room to evolve.

The "combat mindset" is something else entirely. IMO, training /practice in the dojo should be simply mastering the basic techniques( including relaxing/clearing the mind/finding/connecting with centers), which should be martially effective, but I consider the "combat mindset' training an extension of the dojo, whic may include things other than Aikdio( in my case, more military/gun related)..

[GeneC]

That is sort of my concern with all this talk about effectiveness. Alot of it has to do with age and agility. To me, there is many more reasons to study than that. [/quote

What concern? How hard is it to make sure when you begion to eneter,you make sure you didn't sut open yourself up to a tsuki( which could be a punch/kick, but in the pure sense a knife stab)?

[quote= Kevin Leavtt]Honestly I can't tell if you are serious or not with all the talk about mcdojos and what not. It sounds pretty absurb to me, but hey it is your concept so knock yourself out

Hey, I didn't say anything about "MCdojos", that's somebody else's words. I do believe if Aikido is going to be a business (and it is a business, just ask those with dojos), it needs to go large. I do believe Aikido should have their own dojos and not be renting space in karate schools, etc They should be franchised and have natl recognition.

If you look at the founder's goals of aikido it has not much to do with the things you are talking about.

Well, for one, folks don't seem to know what Osensei's goals were. Fact is, he took it world wide, so obviously he wanted it to expand, so I believe that that's exactly what he wanted.

[Joe McParland]

I got it on the competition thing, and I understand where you are coming from.

[...]

I do agree, though, with your concerns as they relate to the practice of aikido. I think aiki is a very narrow set of parameters that is focused on training some very specific things...aiki.

I think I might trust you to do such a thing, Kevin :)

[GeneC]

BTW, if you haven't figured it out yet. Most of the guys that are discussing this with you on here are not what most folks would consider aikibunnies. We take what we do very seriously and frankly will agree that there is much aikido out there that is not trained correctly. We just don't necessarily think that we need to move away from the philosophical base and current methodology to get there. We simply believe that AIkido needs to be trained correctly within the parameters established.

Well, I take Aikido seriously too and take no issue with the philisophical/spitiual side of the house, but if the methods and practices can be improved upon, then I'm all for it. We're just gnna have to agree to disagree on that.

[GeneC]

Gene, you want me to be short...read my tag line below. I put it there for a reason a couple of years ago.

Yeah, I'm not being distrustful, I'm just asking to try and state your point in a single sentence, if possible, as it's really tedious to wade thru a bunch of words to find a point hidden in there somewhere. Any point should be able to be said in a single sentence. If not, something's very wrong. Just asking, if not, oh well.
Btw, I'm seeing some folks being very cynical about any mention of change, yet they'll agree that Aikido is broke.

Besides, I believe Gen. Patton was wrong about that. However , I like what he said about, "Everybody thinks you have to die for your Country, Bu*&SH#$, I say live for your Country! Let the other poor bas&^%$ die for his!"

[Carsten Möllering]

What concern? How hard is it to make sure when you begion to eneter,you make sure you didn't sut open yourself up to a tsuki( which could be a punch/kick, but in the pure sense a knife stab)?

Hey, I didn't say anything about "MCdojos", that's somebody . I do believe Aikido should have their own dojos and not be renting space in karate schools, etc They should be franchised and have natl recognition.

Well, for one, folks don't seem to know what Osensei's goals were. Fact is, he took it world wide, so obviously he wanted it to expand, so I believe that that's exactly what he wanted.

Well I'm a little perplex.

Are there no no teachers in the US who teach an aikido that "works"? No teachers who teach the martial aspects of aikido?
Is there only "dancing"?

Are there no real aikido dojo, standing on their own feet? How comes that Aikido seems not to be popular in the US?

Hasn't aikido spread throughout in the US? I thought that Tohei, Saotome, Yamada (just the names I know) and many others had done a good job?

I really can't believe that.
Or am I getting something wrong?

[Kevin Leavitt]

Gene wrote:

What concern? How hard is it to make sure when you begion to eneter,you make sure you didn't sut open yourself up to a tsuki( which could be a punch/kick, but in the pure sense a knife stab)?

Well, in my book, you just gave a good example of proper AIkido. This has nothing to do with evolution but doing what we already do properly.

Gene wrote:

Hey, I didn't say anything about "MCdojos", that's somebody else's words. I do believe if Aikido is going to be a business (and it is a business, just ask those with dojos), it needs to go large. I do believe Aikido should have their own dojos and not be renting space in karate schools, etc They should be franchised and have natl recognition.

Well this is not entirely true. I am a member of Aikido Schools of Ueshiba and we have many dojos that are doing just fine. My own dojo has been in exsistence for about 10 years in it's current form, total lineage inlcuding a couple of moves...probably closer to 20 years.

We are located in Northern VA, in one of the highest cost real estate areas. Lots of reasons why we rent and have the location we do. But we are doing quite well with what we have. I can tell you that I recieve back in many ways more than what I pay into the dojo...and we are solvent so we are doing something right.

Our "Hombo" dojo, Saotome Sensei's dojo is across town in "North DC". Nice place, owned by Saotome Sensei and ASU...doing well, nice Japanese Garden in the back, cherry floors etc.

National Recognition? Well Aikido by nature is developed into various "types", under the umbrella of Aikido. ASU is a member of Aikikai as are others, some are some are not. I have a little blue passport that was stamped and certified that says I am a member of ASU and Aikikai. I can take it into Hombo dojo in Japan and it looks just like the Japanese guys standing next to me, and I am recognized as Yudansha of he organization.

Well, for one, folks don't seem to know what Osensei's goals were. Fact is, he took it world wide, so obviously he wanted it to expand, so I believe that that's exactly what he wanted.

I admit that a lot of folks are trying to beat a round peg into a square whole and trying to make aikido into something other than what it was designed to do. Kinda like taking a Land Rover and entering it into the Indy 500 and being frustrated because you don't know why you are not doing well with it.

So then, we start talking about re-inventing the Land Rover so it will do well in the race. You know, evolving it. When we could simply drop it off at the dealer leave it alone, and buy a car that is already designed to race in that particular race.

From your perspective what O'Sensei's goals and vision was?

[Kevin Leavitt]

Yeah, I'm not being distrustful, I'm just asking to try and state your point in a single sentence, if possible, as it's really tedious to wade thru a bunch of words to find a point hidden in there somewhere. Any point should be able to be said in a single sentence. If not, something's very wrong. Just asking, if not, oh well.
Btw, I'm seeing some folks being very cynical about any mention of change, yet they'll agree that Aikido is broke.

Besides, I believe Gen. Patton was wrong about that. However , I like what he said about, "Everybody thinks you have to die for your Country, Bu*&SH#$, I say live for your Country! Let the other poor bas&^%$ die for his!"

No you cannot do forum discussions in one sentence. Most have to take the form of a debate. That means it has structure to it.

At a minimum you have the following:

Sentence 1: I disagree. (Not you are wrong).
Sentence 2: This is why I disagree.
Sentence 3: Here is my counter point or an example
Sentence 4: In Closing... or Therefore,

Or something along those lines. One sentence is just an argument and does nothing to lend to productive conversation.

I am not the best writer in the world by any stretch of the imagination. Web Forums are also not meant to be PhD level work either, but a place where you actually have dialogue going on.

Most folks tend to type as they think at work, or what not, so you get what you get, which can get long winded sometimes.

If I am boring you and you don't feel like taking the time to read through it then don't.

To be honest, I have found that most people that are critical of thing do so out of ignorance of the issue they are talking about. Very few people take time to understand something before blasting out a bunch of stuff and making assumptions. It is what gets people killed in combat. Patton was actually a pretty smart man and challenged constantly the status quo, but he did so critically and with lots of research.

Another Gentlemen I know says it slightly different. Stephen Covey of 7 Habits Fame. Seek to understand before being understood.

Personally I think this is the key to world peace and the real underlying message off aikido. Seeking to understand, before being understood.

[Erick Mead]

Yes, that's all zenzy and fuzzy , but on the other hand, the simplest truth needs no decoration. A single word of truth is larger than a thousand worthless words. The more the words, the smaller the point.Some things are irreducibly complex. Descriptions of them, well, they are not short, anyway -- look at all the discussion on this entire forum, for example. :)

[C. David Henderson]

Seek to understand before being understood; worth repeating

[GeneC]

Well I'm a little perplexed.

So, Aikdio is perfect in every way? There's absolutely no room for improvement?

[GeneC]

Some things are irreducibly complex. Descriptions of them, well, they are not short, anyway -- look at all the discussion on this entire forum, for example. :)

*No offense* So the point is? If the Lemmings are running off the cliff, it must be the right thing to do, 'cause everybody's doing it (soundsl like I'm talking to my kids)? Btw, I know of no concept so complex that I can't deduce to a single sentence or paragraph.*No offense*

[GeneC]

Seek to understand before being understood; worth repeating

So is that your new sig?

Btw, I've been seeking and understanding for along time now. Just trying to share( actually trying to offer a different perspective to get folks to open their minds a little). Take it or leave it. Ok by me.

[C. David Henderson]

Gene,

Respectfully, I wasn't addressing you. Peace to you and all your relations.

And seek to understand before trying to be understood is still worth repeating.

[Ron Tisdale]

Fact is, he took it world wide, so obviously he wanted it to expand, so I believe that that's exactly what he wanted.

Uh, no. His son actually took it world wide, and there are quite some discussions about the differences between Ueshiba the Founder and Ueshiba the son.

Best,
Ron (Peter Goldsbury's columns touch on this quite a bit actually, highly recommended reading. But, if you are limited to one sentence statements and conclusions, you aren't likely to get very far with that particular reading assignment...difficult and highly complex topic alert.)

[Ron Tisdale]

actually trying to offer a different perspective to get folks to open their minds a little

Uh, so you are assuming that our minds aren't already open? Just because we disagree doesn't mean our minds aren't open, or even that we haven't already even proselytized from your perspectives in earlier re-incarnations. I've been on the 'net writing about aikido since around 1997, and have personally been through many re-incarnations.

Best,
Ron (probably more than a few more coming....)

[GeneC]

However, I liken the use of sport to accomplish this in aikido to the teaching of super-efficient striking in karate to teach the way of not fighting: Until you deeply understand and integrate what you are practicing, you are prone to act in a way contrary to your art's intent..

I respectfully disagree with this.

First,the terms "sports and "competition" are two different things. Sports is where Aikido actually becomes something else- a sport, which could actually become something else entirely different than Aikido.
That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about competition , where Aikidoka come together fom different dojos and compete. For all practical purposes, it'd look like a "grade test". Actually, grade tests could occur at these conpetitions, as they'd have the same seriousness and respect as a formal test, as each competition would change the "record" of every competitor, for better or for worse. I believe, on the contrary, it'd cause every Aikidoka to practice more earnestly, because if Aikido is true - that the more clear your mind and calm your spirit and the more pure your technique, the more likely to win, then that should hold true in competition.

[GeneC]

Uh, so you are assuming that our minds aren't already open? Just because we disagree doesn't mean our minds aren't open, or even that we haven't already even proselytized from your perspectives in earlier re-incarnations. I've been on the 'net writing about aikido since around 1997, and have personally been through many re-incarnations.

Best,
Ron (probably more than a few more coming....)

Sorry Ron, you've got the wrong guy, I'm not trying to recruit or convert anyone, but It's been my experience that if someone is against or opposed to something, their mind is "made up" or closed.

[Ron Tisdale]

Not necessarily. Perhaps they have honestly considered the thoughts offered, and simply chosen a different path, based upon those considerations. They may even still be willing to periodically revist the discussion, because framing the arguements that brought them to their decision again can produce greater depth in their thought process and conclusions (as well as change).

By the way, the writings I mentioned earlier may be found in the columns section

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=75

And I highly recommend starting with the first of 10 articles:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12008

As I said, not easy reading, but anything worth while... :D

Best,
Ron

[GeneC]

Uh, no. His son actually took it world wide, and there are quite some discussions about the differences between Ueshiba the Founder and Ueshiba the son.

Best,
Ron (Peter Goldsbury's columns touch on this quite a bit actually, highly recommended reading. But, if you are limited to one sentence statements and conclusions, you aren't likely to get very far with that particular reading assignment...difficult and highly complex topic alert.)

Oh, my bad, I remember reading that Osensei went to Hawaii to "expand Aikido".
You're probably right about the "exhausting reading", I'm really suspect of folks who can't simplifiy even complex concepts. Why do you think Reader's Digest is so popular? Long , winded writings are just not necessary,imo.

[Ron Tisdale]

Oh, my bad, I remember reading that Osensei went to Hawaii to "expand Aikido".

I think the words were "to build a golden bridge"... ;)

Again, if you look carefully at the history, and what ACTUALLY happend, I think you'll find that aikido becoming a world wide art had MUCH more to do with the son than the father. There are points where the founder actually said "this is not MY aikido" [emphasis mine]. And that was in the Aikikai hombu dojo, run (I believe) by his son at the time. [could have been under Tohei then, not sure]

But hey, what ever floats your boat. :D

You're probably right about the "exhausting reading", I'm really suspect of folks who can't simplifiy even complex concepts. Why do you think Reader's Digest is so popular? Long , winded writings are just not necessary,imo.

Opinions differ, and that is a good thing.

Best,
Ron

[Kevin Leavitt]

Sorry Ron, you've got the wrong guy, I'm not trying to recruit or convert anyone, but It's been my experience that if someone is against or opposed to something, their mind is "made up" or closed.

I thought you didn't agree with my tag line by Patton?

[GeneC]

Not generally against howitzers, Uzis, hand grenades, M-60, aerial bombardment and a host of other possibilities of grievously unfair advantage. Not generally comfortable fighting, period. Should anyone be? Unfair advantage is the name of the game.

I know this is an exaggeration, but still, if your MA fighting system is lacking, then there's room for improvement, room to evolve.

Half of budo is the preparation -- of those unfair advantages. The other half is a matter of instantaneous will, not calculated effort or result.....

Well we certainly have different ideas about Budo and fighting, etc.
Readiness to see it when it happens - we call mindset, which is constantly scanning your environment and perceiving any threats and having a plan to win the confrontation( which might mean running away).
Luck is the residue of hard work.

The best budo seems merely a idle gesture, with all the utterly natural, unwasted will behind it of scratching an sudden itch.

I have no idea what that means, but to me Budo is the total spirit of fighting, which includes physically preparing/harmonizing your body, mind and spirit for battle. Budo is fighting without fighting, form without form, art without art. So the very doctrine of Aikido goes against Budo.

[Kevin Leavitt]

*No offense* So the point is? If the Lemmings are running off the cliff, it must be the right thing to do, 'cause everybody's doing it (soundsl like I'm talking to my kids)? Btw, I know of no concept so complex that I can't deduce to a single sentence or paragraph.*No offense*

So then the conversation goes something like this.

I disgaree, your wrong.

No, I am right, you are wrong.

Nope, your wrong, I am right.

Let's just agree to disagree.

No, there are somethings that require much deeper thought and introspection that require a great deal more skillfulness than the equivilant of.

I like ice cream, ice cream is good. Chocolate is my favorite. I had Ice Cream this summer. Ice Cream makes me feel good.

The Bible certainly has alot of words in it. Peace Accord talks take days, months years.

We have whole schools and centers set up that deal with Conflict Resolution.

It seems like to me when you are presented with something you disagree wtih or is not congruent with your base argument, or someone points out an inconsistency in your logic, you simply wave the hand and say, I don't understand all that mumbo jumbo of you over intellectual types, and in one fell schwack you dismiss the whole argument.

We have even offered to carry the discourse over to Bullshido where we can keep it simple and on a more primitive level of discussion.

The fact that any of us are still dialoguing with you on here, and the fact that Jun has not interfered with the thread ought to demonstrate how open minded most of us are here.

Ron, Erick, and a few others here debate against each other from time to time if you read the threads. We don't constrain ourselves to one paradigm and are openly critical of aikido methodologies. (Read the threads on Internal Martial Arts).

[GeneC]

I thought you didn't agree with my tag line by Patton?
"Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack." MG George S. Patton "


I don't.....let's examine what he's saying.....so, if I don't trust people, then I can't be trusted? That's not true. So if I feel like folks will abandon me, then I'll abandon people? Not true. If I hate racism, that means I'm racist? Nope. Am I missing something here?

[Kevin Leavitt]

Gene wrote:

I have no idea what that means, but to me Budo is the total spirit of fighting, which includes physically preparing/harmonizing your body, mind and spirit for battle. Budo is fighting without fighting, form without form, art without art. So the very doctrine of Aikido goes against Budo.

Can you provide more information or basis for this statement?

The whole doctrine of Aikido goes against Budo???

What do you see as the base doctrine of aikido?

What part goes against budo?

It appears your definition of budo is fighting a physical enemy (external).

To me, that is Bujutsu.

I'll even accept a link to wikipedia as your basis if you want to simply post a link.

[GeneC]

I think the words were "to build a golden bridge"... ;)

Again, if you look carefully at the history, and what ACTUALLY happend, I think you'll find that aikido becoming a world wide art had MUCH more to do with the son than the father. There are points where the founder actually said "this is not MY aikido" [emphasis mine]. And that was in the Aikikai hombu dojo, run (I believe) by his son at the time. [could have been under Tohei then, not sure]Opinions differ, and that is a good thing.Best,Ron

Yes , that is exactly the words that I get my whole belief and position here in this thread. Ok, Osensei saying, ' this is not my Aikido" means to me that it belongs to the world (unless he meant, This is not my Aikido, THAT is, but still keep it secret) and I believe that's what he meant by that and apparently that's how Kissomaru took it and I expect that Osensei meant for him to and even TOLD him to. Also, the fact that Osensei had several Dojos in Tokyo, instead of of a secret ONE meant that he wanted to expand Aikido.

Also I agree that it's OK to have differing opinions and the key is to still get along.

[GeneC]

So then the conversation goes something like this.

Ok, Kevin before we go any further, you seem to be bouncing all over the place. Why? Is that your strategy? Surround and attack? Hammer and Anvil? Divide and conquer? Why is it that you want to exert your energy to pick me apart? I thought this forum was about sharing ideas. Where's your ideas?

What basis are you using to conclude that's how a conversation goes? It takes two to argue. I don't want to argue. If you disagree with my opinion, then let's just agree to disagree and move on. You seem to want to go on until the last man's standing. Is that how it is over on BS? I don't think that's the way it is here.

Sure the Bible has alot of words, but the Bible is an epic story. A post shouldn't be. Besides, alot of the words are man's words, but look at Jesus's words, they're short and sweet. Amen.

[GeneC]

Can you provide more information or basis for this statement?
Tao of Jeet Kune Do; Tao Te Ching; Go Rin No Sho, et al

The whole doctrine of Aikido goes against Budo???What do you see as the base doctrine of aikido?What part goes against budo?.

Aikido has forms and doctrine( meaning it has to be done a certain way), which goes against the Budo( the way of war,or fighting) of having no form or doctine. Any MA with a subscribed form is limited and goes agianst Budo. Right here in this forum, folks have said that their strategy( if in a fight) is to perform an Ikkyo and if that doesn't work, they'll do a Shihonage and if that doesn't work, a Sankyo, etc. Is that right?

[C. David Henderson]

There are a lot of very basic facts about Aikido, it's philosophy, and history that should be subject to little dispute, but in this thread they don't move any conversation forward.

If you guys have the endurance to keep this dance going, go for it.

I wonder, though whether this thread is dead.

It certainly hasn't evolved in a while.

[Ron Tisdale]

Yes , that is exactly the words that I get my whole belief and position here in this thread. Ok, Osensei saying, ' this is not my Aikido" means to me that it belongs to the world (unless he meant, This is not my Aikido, THAT is, but still keep it secret) and I believe that's what he meant by that and apparently that's how Kissomaru took it and I expect that Osensei meant for him to and even TOLD him to. Also, the fact that Osensei had several Dojos in Tokyo, instead of of a secret ONE meant that he wanted to expand Aikido.

Uh, you just re-invented a whole period of history.

If you read the accounts of that statement being made, the man was furious for what they were doing to "his" aikido.

Not that it wasn't *his* aikido, but the world's. Yikes. ;)

I suggest you suffer through reading the things I mentioned earlier, along with the articles at www.aikidojournal.com, because your lack of information is rather telling. Just my opinion...you may of course believe anything you want, up to and including that the world is flat. But I don't think you'll get many takers. ;)

Also I agree that it's OK to have differing opinions and the key is to still get along.

Agreed.

Best,
Ron

[Ron Tisdale]

There are a lot of very basic facts about Aikido, it's philosophy, and history that should be subject to little dispute, but in this thread they don't move any conversation forward.
That's because *someone* isn't as good at listening as talking. But that happens everywhere, and just about everyone has been in that position once or twice...so... ;)

If you guys have the endurance to keep this dance going, go for it.

This is actually one of the easiest days at work I've had in over a month...so I thought I'd kill a little time. Although I may pay for that tomorrow.... :D

I wonder, though whether this thread is dead.

It certainly hasn't evolved in a while.

Good threads never die! I believe it, so it is true. :D

Best,
Ron

[GeneC]

The fact that any of us are still dialoguing with you on here, and the fact that Jun has not interfered with the thread ought to demonstrate how open minded most of us are here.

I'm not saying "eveybody has a closed mind" as you're tryin to imply. I am saying that a few that're adamantly against any change are closed minded.

AFA Jun , I know that he's watching this thread and I believe that he approves of the flow( as long as we remain civil, which I'm trying hard to do). I am noticing that the daily sayings from Osensei( on the homepage) are directly related to this thread and I'm noticing that Osensei DID try to make Aikido as perfect as possible, but the problem is it has strayed greatly from his intention.

[Kevin Leavitt]

That's because *someone* isn't as good at listening as talking. But that happens everywhere, and just about everyone has been in that position once or twice...so... ;)

This is actually one of the easiest days at work I've had in over a month...so I thought I'd kill a little time. Although I may pay for that tomorrow.... :D

Good threads never die! I believe it, so it is true. :D

Best,
Ron

I am off work for the next two weeks so I too have a little time to kill as well.

[C. David Henderson]

Good threads never die! I believe it, so it is true. :D

Best,
Ron

Do they just fade away?:D

I for one have a closed mind; I am unwilling to consider the hypothesis that the earth is flat. My bad.

[raul rodrigo]

I for one have a closed mind; I am unwilling to consider the hypothesis that the earth is flat. My bad.

Also, you use too many sentences.

:)

R

[C. David Henderson]

Also, you use too many sentences.

:)

R

Yup. Thanks for noticing.:D

[Kevin Leavitt]

Tao of Jeet Kune Do; Tao Te Ching; Go Rin No Sho, et al

Aikido has forms and doctrine( meaning it has to be done a certain way), which goes against the Budo( the way of war,or fighting) of having no form or doctine. Any MA with a subscribed form is limited and goes agianst Budo. Right here in this forum, folks have said that their strategy( if in a fight) is to perform an Ikkyo and if that doesn't work, they'll do a Shihonage and if that doesn't work, a Sankyo, etc. Is that right?

Go Rin No Sho? Oh you mean the "Book of Five Rings". I like it when people say what they really mean instead of using fancy words! :)

As Musashi was from the mid 1600's he actually predates most forms of budo, which is a modern adaptation of the old ways or koryu.

The Tao Te Ching is a chinese text/philosophy so not really sure how that has any bearing upon budo either.

I could spend a while going deep into the Book of Five Rings outlining where I felt the philosophy of aikido (mine at least) and my school's is aligned with the underlying advice of Musashi. The biggest one I take away from is that a warrior must be well rounded and be able to practice the arts of peace as well as the arts of war.

Budo is a modern adaptation of the old, IMO. It is concerned primarily with the perfection of self and dealing with the ego. Less concerned with external forces which by the time Budo came around in the late 1800's early 1900's, there was not much left in Japan for the old schools to fight. That is another story though.

What is the form and doctrine of Aikido?

AND more specifically WHAT aspects of budo does it violate?

Sorry, but I think you will need to be a little more specific other than throwing out a Chinese text and a 17th Century text as sources of reference if we want to continue to move the conversation forward.

[GeneC]

By the way, the writings I mentioned earlier may be found in the columns sectionAnd I highly recommend starting with the first of 10 articles:As I said, not easy reading, but anything worth while... Best,Ron

Ok, let's read:Inheritance

(d) On the other hand, all the evidence indicates that Morihei Ueshiba worried very much about passing on the art to future generations and finally designated his son Kisshomaru Ueshiba as heir and inheritor of the art.

(e) Kisshomaru Ueshiba seems to have changed the inheritance he received quite radically, again, with no clear reaction from his father, such that it has been stated that the aikido taught by him and by his successors nowadays is no longer Morihei Ueshiba's aikido.

Ok, this is telling me that Osensei DID want to expand Aikido, just what I've been saying.

Emulation

(f) Just as the heirs of Morihei Ueshiba have passed on their knowledge and skill to their deshi,...., in proportion as they become more distant from the source.

(g) The fact that many of these deshi live outside Japan and that aikido has become a Japanese art practiced more outside Japan than in Japan has profoundly affected and is profoundly affecting its essential character.

Again saying that Aikido is changing and that it was meant to change, what I've been saying.

However, I also believe that certain crucial assumptions are made, even in the way that the categories are set up. These assumptions, which are also very much controversial issues, are based on a particular paradigm (for want of a better term). This paradigm can also be expressed in a number of propositions:

"Pardigm(for want of abetter word)" sound familiar( I suggested this word was misused early on).

Nevertheless, it is an undisputed fact that aikido spread rapidly overseas with the Founder's blessing (as a Á¨olden Bridge', in the Founder's wordsÍÖttered in Hawaii) and it can also be argued that the art has a stronger base, in terms of knowledge and numbers, outside Japan than in this country.

Still in line with what I'm saying.

I don't know what it is I'm supposed to read that will show me the error of my ways, but I'm seeing Mr Goldsbury saying the same thing I am (maybe I did read those articles ).

[C. David Henderson]

What is the form and doctrine of Aikido?

AND more specifically WHAT aspects of budo does it violate?

.

Hi Kevin,

I appreciate your original point, but to me this is an interesting question on its own merits. If I recall correctly, Ueshiba O'Sensei credited Sokaku Takeda with showing him the key to Budo, but distinguished this from the creation of Aikido.

So, if we change the operative word in your rhetorical question from "violate," to "differ," maybe that could more this conversation forward, at least if we focus on what Ueshiba intended by his comment.

I suspect it wasn't simply a political statement.

Regards,

David

[Ron Tisdale]

Kisshomaru Ueshiba seems to have changed the inheritance he received quite radically, again, with no clear reaction from his father, such that it has been stated that the aikido taught by him and by his successors nowadays is no longer Morihei Ueshiba's aikido.

This section is particularly telling. The difference between MU's aikido and KU's aikido. "no clear reaction" is neither explicit approval, nor explicit disapproval...it is simply "no clear reaction". And I would posit "this is not my aikido!" is about as explicit as you can get.

Oh, and let's not forget that "passing on to future generations" and "expanding" can be two very different things.

You can choose to look at the similarities or the differences...but either way they are in fact different. Which is what I was stressing in post 543. If you continue reading Peter's articles, you'll see more of the dichotomy of wanting to pass aikido on, and what that aikido was in fact becoming, **as a result of passing it on in that fashion**.

Keep reading, I'm sure you'll find it interesting. But remember to open you mind as you do so :D

Best,
Ron (gotta go pick up the honey from the airport. If I leave her standing in the cold in this weather, I'm going to REALLY need my aikido... :eek:)

[Joe McParland]

Oh, I wish I could cancel instead of post, but this line is just too too telling:

Btw, I know of no concept so complex that I can't deduce to a single sentence or paragraph.

Forgive me this one transgression, Jun :D

[RonRagusa]

So, Aikdio is perfect in every way? There's absolutely no room for improvement?

Yes, Aikido is perfect in every way (whatever that means when referring to a body of knowledge).:confused:

We students of Aikido have all the room in the world for improvement. Perfection is an idealized end state; once achieved there's nowhere to go but down. That's why I always make sure I flub a dub at least once in each class. :o

Ron (happy holidays to everyone [apologies to Bill O'Reilly:) ])

[Kevin Leavitt]

Hi Kevin,

I appreciate your original point, but to me this is an interesting question on its own merits. If I recall correctly, Ueshiba O'Sensei credited Sokaku Takeda with showing him the key to Budo, but distinguished this from the creation of Aikido.

So, if we change the operative word in your rhetorical question from "violate," to "differ," maybe that could more this conversation forward, at least if we focus on what Ueshiba intended by his comment.

I suspect it wasn't simply a political statement.

Regards,

David

No problem with that....probably a bad choice of words on my part.

[GeneC]

Go Rin No Sho? Oh you mean the "Book of Five Rings". I like it when people say what they really mean instead of using fancy words!

No, I mean "GO Rin No SHo" 'cause that's what the title of the book is. If it was "ZIppity Do DA Day", that's what I'd say.

Sorry, but I think you will need to be a little more specific other than throwing out a Chinese text and a 17th Century text as sources of reference if we want to continue to move the conversation forward.

Sorry, but you're mistaken, but I don't need to do any such thing and I can still move the thread forward. AFA I'm concerned, you're the one attempting to prevent that.

[Kevin Leavitt]

What by asking you very specific questions related to your argument that you refuse to support in any intelligent and constructive manner?

Guys you are on your own on this thread...it is not moving forward at all with Gene.

Unless I see something devleop that is attempting to actually work through the subject, I am done discussing here!

Have fun!

[GeneC]

Yes, Aikido is perfect in every way (whatever that means when referring to a body of knowledge).:confused: Ron (happy holidays to everyone [apologies to Bill O'Reilly:) ])

Funny you should say Aikido is perfect, yet be confused about it.

Anyway, I happen to disagree. I think there's plenty of room for improvement and counting myself is only a very small part of it. Consider that fact that there's so many different stlyes makes it imperfect. Then the fact that Aikido is actually being taught wrong makes it imperfect (if it was so perfect, it'd be incapable of being taught wrong). The fact that it's not the most popular MA makes it imperfect and last but not least, that fact that it's not the MA in MMA/UFC, makes it imperfect.

[Joe McParland]

Consider that fact that there's so many different stlyes makes it imperfect. Then the fact that Aikido is actually being taught wrong makes it imperfect (if it was so perfect, it'd be incapable of being taught wrong). The fact that it's not the most popular MA makes it imperfect and last but not least, that fact that it's not the MA in MMA/UFC, makes it imperfect.

Your view of perfection itself must then be imperfect because we do not all share it. Your teaching is imperfect because you cannot make us understand. Your art is spiritually imperfect because its essence cannot even transcend the physical to win---let alone avoid---a verbal argument in this civil forum. Your art cannot be popular if you cannot even subject it to Bullshido's simple scrutiny without fear.

So, is there room for you to be improved?

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Gene, I threw down the gauntlet and you didn't picked it.

The USMC will be very proud of you.

[GeneC]

Your view of perfection itself must then be imperfect because we do not all share it. Your teaching is imperfect because you cannot make us understand. Your art is spiritually imperfect because its essence cannot even transcend the physical to win---let alone avoid---a verbal argument in this civil forum. Your art cannot be popular if you cannot even subject it to Bullshido's simple scrutiny without fear.

I'm almost embarrassed for you. That logic is so warped, I won't even respond (Doh!! I just did! Darn it!!)

That quote from Benjamin Franklin comes to mind: "'tis better to remain silent and thought......"

[GeneC]

Gene, I threw down the gauntlet and you didn't picked it.

The USMC will be very proud of you.

It's out of honor that I don't go to battle of wits with an unarmed man

[Voitokas]

<yawn>....:dead:

[GeneC]

Come on folks, instead of just attacking me, if some of you disagree with me, tell me why, tell me how Aikido has absolutely no room to improve, in any way, shape or form.

[akiy]

Hi folks,

I can see that the general tone and direction of this thread is beginning to degenerate.

Can we please stick to discussing the topic and stay away from personal attacks? Also, can we please try to engage in a meaningful, constructive, and positive discussion with depth and substance by participating in a straightforward manner which addresses the questions and thoughts posed by others?

Thank you,

-- Jun

[GeneC]

Happy Holidays , Folks.

[C. David Henderson]

No problem with that....probably a bad choice of words on my part.

I'm sorry, my friend, I disagree.

Your choice of words made perfect sense in their original context -- they simply triggered a stray thought for me.

And I'm guilty of a poor choice of words too -- I meant, "how is Aikido distinct as budo," not "different from budo."

I also think there will be no consensus on that question. I could be wrong, and there may be historical evidence that reasonable people could agree points towards one answer rather than another.

I suspect though, irrespective of the conflicts that have arisen in this thread, that this statement by Ueshiba is ambiguous enough that reasonable people could disagree.

Respectfully, as always.

DH

[Joe McParland]

I suspect though, irrespective of the conflicts that have arisen in this thread, that this statement by Ueshiba is ambiguous enough that reasonable people could disagree.


Ugh---it's been so long and I am getting old ;) What was the quote under consideration?

[Kevin Leavitt]

I think Budo can be a wide open field subject to great interpretation. I I think at it's core, to me at least, budo is about "Stopping Harm or Stopping Conflict" (Bu). the DO part is about the Way, which is understanding or enlightenment. So, the practice of Budo is generically about gaining an understanding of stopping harm or conflict.

You can interpret that externally, internally or both.

Therefore, I think Budo can encompass just about any martial practice that is aligned with that core premise of "Stopping Harm".

It has nothing to do with competition, and everything to do with it. It can encompass it or not.

It can be aikido, judo, BJJ, Tai Chi, JKD, or whatever you want to practice as long as you practice leads you down the path of ultimately understanding how to stop harm or conflict, or at least reaching an understanding of the causes of conflict.

Aikido as an art, as you know has a full spectrum of that practice. Many find value in it simply as a healing process to heal old emotional traumas and it can be somewhat therapeutic to them. (Not that I believe that AIkido SHOULD be a primary way of treatment, or a substitute for competent counseling or advice but for many it has served to heal.)

Training Across Borders has used aikido as a way to help people understand one another and to bridge polictical boundaries in many countries. Irrelevant of how martially effective it was, it works simply for what it is...whatever it may be.

For many, and myself included, I think there is something special we are trying to study that makes aikido distinct and makes it aikido...that is, the study of "Ai Ki".

While alot of things and arts can be considered Budo, what makes aikido a separate, definable, and distinct practice or methodolgy should be the fact that we have isolated out a set kata, exercises, and movements that specifically are designed to train "Ai Ki".

Ai Ki is present in Judo, BJJ, lifting boxes and everything else. However none of those things are primarily concerned with the concentrated study of Ai Ki.

The founder and his Uschideshi felt it important enough to carry forward and felt that this unique and distinct subset of martial methodology would best lead to a profound understanding of self at a very high level.

Is that the case? Maybe maybe not. I am still trying to figure that out after 15 years of study.

However, I can tell you that my study of aiki has benefited me martially in many ways, and my study of other arts such as Judo and BJJ have helped me better understand Ai Ki.

The best studies I have had in recent years have been with guys like Mike Sigman, Akuzawa (Ark), and Toby Threadgill. Guys that have a pretty good grasp on Aiki, ironically none of them consider themselves Aikidoka!

It should not be taken though that Aikido needs to EVOLVE because I have learned from these non-aikidoka, only that aikido can be essentially "Open Source" within its core foundation. Much valuable can be learned by looking at others and looking at our own framework critically from time to time.

At it's core though, aikido is a principally centered practice of budo with the primary objective to understand "Ai Ki". the framework is about 50 years old now and has proven to help many reach their personal goals, and it is a sound and stable platform to build a decent martial body on if you train it honestly, correctly...and often!

[Joe McParland]

#574 - Very nice post, Kevin :)

[Erick Mead]

... the path of ultimately understanding how to stop harm or conflict, or at least reaching an understanding of the causes of conflict.

Aikido as an art, as you know has a full spectrum of that practice. ... It should not be taken though that Aikido needs to EVOLVE because I have learned from these non-aikidoka, only that aikido can be essentially "Open Source" within its core foundation. Much valuable can be learned by looking at others and looking at our own framework critically from time to time.Development is one thing. Evolution is something else.

Evolution is only recognized after the fact and then only after a number of generations of substantial difference make the two heritages unviable when combined.

Aikido is still developing. It is not yet really evolving; and if it were it would no longer be aikido. Development occurs as the realization of a principle in the nature of a thing is combined with substances external to the developing entity. In evolution the principle changes.

This interplay of essential principle and external contribution continues in aikido, on many fronts. But the essentials have not changed in the three lineages I have trained in. In any event, and despite the distinctions, they have not made the experiences of others unintelligible to me..

[Erick Mead]

Oh, I wish I could cancel instead of post, but this line is just too too telling:
Btw, I know of no concept so complex that I can't deduce to a single sentence or paragraph.One example rebuts that -- his own DNA sequence. Only a four letter alphabet, but 3 billion base pairs. The sequence defining Gene cannot be meaningfully reduced, at all, much less into a paragraph, and, more to the point, Gene still cannot be deduced from it either.

Aikido is similarly unique, and, despite its familial relations -- it is neither less nor more than they are -- it simply is what it is. It may be explored, yes; reduced, never.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Development is one thing. Evolution is something else.

Evolution is only recognized after the fact and then only after a number of generations of substantial difference make the two heritages unviable when combined.

Aikido is still developing. It is not yet really evolving; and if it were it would no longer be aikido. Development occurs as the realization of a principle in the nature of a thing is combined with substances external to the developing entity. In evolution the principle changes.

This interplay of essential principle and external contribution continues in aikido, on many fronts. But the essentials have not changed in the three lineages I have trained in. In any event, and despite the distinctions, they have not made the experiences of others unintelligible to me..

I agree Erick!

It is people that develop and grow...and maybe evolve around the methodology. My Aikido and understanding of it certainly is not what it was 15 years ago. My aikido may not even be the same as yours! At the core though, I am betting that we share the same common core of expectations and desired outcome, and for that, we could get together and practice and learn from each other.

[Joe McParland]

Aikido is similarly unique, and, despite its familial relations -- it is neither less nor more than they are -- it simply is what it is. It may be explored, yes; reduced, never.

Senseis Watson and Crick have not released their findings to this thread yet. ;)

Everyone has a concept of a thing called "aikido." Everyone can read this statement and see that it is true for his own true aikido and feel bolstered. The statement is a tautology even larger than the "it is what it is" statement.

So, while we can certainly accept and work with Erick's definitions of "evolution" and "development," what I believe this thread failed to produce so far was aikido's DNA. That is, we are discussing the evolution or development of what exactly?

This failing was indicated early in the thread by others, and some have indicated their views of what is key (no pun intended). If it was resolved, I missed it.

For what it's worth, I am not calling for a search for the definition; I am simply pointing out that without it we cannot address the thread's question. In mathematics and other disciplines, I expect that rigor; in zen, aikido, and similar, I know deeply that it's futile. Any concept of aikido is not aikido---unless I'm wrong. ;)

[Voitokas]

... DNA sequence. Only a four letter alphabet, but 3 billion base pairs. The sequence defining Gene cannot be meaningfully reduced, at all, much less into a paragraph, and, more to the point, Gene still cannot be deduced from it either.

Aikido is similarly unique, and, despite its familial relations -- it is neither less nor more than they are -- it simply is what it is. It may be explored, yes; reduced, never.That's an interesting metaphor for aikido! The techniques are no more the whole of aikido than my set of alleles is me. Techniques are taught and learned differently, practised differently and with different people, and distilled in our own set of experiences; surel no two people's aikido is the same. But just like you, Kevin, Gene and I are all human, the aikido that each of us practise, assuming a comprehensive skill level, is aikido..

Just as we could ask, "well what are the things that make us human?", the metaphor does beg the question of "what makes something aikido?" (I'm sure the latter question would provoke as many answers and speculation as the former!);)

[Kevin Leavitt]

Jeremy wrote:

Just as we could ask, "well what are the things that make us human?", the metaphor does beg the question of "what makes something aikido?" (I'm sure the latter question would provoke as many answers and speculation as the former!

Absolutely, and I think it is healthy that we may walk away with no concrete answer. I believe what is important in the dialogue or the practice is that we meet, define a problem, try to understand it from the other persons view point, and we attempt to resolve it, and we gain a little more knowledge from the experience.

I do think though that at the core of our practice, that we practice learning "Ai Ki" which as Erick, I, Mike Sigman, and a few others might debate for days over exactly what that means. :)

[Erick Mead]

So, while we can certainly accept and work with Erick's definitions of "evolution" and "development," what I believe this thread failed to produce so far was aikido's DNA. That is, we are discussing the evolution or development of what exactly? ,,, In mathematics and other disciplines, I expect that rigor; in zen, aikido, and similar, I know deeply that it's futile. Any concept of aikido is not aikido---unless I'm wrong. ;) That same problem exists in the biological template being used ... we only know the proverbial chicken is developmentally related to the egg, because we have watched chickens grow from eggs. The chicken-egg problem is not a problem -- The egg is a chicken is an egg. They are each constitutive elements of the other. They form an organic whole, even though at certain scales of observation there are distinctions to be made.

An organic whole is not other than it is because it exists at some intermediate stage of development (or evolution). At the individual level of detail it is impossible to make out the broad patterns that finally distinguish one path of development from another. The fact that at some point what we describe as the last of feathered dinosaurs became something more like chickens is a conclusion -- not a premise.

In human terms, distinctions ARE made as premises, but they are for purposes unrelated to the natural development of the art. They are attempts to force such distinctions well before they are so divergent as to be naturally inarguable (for a variety of reasons, good and bad) when the division may be more apparent than real.
That may be one useful point of identifying aikido -- it is an outgrowth, a natural thing, an organic development of a basic physical reality, not an invented or engineered construct. One can find spirituality in that fact, as many do, but you don't have to.

[C. David Henderson]

#574 - Very nice post, Kevin :)

Yes, it is.

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

DH

[GeneC]

Gene,

Respectfully, I wasn't addressing you. Peace to you and all your relations.

And seek to understand before trying to be understood is still worth repeating.

Then I apologize. Yes that is a very good 'something to think about'.

[GeneC]

I think Budo can be a wide open field subject to great interpretation.

Budo is the way of war or fighting, plain and simple.

[Joe McParland]

That same problem exists in the biological template being used ... we only know the proverbial chicken is developmentally related to the egg, because we have watched chickens grow from eggs. The chicken-egg problem is not a problem -- The egg is a chicken is an egg. They are each constitutive elements of the other. They form an organic whole, even though at certain scales of observation there are distinctions to be made.

An organic whole is not other than it is because it exists at some intermediate stage of development (or evolution). At the individual level of detail it is impossible to make out the broad patterns that finally distinguish one path of development from another. The fact that at some point what we describe as the last of feathered dinosaurs became something more like chickens is a conclusion -- not a premise.

In human terms, distinctions ARE made as premises, but they are for purposes unrelated to the natural development of the art. They are attempts to force such distinctions well before they are so divergent as to be naturally inarguable (for a variety of reasons, good and bad) when the division may be more apparent than real.
That may be one useful point of identifying aikido -- it is an outgrowth, a natural thing, an organic development of a basic physical reality, not an invented or engineered construct. One can find spirituality in that fact, as many do, but you don't have to.

In this thread, the ostrich, the platypus, and the snake showed up to discuss the evolution of the chicken---specifically, how the chicken might be made better. This was not a problem until each one revealed his own thoughts that he was himself a chicken and that at least one of the others was not. The revelations occurred when the snake said that the chicken's scales might be modified, when the platypus said the chicken's milk could be fortified, when the ostrich said the chicken's legs should be at least this long, ... There may have been a pheasant who said that the chicken was perfect as it is, but I suspect he thought he was a chicken, too.

So much for the Art of Peace :rolleyes:

So, I don't believe I'm oblivious to your argument---I may be very much in agreement. For what it's worth, I also don't believe earlier disagreements nullified your model; I only state that it would not have resolved the misunderstandings. I'm asking you to drive it home. You've defined "evolution" and "development" for us (to help us distinguish what is and what is not "evolution" as per the thread's topic); we just need the definition of "aikido" now---so people will know what is and what is not aikido. ;)

My own belief, restated---and also for what it's worth---is that it is an error in aikido to strive to define aikido---except perhaps as an exercise to bring you to this conclusion. But, as usual, I may be wrong. :)

[GeneC]

Development is one thing. Evolution is something else. ..

Yes, in R&D- reseach and developement- research is done to find a a way to improve the product. Finding that way to improve and then producing the improved product is developement. When the improved product is proven to be a success, then it's considered an evolution of that product.

Same with Aikido.

[GeneC]

I am simply pointing out that without it we cannot address the thread's question. In mathematics and other disciplines, I expect that rigor; in zen, aikido, and similar, I know deeply that it's futile. Any concept of aikido is not aikido---unless I'm wrong. ;)

Sure we can. The priciples of Aikido are based on absolute mathmatical and physical laws. In fact, I don't know why it's called an "art" at all...any more than math or physics are called arts.

[GeneC]

That same problem exists in the biological template being used ... we only know the proverbial chicken is developmentally related to the egg, because we have watched chickens grow from eggs. The chicken-egg problem is not a problem -- The egg is a chicken is an egg. They are each constitutive elements of the other. They form an organic whole, even though at certain scales of observation there are distinctions to be made.

Right , we can't use a biological tenplate because this is not a biological issue, it's simply a manmade art based on Natural science. Btw, the only porblem with the chicken or the egg is which came first.

[GeneC]

Oh, I wish I could cancel instead of post, but this line is just too too telling:
Btw, I know of no concept so complex that I can't deduce to a single sentence or paragraph.
Forgive me this one transgression, Jun :D

No problem here, simply give me a concept and see.

[RonRagusa]

Btw, the only porblem with the chicken or the egg is which came first.

Every individual chicken is preceded by an egg.

Ron

[RonRagusa]

Sure we can. The priciples of Aikido are based on absolute mathmatical and physical laws.

Please feel free to explain Ki and mind/body coordination in terms of mathematics and physical laws. And if you're going to fall back on the Ki is energy and part of the electromagnetic spectrum assumption then exactly where in the spectrum does it fall and how do you go about measuring it, what is the wavelength of Ki, what are the exchange particles that transmit Ki energy?

Ron

[Joe McParland]

I am simply pointing out that without it we cannot address the thread's question. In mathematics and other disciplines, I expect that rigor; in zen, aikido, and similar, I know deeply that it's futile. Any concept of aikido is not aikido---unless I'm wrong.


Sure we can. The priciples of Aikido are based on absolute mathmatical and physical laws. In fact, I don't know why it's called an "art" at all...any more than math or physics are called arts.

If aikido is the thing which is uniquely generated by a set of principles, then define that set.

Next, let us explore that space of things generated by that set, just to be sure that it is unique. Consider that we may not need to compete with BJJ, for instance, if BJJ is generated by that same set of principles. We can simply claim that BJJ already is aikido and declare victory.

[GeneC]

Every individual chicken is preceded by an egg.Ron

Ok, and every individual egg is produced by a chicken..

[GeneC]

One example rebuts that -- his own DNA sequence. Only a four letter alphabet, but 3 billion base pairs. ...

But you did it..DNA sequence= 4 alphabets consisting of 3 billion base pairs.

[GeneC]

If aikido is the thing which is uniquely generated by a set of principles, then define that set..

Newton's laws of motion including Centripedal and Centrifugal force.

[Joe McParland]

If aikido is the thing which is uniquely generated by a set of principles, then define that set..


Newton's laws of motion including Centripedal and Centrifugal force.

Fair enough. We have:

(1) Intertia.
(2) F=ma.
(3) Actions have equal and opposite reactions.
plus equations regarding forces and angular acceleration.

If we look at the things that obey these laws, I agree that aikido is among them; but, does there exist a martial art that does not obey all of these laws? Does there exist an anything that does not obey these laws? (Within reason, in this neck of the ordinary universe, of course.)

Again, if that's all there is, aikido does not, for instance, have to change to be as popular as BJJ because BJJ already is aikido---we've got it covered.

We can add more constraints to the set if you like. Is there a physical or mathematical principle in aikido that is not found in, again by way of example, BJJ so that we can eliminate BJJ from the set generated by those principles and finally declare aikido and BJJ to be different?

[Kevin Leavitt]

Joe wrote:

We can add more constraints to the set if you like. Is there a physical or mathematical principle in aikido that is not found in, again by way of example, BJJ so that we can eliminate BJJ from the set generated by those principles and finally declare aikido and BJJ to be different?

Of course there is not. We might choose to ignore principles or attempt to "power through them", or we might attempt to "skip things" in order to get to a place we really want to go. However, we are still subject to them.

I think the difference is simply in the paradigm of the methodology we are adhering to in our practice. Once we begin to open our minds and subject ourselves to other paradigms, we are presented with a whole new world.

The problem arises when we don't recognize it for what it is and we start to dismiss what we are experiencing. (Cognitive Dissonance).

As I stated above in another post, the difference is that in Aikido we concentrate on a very narrow set of parameters in order to master Ai Ki. We might define success in terms of aiki slightly different than in terms of BJJ.

[C. David Henderson]

Every individual chicken is preceded by an egg.

Ron

Yes, and, historically, an egg hatched into whatever organism we want to call the first chicken. That egg was laid by a proto-chicken.

Ergo, the egg came first.:D

The problem with the old saying is it mixes categories -- the general and the specific -- to create the apparent paradox.

And, the truth likely is if we saw the first chicken, we wouldn't recognize it as a different species, for reasons already stated by, I believe, Erick.

Regards

David

[GeneC]

Do they just fade away?:D

I for one have a closed mind; I am unwilling to consider the hypothesis that the earth is flat. My bad.

Yes, but how many believe the moon orbits the earth in a elliptical circle ( or the Earth, the Sun, or any planet around any planet)? The "Holy Grail" is the "Holy Grail" and is a goblet? Jesus was an only son? or that He had children? Lightening comes from the sky? All rivers in America run South? I could go on and on....

[C. David Henderson]

Gene,

I'm sure you could, but that wasn't my point and it wasn't addressed to you. Peace to you and all your relations.

[akiy]

Hi folks,

Can we please steer the discussion to be more explicitly pertinent to the original topic of whether the teaching and practice methodologies within aikido need to "evolve" or not?

Thank you,

-- Jun

[GeneC]

Yes, and, historically, an egg hatched into whatever organism we want to call the first chicken. That egg was laid by a proto-chicken. Ergo, the egg came first.:D he problem with the old saying is it mixes categories -- the general and the specific -- to create the apparent paradox.And, the truth likely is if we saw the first chicken, we wouldn't recognize it as a different species, for reasons already stated by, I believe, Erick.RegardsDavid

The egg had to come from a chicken, which couldn't possibly be any other animal. The rest is yet to be proven.

[GeneC]

Hi folks,

Can we please steer the discussion to be more explicitly pertinent to the original topic of whether the teaching and practice methodologies within aikido need to "evolve" or not?

Thank you,

-- Jun

Yes, yes, PLEASE.....Jun, maybe you could "nudge" it in the right direction. I'm trying to show that most folks' minds are closd to this whole concept.

[GeneC]

My position has been the same and very simple: If it has room for improvement, it has room to evolve.

Noone has satisfactorily proven to me that Aikido does NOT have room to improve, in some way.

[RonRagusa]

Hi folks,

Can we please steer the discussion to be more explicitly pertinent to the original topic of whether the teaching and practice methodologies within aikido need to "evolve" or not?

Thank you,

-- Jun

The key phrase here is "need to evolve" (as in begin to evolve). The phrase implies that Aikido teaching and practice methodologies are static and do not change. Anyone who has been around Aikido for any length of time can see that this is patently incorrect. I would sitpulate that Aikido practice and teaching methodologies are in a state of continuous evolution and therefore is the question as to whether they need to evolve is meaningless.

This says nothing about whether the various offshoots from the main line work for the betterment of Aikido, its detriment or have no effect at all.

Ron

[C. David Henderson]

Hi Ron,

Good point. To me, a equally key phrase in Jun's post, is "or not."

Best Wishes,

DH

[C. David Henderson]

In this thread, the ostrich, the platypus, and the snake showed up to discuss the evolution of the chicken---specifically, how the chicken might be made better. This was not a problem until each one revealed his own thoughts that he was himself a chicken and that at least one of the others was not. The revelations occurred when the snake said that the chicken's scales might be modified, when the platypus said the chicken's milk could be fortified, when the ostrich said the chicken's legs should be at least this long, ... There may have been a pheasant who said that the chicken was perfect as it is, but I suspect he thought he was a chicken, too.

So much for the Art of Peace :rolleyes:

So, I don't believe I'm oblivious to your argument---I may be very much in agreement. For what it's worth, I also don't believe earlier disagreements nullified your model; I only state that it would not have resolved the misunderstandings. I'm asking you to drive it home. You've defined "evolution" and "development" for us (to help us distinguish what is and what is not "evolution" as per the thread's topic); we just need the definition of "aikido" now---so people will know what is and what is not aikido. ;)

My own belief, restated---and also for what it's worth---is that it is an error in aikido to strive to define aikido---except perhaps as an exercise to bring you to this conclusion. But, as usual, I may be wrong. :)

Joe,

Nice parable. Can I be the platypus?

[C. David Henderson]

Here is my attempt to state what I believe the parameters of a reasonable discussion of this topic need to take into account. Warning, it will take a few paragraphs to set this out, so if that's not to your taste as a reader, I understand.

I for one do not believe it remains to be proven that, e.g., the chicken, as a biological species, evolved from a species that was not, at a genetic level, a chicken. At some point, "chickens" could no longer interbreed with "proto-chicken." That is when we could talk sensibly about chickens as a separate species.

I also think human beings evolved from early, now extinct hominids. Like other social mammals, including canines, felines, and primates, it is likely these antecedents to our DNA learned both predation and intra-specific aggression skills through play behavior with con-specific members of their social group. Like other mammals, it is likely they had hard-wired into them inhibitions against killing a member of their own species.

Nonetheless, as with Chimpanzees, it is likely an ethologist would, if she were able to study early hominid behavior as extensively as Jane Goodall has studied the Chimp, also would have observed, e.g., abberations such as cannibalism, and organized raids on rival factions of hominid that looked and acted like hunting parties.

At some point in human evolution, our ability to communicate through symbolic means changed everything. Everything included the way early humans fought, and the way they learned to fight.

Rather than simply play behavior fine tuning ingrained biological responses, those responses were subject to elaboration and modification through reflection and communication.

The evolutionary change that created culture also gave rise to cultural traditions of warfare that included, not only learned ways of using one's body but also cultural implements -- weapons.

Somewhere in the history of these many cultural traditions, certain breakthroughs may have occurred -- e.g., improved ways of training and entraining martially efficient movement; skill sets for striking and grappling; etc. (Please expand if you wish.)

And because real warfare seems like an endeavor to which the "evolution" model sensibly may be applied, over the course of human history, the role of war, and the lethal effectiveness of war have changed to the point where a push of a button can kill far more people than the most skilled unarmed warrior.

Also in this history, martial pursuits became pursuits for ends other than simply martial effectiveness. (Beware, even here, that in certain cultural traditions, including the Plains Indians, the point of battle was not always to kill, but to win prestige, e.g., by counting coup.)

I think Buck made a good point when he talked about budo as developing from bujustu as other technologies came to dominate the battlefield.

Maybe that's a distinct "evolutionary step" in itself.

What comes next I don't know.

DH

[GeneC]

Imo, part of the problem is the tendencey to mold concepts to fit certain psyche.

From Wikipedia:

"Bud½æv is a compound of the root bu (Éð:¤Ö), meaning war or martial; and d½æv (Æ»:¤É¤¦), meaning path or way. Specifically, d½æv is derived from the Buddhist Sanskrit m½æFrga (meaning the 'path' to enlightenment).[1] The term refers to the idea of formulating propositions, subjecting them to philosophical critique and then following a 'path' to realize them.[2] D½æv signifies a 'way of life'. D½æv in the Japanese context, is an experiential term, experiential in the sense that practice (the way of life) is the norm to verify the validity of the discipline cultivated through a given art form. The modern bud½æv has no external enemy, only the internal enemy, one's ego that must be fought[3] (state of Muga-mushin). Similarly to bud½æv, bujutsu is a compound of the roots bu (Éð), and jutsu (½Ñ:¤¸¤å¤Ä), meaning science, craft, or art. Thus, bud½æv is most often translated as "the way of war", or "martial way", while bujutsu is translated as "science of war" or "martial craft." "

I will admit I prefer Aikido to be Aikijutsu, as that'd more closely describe my perception of Aikido evolved.

[jennifer paige smith]

Sure, Martial = war or fighting , but what about "art"? Is MA (Aikido) an art or a science?

It is Budo.

[jonreading]

I think that aikido is not an organic thing, hence it does not "evolve," in the sense that many posts state. However, I believe aikido is learning experience and like most learning experiences, there is a natural selection that places those who learn faster at an advantage. To that extent, I believe there should ALWAYS be pressure to find a better way to learn aikido and to teach aikido. I see people like George Ledyard sensei who strive to create a better teaching methodology and I argue that aikido is becoming an easier art to learn through instructors who are spending time breaking down the techniques and principles to a level that is easier for students to consume.

Second, I think that comparing aikido to other martial arts is something like comparing apples to oranges and probably not worthwhile discussion. However, a valid point to raise is why aikido does not attract the same students as MMA or other "popular" arts. I think we answer that question ourselves when in one breath we ask, "why doesn't aikido attract 18-25 yo athletes that want to fight?" and in the next breath say, "aikido should evolve to no fighting at all."

Aikido is a great martial art. If we have trouble marketing it to those who would embrace it, then change marketing techniques not the art itself.

[Erick Mead]

Right , we can't use a biological tenplate because this is not a biological issue, it's simply a manmade art based on Natural science. Btw, the only porblem with the chicken or the egg is which came first. Are men not biological? Do we not make according to our kind and according to our understanding as the ants do, as the termites or bees? we have more subtlety and power ( and a knowledge of things beyond the material), but, as animals we are animals according to our kind. Arts in the Greek sense of techne did not have the division you imply. You create that division for a purpose -- and whenever a division is created, one must ask the purpose of dividing it in the first place, and secondarily, of dividing it quite THAT way rather than some other way.

Aikido is natural Way of conflict -- not the only such Way, by any means -- but as natural a Way to mankind according to a consistent principle of action as any of the various Ways of growing food or of building shelter, or of mastering fire or chemistry, or any of the other necessities of maintaining existence.

@ David -- There was no "first" chicken. There is a continuum of being, and we cannot define any single point where, precisely, the branch and trunk divide; even though at some scale we can distinguish them, we cannot make them less than unified, either. I really do commend studying Baien and understanding this aspect of the jouri principle of the development of Ki. Many and Other are fundamentally one -- in a physical sense.

On Jun's caution, this is truly a deep part of the underlying principles of of Aikido -- Aikido is a method to realize or reconnect to that continuum of being between oneself and the opponent -- in a physical, tangible sense, not merely a spiritual or metaphorical sense, sharing the same sensations and motivating mechanisms as the opponent and using them within his body as you use the same mechanisms and sensations within your own.

[GeneC]

It is Budo.

It's heart is Japanes tradition and soul is Budo, but it's brain and backbone is science.

[GeneC]

I think that aikido is not an organic thing, hence it does not "evolve," .

Did not the automoble evolve? The telegraph? The telephone? The horseless buggy? The Abacus? Everything in the world? That was my point about 8+ pages ago- that there's different kinds of evolution- everything is in a constant state of change, including Aikido.

[GeneC]

On Jun's caution, this is truly a deep part of the underlying principles of of Aikido -- Aikido is a method to realize or reconnect to that continuum of being between oneself and the opponent -- in a physical, tangible sense, not merely a spiritual or metaphorical sense, sharing the same sensations and motivating mechanisms as the opponent and using them within his body as you use the same mechanisms and sensations within your own.

Well, that just about covers the spiritual side, but my position is all that goes out the window ( or hopefully not) at that moment of reckoning when confronted by our worst nightmare. best you can hope for then is all that training/practice was martially effective(in other words, your brand of Aikido has evolved). You could be in total "Zen Zone" ,but if your technique opens you to attack, that BG's gonna destroy a piece of your body (and possibly take your life). Also, evolving means teaching your new students what you're saying quicker/ more effectively.

[Joe McParland]

Nice parable. Can I be the platypus?

Since I'd only gone so far as to cast myself as a deluded pheasant, sure! Why not? :)

[Kevin Leavitt]

Well, that just about covers the spiritual side, but my position is all that goes out the window ( or hopefully not) at that moment of reckoning when confronted by our worst nightmare. best you can hope for then is all that training/practice was martially effective(in other words, your brand of Aikido has evolved). You could be in total "Zen Zone" ,but if your technique opens you to attack, that BG's gonna destroy a piece of your body (and possibly take your life). Also, evolving means teaching your new students what you're saying quicker/ more effectively.

Teaching new students quicker, more effective...

I would not waste my time with aikido or even be concerned with evolving aikido.

Aikido is like grad school of a specialized practice.

Long story (which I know you don't like), but Modern Army Combatives has a pretty good program for teaching skills along the criteria that you are talking about here.

IMO, a completely different focus than Aikido is even concerned with.

I spend about 5 days a week involved in teaching/training in MAC and it is a good program.

[GeneC]

Yes, I wondered why you didn't say anything when I was talking about knife fights several pages back, afa how Aikido has one grabbing at the knife. Do you think that's a good idea?

Btw, Merry Christmas(time to join my other family and sing carols and open presents) to all and to all a good night.

[Erick Mead]

Well, that just about covers the spiritual side, I was speaking entirely physically. What one does with it spiritually is another thing entirely. They are definitely related but not irrevocably tied.

but my position is all that goes out the window ( or hopefully not) at that moment of reckoning when confronted by our worst nightmare. best you can hope for then is all that training/practice was martially effective(in other words, your brand of Aikido has evolved). You are entitled to your position, but it is not consistent with my experience. Aikido is specifically intended to find the place of awareness where that window can remain firmly shut. People have varying degrees of success in finding that place. Aikido is a physical method of seeking means to arrive at that sensibility, but it is not the only one: "Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you." I find that sensibility to be more martially effective than the opposite. Oxytocin is a more robust, longer lasting, more broadly effective and less damaging stress hormone than adrenaline and norepinephrine. But there is no faking it; the body won't be fooled. Aikido really is about learning that, and it is not a "quick" endeavor, by any method, and as many people will tell you -- in and out of Aikido.

You could be in total "Zen Zone" ,but if your technique opens you to attack, that BG's gonna destroy a piece of your body (and possibly take your life). Also, evolving means teaching your new students what you're saying quicker/ more effectively.As to the first point, so...? No one said anything makes one invincible. Something will kill us all, eventually ... So quit worrying about it -- as such -- and just train so that you don' t have to worry about it at the point of concern. If you worry about dying too much, you end up sooner dead.

Who said faster is better? Better is better, and fast or slow is not relevant except to the capacity of the student. Thorough is generally slower, all things begin equal. If you want quick -- get a gun and stay up nights planning all your siege and field response scenarios (not that there's anything wrong with that) -- otherwise ...

Presents all wrapped now, so Merry Christmas ! ... and off to bed ...

[C. David Henderson]

Since I'd only gone so far as to cast myself as a deluded pheasant, sure! Why not? :)

OK, but you do get first call.

DH

[C. David Henderson]

@ David -- There was no "first" chicken. There is a continuum of being, and we cannot define any single point where, precisely, the branch and trunk divide; even though at some scale we can distinguish them, we cannot make them less than unified, either. I really do commend studying Baien and understanding this aspect of the jouri principle of the development of Ki. Many and Other are fundamentally one -- in a physical sense.

On Jun's caution, this is truly a deep part of the underlying principles of of Aikido -- Aikido is a method to realize or reconnect to that continuum of being between oneself and the opponent -- in a physical, tangible sense, not merely a spiritual or metaphorical sense, sharing the same sensations and motivating mechanisms as the opponent and using them within his body as you use the same mechanisms and sensations within your own.

Merry Christmas, Erick.

What about this book -- run across it? It looks interesting.

Deep Words: Miura Baien's System of Natural Philosophy (Philosophy of History and Culture) (Philosophy of History and Culture)

I don't know if you thought I believed there actually was a "first chicken," as opposed to saying the chicken and egg paradox comes from a confusion of logically distinct categories -- the development of a single organism and the development of a species. The idea that the "egg came first" was just playing.

I quoted your last paragraph because I really like it, and would hold to a similar view (particularly now that you have rung the bell, so to speak).

Regards, as always.

DH

[Buck]

Merry Christmas, Erick.

I don't know if you thought I believed there actually was a "first chicken," as opposed to saying the chicken and egg paradox comes from a confusion of logically distinct categories -- the development of a single organism and the development of a species. The idea that the "egg came first" was just playing.

I quoted your last paragraph because I really like it, and would hold to a similar view (particularly now that you have rung the bell, so to speak).

Regards, as always.



I really hate to throw the chicken under the bus on this debate concerning evolution, but it does beg the question..."Why did the chicken cross the road?" :D

[Mato-san]

Aikidio is Aikido and it will continue to be Aikido.... we will grow with it....but will you ever understand it? ...let us see....

[Mato-san]

everyone wants to defend Aikido....but Aikido IS...let it it be

[lbb]

I really hate to throw the chicken under the bus on this debate concerning evolution, but it does beg the question..."Why did the chicken cross the road?" :D

Obviously, he didn't. He got run over by the bus.

To quote a character from one of my favorite movies: "What is this, an intergalactic Talmud lesson???"

[Kevin Leavitt]

Yes, I wondered why you didn't say anything when I was talking about knife fights several pages back, afa how Aikido has one grabbing at the knife. Do you think that's a good idea?

Btw, Merry Christmas(time to join my other family and sing carols and open presents) to all and to all a good night.

The reason I didn't say anything is that we are discussing the evolution of aikido and not "how to fight".

I personally make a distinction between fighting and Aiki. After about 13 years of studying Aikido, I feel like I have a decent understanding of what the methodology is designed to impart and what it is not.

Once we enter the realm of "fighting" or "tactics", that opens up a whole new area of discussion and focus.

Aikido is a part of that realm for me, but it is a completely separate training "time" in which I like to spend doing different training methods aside from TTPs or Skills.

I do, however, think it is good training to "crossover" and to put the pieces of the puzzle together from time to time though.

I think you would find the way I train more in tune with what you are looking for as I like to train a spectrum of things. There are others out there too that like to do the same.

I am very careful though about "blending" and the "evolving" thing though as it is important to keep methodologies distinct as they are designed to enhance/improve specific things. Hence why I am so adamant about thee whole evolution thing.

Again, I agree, there is alot of bad aikido with people doing things like grabbing for knives etc. That doesn't mean that the whole of aikido needs to evolve, just those that are doing the stuff the wrong way!

[GeneC]

The reason I didn't say anything is that we are discussing the evolution of aikido and not "how to fight".
But, imo, that is directly a perfect example of what I'm talking about of Aikido evolving.
Again, I agree, there is alot of bad aikido with people doing things like grabbing for knives etc. That doesn't mean that the whole of aikido needs to evolve, just those that are doing the stuff the wrong way!
Btw, so you're saying there's AIkido techniques that teach to totally get away from the knife (like we found to be the safest thing to do in FoF, i.e. in a real knife encounter)? I'll admit I'm new to Aikido, but I don't know of any( and don't think I'm not concerned about that"bad Aikido" and "etc" you mentioned). If any technique of Aikido is "'flawed" and has room for improvement, then is has room to evolve. Nishio Sensei even says Aikido has evolved over the last 50 yrs, so I know it's possible for Aikido to evolve.
Also, I've never said Aikido needed a complete makeover. In fact ,most of the changes will be subtle, others significant, but any change, however slight, if it's an improvement, it's an evolvement

[GeneC]

This is from the book "Aikido Weapons Techniques" by Phong Thong Dang and Lynn Seiser (pg 56 Bo-jutsu and Jo-jutsu)- "Bo-jutsu and Jo-jutsu have never lost their combat effectiveness, because they were initially ideal for defeating but not killing. Jodo is a modern attempt to EVOLVE the more combative jutsu system into a sport, or 'do'." So here they're saying "do" means evolving to a sport. So the same could be said for Aiki-jutsu to Aikido(without losing any of it's spiritual or Budo meaning).

[GeneC]

Teaching new students quicker, more effective...I would not waste my time with aikido or even be concerned with evolving aikido..

???(Am I missing something here?) I'm surprised....how many sempai and sensei finds themselves, at one time or another thinking to themselves (or even saying),"I know this concept, but how can I possibly teach it to that student." How much time (and students) would be saved if students could understand concepts sooner and/or easier, without frustration.

[Buck]

Obviously, he didn't. He got run over by the bus.

To quote a character from one of my favorite movies: "What is this, an intergalactic Talmud lesson???"

Yep! He did. LOL

[RonRagusa]

This is from the book "Aikido Weapons Techniques" by Phong Thong Dang and Lynn Seiser (pg 56 Bo-jutsu and Jo-jutsu)- "Bo-jutsu and Jo-jutsu have never lost their combat effectiveness, because they were initially ideal for defeating but not killing. Jodo is a modern attempt to EVOLVE the more combative jutsu system into a sport, or 'do'."

This is a correct usage of the term evolve since the combative form of the arts referred to are being altered in a fundamental ways that will result in wholy separate species of each.

So here they're saying "do" means evolving to a sport.

WADR to Phong Dong Dang and Lynn Seiser, I believe the usage of 'do' is being incorrectly employed. There are many 'do' arts that are not sporting activities (Chado, the Way of tea, Kado, the Way of flowers, Shodo, the Way of writing to name a few). Therefore I have to respectively disagree with Gene's conclusion that 'do' means evolving to a sport when, in fact, 'do' translates to Way and implies:

"...a body of knowledge and tradition with an ethic and an aesthetic, and having the characteristics of specialization (senmonsei), transmissivity (keishōsei), normativity (kihansei), universality (kihensei), and authoritativeness (ken'isei)." from the Wikipedia Encyclopedia. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C5%8D_(Way)

So the same could be said for Aiki-jutsu to Aikido(without losing any of it's spiritual or Budo meaning).

Applying the same usage of evolve as in the above paragraph I'd have to disagree since Aikido retains the characteristics of a martial art and is clearly not a separate species from Aiki-jutsu.

Ron

[Kevin Leavitt]

But, imo, that is directly a perfect example of what I'm talking about of Aikido evolving.

Btw, so you're saying there's AIkido techniques that teach to totally get away from the knife (like we found to be the safest thing to do in FoF, i.e. in a real knife encounter)? I'll admit I'm new to Aikido, but I don't know of any( and don't think I'm not concerned about that"bad Aikido" and "etc" you mentioned). If any technique of Aikido is "'flawed" and has room for improvement, then is has room to evolve. Nishio Sensei even says Aikido has evolved over the last 50 yrs, so I know it's possible for Aikido to evolve.
Also, I've never said Aikido needed a complete makeover. In fact ,most of the changes will be subtle, others significant, but any change, however slight, if it's an improvement, it's an evolvement

For the most part aikido is a principal based practice or methodology designed to teach principles of aiki. As such it, it is really only (or should be) concerned with teaching principles of martial movement. It is why I use the term "Martially Relevant" and not "Martially Effective". Shomenuchi practiced correctly is martially relevant, but no one I know of remotely considers it Martially effective!

We practice it that way to help us understand principles. It is a technique in and of itself, but it is not an end unto itself, but a means to and end, which is to teach your "self" "Ai Ki".

It is up to you to explore things martially, to figure out the timing, movement, engagement, ma'ai, and to find application that you consider to be "martially effective".

I for one, think Aikido is really a graduate level practice. yes, it can be entered into at any level of prior experience. However, I think for many it is best to develop a martial base.

One thing I think that is tough for those of us that come from other martial backgrounds like hardstyle Karate, jiujitsu etc. is that we have established a paradigm and filter system that can block us when we apply it against aikido. I know I did for a LONG while!

The paradigm I had was looking at aikido as a "fighting system", and I approached every training day with that mentality. It is frustrating! You see alot of things that simply do not work or you would not do in a fight. (also, sometimes coupled with some silly stuff from some people that is just downright wrong!).

However, assuming that you have access to good instruction, if you can suspend your paradigm of a complete fighting system and look at it as a methodology to teach "aiki" you will begin after a while to see some of the things that it has to offer that will be beneficial when you put it back together.

It is a long, slow road though, and it is not necessarily the ONLY way to do it!

There are alot of solo exercises and training I do on my own, that many aikido instructors either don't know, or don't teach for whatever reason that are good to do as well. I have only begun to scratch the surface on this area, but what I have done has been beneficial.

[Kevin Leavitt]

???(Am I missing something here?) I'm surprised....how many sempai and sensei finds themselves, at one time or another thinking to themselves (or even saying),"I know this concept, but how can I possibly teach it to that student." How much time (and students) would be saved if students could understand concepts sooner and/or easier, without frustration.

There are alot of sensei out there that DO teach things like this to their students. Don't assume that just because you have not experienced it that they don't cover it.

Check out Roy Dean's website. He is a good example of a "crossover" that combines BJJ and Aikido. Although I think you will find that he too considers the two methodologies somewhat separate in training and not as a complete hybrid blend.

http://www.roydeanacademy.com/

In randori and sparring maybe, but in practice (kata), you have to train them as separate and distinct methodologies in order to benefit from them I think.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Here is a post from Roy's blog.

http://www.roydeanacademy.com/blog

Note where he says that Aikido could benefit from more resitance training. I agree for the most part.

I think AIKIDOKA could benefit, but not at the expense of the methodology.

I want to be clear that I think there are some ways that aikido could be trained better, but not to the point that we evolve it around a model that is based on "effectiveness".

[Mato-san]

As always, well said Kevin.

Roy dean has learnt to adapt not only his wrist locks 1 to 5 in his application of BJJ but he also displays beautiful, powerful yet gentle BJJ.
So the foundation of Aikido plays a huge part in his elegance as a martial arts practitioner

[Mato-san]

Look at what we derived..... if I have a weapon and you grab me... I am sure as sh@t you will not let go of me and my wrist...
Ohhh another realm
I will taser, and cuff you mofarker

Tuff talk aside Aikido principles are lord.

when the aggressive ppl come on, just display that that they have a weak center. Maybe they will appreciate it

[lbb]

???(Am I missing something here?) I'm surprised....how many sempai and sensei finds themselves, at one time or another thinking to themselves (or even saying),"I know this concept, but how can I possibly teach it to that student." How much time (and students) would be saved if students could understand concepts sooner and/or easier, without frustration.

When you find the magic pill that imparts understanding, do let me know. I'll market it and give you a 2% royalty.

As I said to you in another thread, understanding is not something that the teacher can give the student. It seems obvious that you don't want to accept this, but it is the truth.

[GeneC]

This is a correct usage of the term evolve since the combative form of the arts referred to are being altered in a fundamental ways that will result in wholy separate species of each.

But wait, I just can't accept if that just because you change one thing in a MA, that alone makes it a whole different "species" nor that that specifically defines evolve.

WADR to Phong Dong Dang and Lynn Seiser, I believe the usage of 'do' is being incorrectly employed. There are many 'do' arts that are not sporting activities (Chado, the Way of tea, Kado, the Way of flowers, Shodo, the Way of writing to name a few). Therefore I have to respectively disagree with Gene's conclusion that 'do' means evolving to a sport when, in fact, 'do' translates to Way and implies

???? Dr Sieser incorrectly, misusing a term??? How do you know those "do's" aren't being competed?

Applying the same usage of evolve as in the above paragraph I'd have to disagree since Aikido retains the characteristics of a martial art and is clearly not a separate species from Aiki-jutsu.
Ron

So you're saying Aikido and Aiki-jutsu is the same thing? That can't be right.

[GeneC]

For the most part aikido is a principal based practice or methodology designed to teach principles of aiki. As such it, it is really only (or should be) concerned with teaching principles of martial movement. It is why I use the term "Martially Relevant" and not "Martially Effective". Shomenuchi practiced correctly is martially relevant, but no one I know of remotely considers it Martially effective!

See, here's one of my points, most folks are thinking of Aikido( and most all MA) as an empty hand MA and it isn't. A Shomenuchi with a sword is one of the most Martially effective techniques known to man. However, I'd expect that anybody with any sense wouldn't even attempt it without it.

We practice it that way to help us understand principles. It is a technique in and of itself, but it is not an end unto itself, but a means to and end, which is to teach your "self" "Ai Ki".

I thought we practice that way so that the Nage can practice his technique and has nothing to do with an empty hand shomenuchi. My point here is alot of opinions are based in a wrong presumption. When I become a Sensei, my students will practice Aikido with a Ken in their hand.

One thing I think that is tough for those of us that come from other martial backgrounds like hardstyle Karate, jiujitsu etc. is that we have established a paradigm and filter system that can block us when we apply it against aikido. I know I did for a LONG while!The paradigm I had was looking at aikido as a "fighting system", and I approached every training day with that mentality. It is frustrating! You see alot of things that simply do not work or you would not do in a fight. (also, sometimes coupled with some silly stuff from some people that is just downright wrong!).

That is exactly what I was talking about when I said," How much time (and students) would be saved if students could understand concepts sooner and/or easier, without frustration." This'd be an evolvement.

[GeneC]

There are alot of sensei out there that DO teach things like this to their students. Don't assume that just because you have not experienced it that they don't cover it.

My point is that if that's true, then that's Aikido evolving, bacause not too long ago (and apparently even today), alot of sensei don't. Btw, AFA I'm concerned, I have the best Sensei out there.

Check out Roy Dean's website

WADR, that concept has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Imo, fusing two MA is a mutation, not a hybrid nor evolvement.

[RonRagusa]

But wait, I just can't accept if that just because you change one thing in a MA, that alone makes it a whole different "species" nor that that specifically defines evolve.

Ok, don't.

???? Dr Sieser incorrectly, misusing a term???

"...incorrectly, misusing a term???" Better think that one over Gene. You've just implied that the term was used correctly and you're questioning its usage. Glad to see we agree on that.

How do you know those "do's" aren't being competed?

I never said they weren't being competed, only that they're not considered sports. Would you consider an art competition a sport?

So you're saying Aikido and Aiki-jutsu is the same thing? That can't be right.

Insofar as both are martial arts, yes.

Ron

[GeneC]

"...incorrectly, misusing a term???" Better think that one over Gene.

Ron, Imo, it's correct( something about the comma), but Jun has already warned to keep the posts thread specific and no personal attacks, so unless you have something to add about Aikido evolving, I have nothing else to say except, enjoy the rest of the Holidays.

[GeneC]

I realized something this morning. As I watched our dogs( we have Malamutes and Chijuajuas) feeding and in the process of feeding them we also feed the neighborhood birds- Cackles, Swifts, Doves and Pigeons. I don't mind feeding the other birds, but not those darn verminous, disease carrying Pigeons, but then I realized that even tho Doves are the Birds of Peace, they're more feral than the Pigeons, meaning the Pigoens are more evolved.

[mathewjgano]

...they're more feral than the Pigeons, meaning the Pigoens are more evolved.

I still can't get behind your idea of evolution: differently evolved seems more appropriate. I'm assuming you mean feral to denote a higher degree of aggression and from the standpoint of getting food in the wild, that might be more evolved. From the standpoint of getting more food from you, it might be less evolved, but only if it prevents them from attaining their goal. Similarly, Aikido evolution of pedagogy depends upon what you're trying to acheive.

[RonRagusa]

Ron, Imo, it's correct( something about the comma),...

Touche.

Nevertheless, if the authors are contending that the term 'do' connotes having evolved to a sport in all cases and are not just referring to the two arts mentioned in their book then they're wrong. I'll repost the paragraph from my prior post that contains Wikipedia reference:

There are many 'do' arts that are not sporting activities (Chado, the Way of tea, Kado, the Way of flowers, Shodo, the Way of writing to name a few). Therefore I have to respectively disagree with Gene's conclusion that 'do' means evolving to a sport when, in fact, 'do' translates to Way and implies:

"...a body of knowledge and tradition with an ethic and an aesthetic, and having the characteristics of specialization (senmonsei), transmissivity (keishōsei), normativity (kihansei), universality (kihensei), and authoritativeness (ken'isei)." from the Wikipedia Encyclopedia. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C5%8D_(Way)

and I'll ask the question again:

Clarence Couch wrote:
How do you know those "do's" aren't being competed?

I never said they weren't being competed, only that they're not considered sports. Would you consider an art competition a sport?

Ron

[GeneC]

I still can't get behind your idea of evolution: differently evolved seems more appropriate. I'm assuming you mean feral to denote a higher degree of aggression and from the standpoint of getting food in the wild, that might be more evolved. From the standpoint of getting more food from you, it might be less evolved, but only if it prevents them from attaining their goal. Similarly, Aikido evolution of pedagogy depends upon what you're trying to acheive.

My idea of evolved is not changed: adapting to improve to survive.
My point about the Pigeon is that it has evolved to be domesticated more than the Dove.

[Buck]

I realized something this morning. As I watched our dogs( we have Malamutes and Chijuajuas) feeding and in the process of feeding them we also feed the neighborhood birds- Cackles, Swifts, Doves and Pigeons. I don't mind feeding the other birds, but not those darn verminous, disease carrying Pigeons, but then I realized that even tho Doves are the Birds of Peace, they're more feral than the Pigeons, meaning the Pigoens are more evolved.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My idea of evolved is not changed: adapting to improve to survive.
My point about the Pigeon is that it has evolved to be domesticated more than the Dove.


Try looking at swine. Domestic hogs go feral very quickly if left to survive on their own morphing back to (all characteristics) being wild boar.

[GeneC]

Touche....Would you consider an art competition a sport?Ron

You mean like Judo? Yes, boxing? yes Karate? yes. Aikido? yes.
Then there's photo competitions, drawing competitons, painting competitions, craftmaking competitons (have you never been to a fair?). Then there's horseback riding, archery and just about every sport in the Olympics started out as an art.
How do you know the arts you mentioned aren't considered a sport in other parts of the world? I presume they are because of the human nature to compete. Anything that requires skill will eventually be a competition and hence, a sport. Btw, what makes a competiton a sport?

[RonRagusa]

You mean like Judo? Yes, boxing? yes Karate? yes. Aikido? yes.
Then there's photo competitions, drawing competitons, painting competitions, craftmaking competitons (have you never been to a fair?). Then there's horseback riding, archery and just about every sport in the Olympics started out as an art.
How do you know the arts you mentioned aren't considered a sport in other parts of the world? I presume they are because of the human nature to compete. Anything that requires skill will eventually be a competition and hence, a sport.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one Gene. I would say that all sports involve competition but not all competitions are sports. I do not consider Aikido a sport.

Btw, what makes a competiton a sport?

To borrow a page from Justice Stewart, I can't define it but "I know it when I see it."

Ron

[Erick Mead]

How do you know the arts you mentioned aren't considered a sport in other parts of the world? I presume they are because of the human nature to compete. Anything that requires skill will eventually be a competition and hence, a sport. Btw, what makes a competition a sport?It is also in human nature to cooperate, and in fact, mass forms of the quite deadly "competition" called War, requires, first and foremost, to hone the cooperative aspects of our nature better than those of the "enemy."

It is perhaps war's one redeeming quality -- that it calls forth the best in us -- to do our worst.

"Martial arts" being part of the warlike endeavor -- it should not surprise us that perhaps the measure of our cooperation, not our competition, is the measure of our power. Some consideration might be given to the possibility that the superior form of warfare is not in competition with the enemy but in merely cooperating with him, in his will to destruction -- if need be, -- or to end conflict without destruction -- if possible. "To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."

[GeneC]

Try looking at swine. Domestic hogs go feral very quickly if left to survive on their own morphing back to (all characteristics) being wild boar.

Yes, then if they 'morphed'( revert- morph implies a physical change) back to domestication, that'd be a good example of a perfect evolution. Hmmm, AIkido perfectly evolved.......

[Buck]

Now how about the chicken situation?

[C. David Henderson]

Don't ask a pheasant, snake, or platypus.

[GeneC]

It is also in human nature to cooperate....."To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."

The there's millions of unskilled folks imposing their will on one another.The Marines have a saying: " Peace thru superior firepower" Too bad most of the time they have to use it to get it.

[Sy Labthavikul]

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one Gene. I would say that all sports involve competition but not all competitions are sports. I do not consider Aikido a sport.

I agree here. The way I've always been taught is that a key definition of a sport is that there must be a winner and there must be a loser. Whats more, in order for the winner to win, he must actively work to make the other participants lose.

From my understanding, a part of O'Sensei's enlightenment came when he was able to reconcile the seemingly contradictory notions of remaining martial and yet not having to actively work on making his opponents "lose," i.e., he didn't have to kill.

[GeneC]

Without the slightest opening
Nor the least thought of the enemy
And his encircling swords,
Step in and cut!

- Morihei Ueshiba

Does anyone see anything wrong with that saying?

Btw, Dr House( TV show "House") just said "that without competition, we'd still be single cell organisms".

[GeneC]

From my understanding, a part of O'Sensei's enlightenment came when he was able to reconcile the seemingly contradictory notions of remaining martial and yet not having to actively work on making his opponents "lose," i.e., he didn't have to kill.

Yet he competed all his life.What a contradiction... a hyp..well, you know. Btw collecting more points than your opponent is a far cry from killing. Besides, I'll predict that in Aikido, it won't be one actively working to make his opponent lose, it'll be one defeating themself more than the other defeating themself.

[Erick Mead]

The there's millions of unskilled folks imposing their will on one another.The Marines have a saying: " Peace thru superior firepower" Too bad most of the time they have to use it to get it.The Marines. Where would we be without them?

[War] isn't a Nintendo game… There's no hitting reset and coming back to life. ... I have to tell you, as a former Marine, I was involved with the worlds most efficient killing machine. We were the best led, best trained, best equipped warriors anybody's ever seen, and we are today. When we go to war we will slaughter those who oppose us, because that's what we do, and we do it better than anyone else. If you get in my way, I will kill you. You try hurt one of my marines, I'm taking you down. And I will continue to go until my government tells me to stop. We are the dogs of war and when we are unleashed there is nothing but hell. That's the reality of war. For God's sake, don't unleash the dogs of war unless there's an absolute necessity to do so.
OUR military, including Marines are ALL volunteers. Like I said, cooperation first and cooperation foremost. Killing after. NO ONE competes with Marines. Marines don't compete -- they just kill people and break things -- highly cooperatively.

[Joe McParland]

Don't ask a pheasant, snake, or platypus.

:D

[Joe McParland]

Without the slightest opening
Nor the least thought of the enemy
And his encircling swords,
Step in and cut!

- Morihei Ueshiba

Does anyone see anything wrong with that saying?


Presume first, just for a minute, that this poem has O-Sensei telling us something about aikido. Next, see that you do not understand it.

Two natural ways to bridge the misunderstanding are these:

(1) O-Sensei makes no sense in his poetry, so why should I expect his aikido is any better. I can fix aikido to make it make sense to me...

(2) I don't understand what he's talking about. Is there a chance I don't understand what his aikido is for either? I wonder if it's worth investigating...

I wouldn't say that either way is the right way or the wrong way for anyone; but, I do think the point is relevant to the entire evolution discussion.

[Buck]

Without the slightest opening
Nor the least thought of the enemy
And his encircling swords,
Step in and cut!

- Morihei Ueshiba

Does anyone see anything wrong with that saying?

Btw, Dr House( TV show "House") just said "that without competition, we'd still be single cell organisms".

It's poetic budo code (I got it from Gozo Shido's books- think it is the advance techniques for Aikido). He is using sword work as a metaphor for not hesitating- to act quickly, e.g. kendo's "right mind." kind of thingy.

Do we live in a constant state of competition? Is competition something we have no choice, but to engage in, or like is it something we choose to do i.e., if something is plentiful that meets the demands of the increasing population, like food, do we need to compete for it?

If you buy into the evolution thingy, doesn't evolution happen naturally, automatically, we have no say in it. There is no choice, but for it to happen. Aikido naturally on its own evolves at its own rate and time; that applies to all Aikido/variations. What would evolve wouldn't be the practitioner, but the things that are really composing Aikido, the things that make it alive! i.e. budo, physics, philosophy, etc. Hey, we just do it. We don't make it, or evolve it. We are after the fact.We handle it.

FWIW, "House," it is a TV show. It is written by writers, not scientists, or athletes, it goes along the same lines as the actor Hugh Laurie who plays the fictional character Gregory House MD, isn't really a doctor. :)

And my fav line in "House" of all time is, "everyone lies."

Defining Stuff

Def: COMPETITION

To compete for something; engage in a contest; measure oneself against others.

Def: COMPETITION- other def.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition

Def: SPORT

An active diversion requiring physical exertion and competition
The occupation of athletes who compete for pay
A temporary summer resident of Maine (Maine colloquial :) )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_(biology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_(botany)

[mathewjgano]

My idea of evolved is not changed: adapting to improve to survive.
My point about the Pigeon is that it has evolved to be domesticated more than the Dove.

I didn't think you idea had changed. I was trying to change my own view to be in accordance with your own, but alas cannot. I got your point about the pigeon and simply offered the idea that the dove, apparently, evolved differently to suit a different context. I guess that was a dead horse, sorry.

[mathewjgano]

The there's millions of unskilled folks imposing their will on one another.The Marines have a saying: " Peace thru superior firepower" Too bad most of the time they have to use it to get it.

Some would disagree that superior firepower creates peace. I would argue strongly that this phrase is overly simplistic and usually wrong from a historic standpoint. If anything, superior firepower coupled with force tends to inspire competition and subversion: Afghanistan vs. Russia; Vietnam vs USA; present-day Iraq; etc. are all modern examples of how superior firepower has little to do with creating peace. In each of these cases we can see a clear superiority in firepower and clear protraction of conflict. It wasn't until the superior power walked away in 2/3 of my examples that relative peace ensued.
I can be invincible and not find peace. No, peace comes through something altogether different than having an easier way of inflicting damage than a foe. Peace comes about when people stop using their firepower; sometimes that's when they're all but wiped out...would you describe the cold war as peaceful? I wouldn't, so I also wouldn't conclude that mutually assured destruction creates peace either. Sometimes you have to give in to get peace; sometimes you have to make the other guy give in, but holding a person in check is hardly peaceful when that person still wants to harm you. It's the willingness to fight, or rather, the lack of it, which creates peace; firepower has little to do with it.
My opinion at the least.

[mathewjgano]

...and, Gene, while House may be a great show, w/ re: competition: wouldn't it be better to use a source other than a fictional character? I believe most would argue competition is but one componant of possible evolutionary processes, be it single-celled or otherwise. Competition only occurs when resources are relatively thin: adaptability for survival can be shaped by this, but doesn't have to be (thus other models are just as relevant, if not potentially more so).
(I'll [probably] try to find some sources to back my claim, but for now it's a bit late). Night all.

[lbb]

I agree here. The way I've always been taught is that a key definition of a sport is that there must be a winner and there must be a loser. Whats more, in order for the winner to win, he must actively work to make the other participants lose.

So, track and field isn't a sport? Ski racing? Swimming?

I'm not so much picking at your definition of "sport" as pointing out the futility of trying to nail down some universally accepted definition that has no exceptions. That being the case, for the term "sport" and for so many other terms as well, discussion is useless unless the participants have a certain...how to put it...good will? Good faith? Resolution to address the subject under discussion rather than run it off the rails into terminology quibbling?

[Buck]

The there's millions of unskilled folks imposing their will on one another.

Isn't that called the government? :D

[C. David Henderson]

SO maybe budo practice should be seen as (deadly-serious) play.

On Christmas night, I was watching my son play chess with a friend, while his Mom was putting together a jigsaw puzzle with another friend.

Both sets of people were hunched forward, brows furrowed in concentration. One game was defined by competition; the other by cooperation. But essentially both were puzzles, simply puzzles of a different sort.

Haki Sack is a sport too, of sorts. Is so...

[Erick Mead]

Some would disagree that superior firepower creates peace. I would argue strongly that this phrase is overly simplistic and usually wrong from a historic standpoint. If anything, superior firepower coupled with force tends to inspire competition and subversion: ...
I can be invincible and not find peace. No, peace comes through something altogether different than having an easier way of inflicting damage than a foe. Peace comes about when people stop using their firepower; sometimes that's when they're all but wiped out...would you describe the cold war as peaceful? The old wisdom says "Si vis pacem, para bellum." NOT "Si vis pacem, fecit bellum." [For the Latin-challenged: "If you wish peace, prepare for war." vice -- "If you wish peace, make war."

I guess the first question about where the art "evolves" is whether the conditional statement ("if you wish... ") has been satisfied by the person asking the question: Does one truly desire peace? The implied alternative is that one still wishes to beat someone else. Which is -- in my book -- the underlying issue in competition.

[Buck]

The links I provided for sport (bio and bot) don't work via the link, if you add a ")" in the URL it will work. But to save you all the trouble, here is what Wikipedia says.

Sport defined biologically:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Sport (biology))
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Mutant (disambiguation).

The blue lobster is an example of a mutant.A mutant is an individual, organism, or new genetic character arising or resulting from an instance of mutation, which is a base-pair sequence change within the DNA of a gene or chromosome of an organism resulting in the creation of a new character or trait not found in the wild type. The natural occurrence of genetic mutations is integral to the process of evolution.

Etymology
Although not all mutations have a noticeable phenotypic effect, the common usage of the word mutant is generally a pejorative term only used for noticeable mutations.[1] The scientific usage is broader, referring to any organism differing from the wildtype.

Mutants should not be confused with organisms born of developmental abnormalities, which are caused by errors during morphogenesis. In a developmental abnormality, the DNA of the organism is unchanged and the abnormality cannot be passed on to progeny. Conjoined twins are the result of developmental abnormalities.

Chemicals that cause developmental abnormalities are called teratogens; these may also cause mutations, but their effect on development is not related to mutations. Chemicals that induce mutations are called mutagens. Most mutagens are also considered to be carcinogens.

Sport defined botanically:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
In botany, a sport is a part of a plant (normally a woody plant, but sometimes in herbs as well) that shows morphological differences from the rest of the plant. Sports may differ by foliage shape or color, flowers, or branch structure.

Sports with desirable characteristics are often propagated vegetatively to form new cultivars. Such selections are often prone to "reversion", meaning that part or all of the plant reverts to its original form.

[Buck]

SO maybe budo practice should be seen as (deadly-serious) play.



Mary's post on defining a sport, I agree with too. Party on!

Dave, you got my vote. Party on!

I will go on to say what I think what is pivotal to the discussion is that budo is its own category neither sport or art; truly. But instead, perhaps,"deadly-serious play." And I think we use these terms sport (and art) to I.D. something that doesn't fit in our category of sport (and art). And to proved those who are unfamiliar with budo a term of familiarity when we describe it. People unfamiliar with budo always ask, "what do you call it?" The word budo is so unfamiliar, providing no similar context. I think that is possibly (for better or worse) the drive for Nitobe to write his book "Bushido" to explain it intellectually to people unfamiliar with budo.

Terminology, is the concern, if it is a concern, that Aikido evolving means becoming a sport -applied to evolution then maybe a new definition is needed- in terms of evolution and athletics, a specialized definition. Then who is qualified in terms of evolution, cause I don't know of any scientist or study looking at Aikido in evolutionary terms.

Terminology in terms of athletics, Aikido as a sport like tennis, places Aikido (if it follows the things for it to be considered a contemporary sport ..matches, prizes, judges, etc. ) then it falls under the universal term of sport. Which changes it, not because of evolution, but because of a desire to be considered as such. If I want to change my sex and get it done to be a women, that isn't evolution. That's a sex change. And so goes it with Aikido styles shifting to being and being defined as a western sport.

I am not thinking about changing my sex, btw. No nip and tuck for me. :)

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Scott Ritter wrote:
[War] isn't a Nintendo game… There's no hitting reset and coming back to life. ... I have to tell you, as a former Marine, I was involved with the worlds most efficient killing machine. We were the best led, best trained, best equipped warriors anybody's ever seen, and we are today. When we go to war we will slaughter those who oppose us, because that's what we do, and we do it better than anyone else. If you get in my way, I will kill you. You try hurt one of my marines, I'm taking you down. And I will continue to go until my government tells me to stop.

Well I would disagree with that one........ chuckle....

As I remember one American Navy Seaman braggart saying in a bar in Singapore one night..... "How's the smallest Navy in the world?" to which our Petty Officer (Royal Navy) replied "How's the second best?"...........

[Buck]

I always thought that some sports, btw, may have evolved from war stuff, i.e. core gymnastics sports, football, fotbal, etc. while others have not, i.e. bowling, golf, basketball, etc. Those sports didn't evolve out of war, but rather bordom. Point being not everything that comes from war becomes a game. Many, Many posts back Dave and I discussed this but not so basically in terms of speciation.

GeneC, as a steadfast dude for Aikido's evolution, how does genetic drift and flow relate to Aikido's evolution precisely following the idea of progeny. For da' sake of discussion, we will consider O'Sensei's major uchideshi as progeny. What are your thoughts?

Oh, I wanted to say that in my previous posts what I was getting to in a round about way (its more fun then being direct- intellectual foreplay) is that cooperation is beneficial,competition isn't the only way to survive. Not all things compete to survive. I love cockroaches, bees, ants, etc creatures that cooperate within their communities. And those creatures that are prey, and not predators that flourish in large populations in the face of competition. :)

[GeneC]

Marines don't compete -- they just kill people and break things -- highly cooperatively.

You're kidding right? Marines are one of the most competitive groups on earth. Sure they might cooperate with each other( that's just military protocol), but compete with everybody else in the world.

[GeneC]

Presume first, just for a minute, that this poem has O-Sensei telling us something about aikido. Next, see that you do not understand it....

Joe, must you use every post as an excuse to personally attack me?

[C. David Henderson]

I always thought that some sports, btw, may have evolved from war stuff, i.e. core gymnastics sports, football, fotbal, etc. while others have not, i.e. bowling, golf, basketball, etc.

Hi Buck,

Not only does this sound right, sport was long seen as a way of training the young for war. Many games develop rules that highlight things like teamwork, sacrifice, etc.

My understanding as a Yank has been that the British in the heyday of the Empire saw sport as positive because it prepared the children of the elite to become officers -- Someone who knows --does that sound right?

DH

[GeneC]

It's poetic budo code (I got it from Gozo Shido's books- think it is the advance techniques for Aikido). He is using sword work as a metaphor for not hesitating- to act quickly, e.g. kendo's "right mind." kind of thingy.

I was just wondering, do you talk like that in person (the the "thingy" thing)?

Do we live in a constant state of competition? Is competition something we have no choice, but to engage in, or like is it something we choose to do i.e., if something is plentiful that meets the demands of the increasing population, like food, do we need to compete for it?

Yes we do, whether some realize it or not. There's all kinds of examples of competition all around us, one just has to notice.

If you buy into the evolution thingy, doesn't evolution happen naturally, automatically, we have no say in it. There is no choice, but for it to happen. Aikido naturally on its own evolves at its own rate and time;

There goes that "thingy" thing again. What's up with that? Once again (for the 3rd or 4th time), you're talking about biological evolution, which applies to all things in Nature. That's different than the evolution that I'm talking about, which also applies to Aikido , which is the Industrial evolution, which can happen in a matter of weeks or overnight and applies to most all things not occuring in Nature. Now, since the pinciples of Aikido are based on Natural Principles, then it falls under the "Natural biological evolution" and those will have to evolve naturally, but all other things in Aikido can be evolved much sooner.

FWIW, "House," it is a TV show. It is written by writers, not scientists, or athletes, it goes along the same lines as the actor Hugh Laurie who plays the fictional character Gregory House MD, isn't really a doctor. :)And my fav line in "House" of all time is, "everyone lies."

Wow, sounds like you're as cynical as House and you may be right about everyone's roles( on House), that takes nothing away from the fact that the statement is absolutely true.-"If it wasn't for competition, we'd all still be single cell organisms."

[GeneC]

Without the slightest opening
Nor the least thought of the enemy
And his encircling swords,
Step in and cut!- Morihei Ueshiba

It's poetic budo code]

My point is that he advises to "step in (and cut)" even without an opening. Not only is that not martially sound, but isn't that the very scenario we train for? Don't we hope our opponent "steps in " without an opening? Imo, that's bad advice and a point of evolution.

[mathewjgano]

My point is that he advises to "step in (and cut)" even without an opening. Not only is that not martially sound, but isn't that the very scenario we train for? Don't we hope our opponent "steps in " without an opening? Imo, that's bad advice and a point of evolution.

I'm pretty sure you're misunderstanding the quote. Who else in the scenario might not have an opening?

[GeneC]

I didn't think you idea had changed. I was trying to change my own view to be in accordance with your own, but alas cannot. I got your point about the pigeon and simply offered the idea that the dove, apparently, evolved differently to suit a different context. I guess that was a dead horse, sorry.

Matt, I didn't participate in this thread, nor maintain my position to recruit folks or sway anyone, I do it because that's honestly what I believe. I have no idea why the pigeon is more evolved than the Dove, that's just my observation. If pressed, I'd have to guess it'd be the Pigeon's homing instinct which caused the Pigeon to take the evolutionary leap ahead of the Dove, et al. Maybe folks are mistakingly thinking that biological evolutionary change is a conscious effort.

[mathewjgano]

Yes we do, whether some realize it or not. There's all kinds of examples of competition all around us, one just has to notice.



Splendid! We already have plenty of competition then. Maybe it's time to evolve to greater cooperation.

[GeneC]

Without the slightest opening
Nor the least thought of the enemy
And his encircling swords,
Step in and cut!- Morihei Ueshiba

I'm pretty sure you're misunderstanding the quote. Who else in the scenario might not have an opening?

I don't think I am. Usually he's talking to (about) the student, but in case he's not, in this case , he says "without the slightest openings", to me, meaning none. Plus, one can also extrapolate that the "enemy" had two smaller swords, rather than the Katana, which was actually the preferred fighting tools/skill of the time.

[mathewjgano]

Matt, I didn't participate in this thread, nor maintain my position to recruit folks or sway anyone, I do it because that's honestly what I believe. I have no idea why the pigeon is more evolved than the Dove, that's just my observation. If pressed, I'd have to guess it'd be the Pigeon's homing instinct which caused the Pigeon to take the evolutionary leap ahead of the Dove, et al. Maybe folks are mistakingly thinking that biological evolutionary change is a conscious effort.

I didn't say you were trying to change anyone's opinion. I was trying to change mine because I regularly try to refine/change/adapt my thinking to suite new information.
I don't think anyone has suggested biological evolution is conscious.

[C. David Henderson]

If we are going to get into a discussion of social evolution, we are going to get into another argument on terminology, as well as an argument about it's connection or lack of connection with the processes of biological evolution.

As I said many posts ago, most modern social scientists would have real problems with the idea of the Industrial Revolution as a model of progressive social evolution in a unitary direction.

No one need change her position or his position because of that fact. But it seems to me the burden of persuasion should rest with those who wish to use a theory of social change that generally has been rejected by scholars who study social change as an ideology of the Industrial Revolution.

And, that is before we get to why a generally unaccepted scientific theory sheds light on change in the martial arts.

Did Chess have to adapt to survive?

FWIW

DH

[Mary Eastland]

I understand better when I am on the mat training. Talking or writing about opinions is a form of competition. Aikido to me is training together so we both get stronger. Competion is discouraged at our dojo...if folks want that they need to train somewhere else.
Mary

[GeneC]

Splendid! We already have plenty of competition then. Maybe it's time to evolve to greater cooperation.
Yes we do- if businesses don't compete, they go under; everything in Nature is about competition, all sports is about competition; All fighting/war is about competition; folks compete for jobs, food, parking spaces, sales, status, just about everything. Negative and positive energy compete for space, etc. Yep, plenty of competition.

Now that would be a wondeful thing and that would be a great evolvement. Btw, isn't that what Kumbaya is all about?
Also, would you consider more cooperation an evolvement?

[GeneC]

I didn't say you were trying to change anyone's opinion. I was trying to change mine because I regularly try to refine/change/adapt my thinking to suite new information.
I don't think anyone has suggested biological evolution is conscious.

Sorry if I mis-understood you. My bad.

[GeneC]

If we are going to get into a discussion of social evolution, we are going to get into another argument on terminology, as well as an argument about it's connection or lack of connection with the processes of biological evolution.

Well, then I don't think that's a problem, 'cause we're not talking about social evolution(which some might think an American black President as such).

Did Chess have to adapt to survive?

Yes, it did.
Chess is a recreational and competitive game played between two players. Sometimes called Western chess or international chess to distinguish it from its predecessors and other chess variants, the current form of the game emerged in Southern Europe during the second half of the 15th century after EVOLVING from similar, much older games of Indian and Persian origin.

[mathewjgano]

Did Chess have to adapt to survive?


I'm not sure if it had to, but it did change: as I recall the queen wasn't always so powerful.

[mathewjgano]

Sorry if I mis-understood you. My bad.

No worries! I misunderstand things plenty (once a long time ago, and once is enough:D ).

[mathewjgano]

Btw, isn't that what Kumbaya is all about?
Also, would you consider more cooperation an evolvement?

I thought Kumbaya was about eating smores around a camp-fire with my mom's hippie friends!

But seriously folks...
Yes, I do think more cooperation would generally be an evolvement...whatever it is we're talking about: civilizations can't exist without it; species propogate better with it than without; and I think the same is true for nearly everything else. I don't think competition is the best model for business, etc. because it tends to inspire subversive actions and a win-at-all-costs attitude. It doesn't have to, but it often does just the same.
So I guess I think competition can be healthy as long as it's on the periphery and not the central thrust of one's :do: . It's like a game to generate motivation in my mind. I'm probably a little biased though. I grew up being pretty competitive and all my friends are/were very competitive, and those experiences coupled with my views on some of the above mentioned (business being central to that, FWIW) have often left a bad taste in my mouth. I'm far more interested in other-regarding modes of behavior and tend to see competition as counter to that. To use your examples of competition in martial arts: I like what little I saw of Shodokan competition because I believe at the heart of it lies a cooperative essence.
Sorry if this post was a bit rambling.
Take care,
Matt

[C. David Henderson]

Evolve \E*volve"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Evolved; p. pr. & vb.
n. Evolving.] [L. evolvere, evolutum; e out + volvere to
roll. See Voluble.]
1. To unfold or unroll; to open and expand; to disentangle
and exhibit clearly and satisfactorily; to develop; to
derive; to educe.

The animal soul sooner evolves itself to its full
orb and extent than the human soul. --Sir. M.
Hale.

The principles which art involves, science alone
evolves. --Whewell.

Not by any power evolved from man's own resources,
but by a power which descended from above. --J. C.
Shairp.

2. To throw out; to emit; as, to evolve odors.

[C. David Henderson]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evolved

Main Entry: evolve
Pronunciation: \i-ˈvälv, -ˈvȯlv, ē- also -ˈväv or -ˈvȯv\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): evolved; evolv·ing
Etymology: Latin evolvere to unroll, from e- + volvere to roll — more at voluble
Date: 1775
transitive verb
1: emit
2 a: derive , educe b: to produce by natural evolutionary processes c: develop , work out <evolve social, political, and literary philosophies — L. W. Doob>
intransitive verb
: to undergo evolutionary change
— evolv·able \-ˈväl-və-bəl, -ˈvȯl- also -ˈvä-və- or -ˈvȯ-və-\ adjective
— evolve·ment \-ˈvälv-mənt, -ˈvȯlv- also -ˈväv- or -ˈvȯv-\ noun

[GeneC]

I thought Kumbaya was about eating smores around a camp-fire with my mom's hippie friends!]/quote]

Wow, for me it wasa bunch o fBoyscouts at Boyscout camp.

[quote= Matthew Gano]But seriously folks...
Yes, I do think more cooperation would generally be an evolvement...So I guess I think competition can be healthy as long as it's on the periphery and not the central thrust of one's :do: Matt

Oh yes, my intent for competition is strictly to enhance one's "DO" and whatever the Japanese word(s)/character(s) for a person's skill at an art and his mettle in battle and mercy in battle and integrity in battle and purity of heart/character. In English it's Gentleman.

[C. David Henderson]

The cover story for Scientific American, January 2009, entitled, The Evolution of Evolution, How Darwin's Theory Survives, Thrives, and Reshapes the World:

"From his readings of Lyell, Darwin took the idea of gradual change in the geological landscape and reasoned that it must also apply to biological organisms: one species must beget another. The recognition of ... mutability was shared by some other thinkers of the day. But it was conceived as a scala naturae -- an ascending ladder in which each lineage of plant or animal arose by spontaneous generation... and then progressed inexorably toward greater complexity and perfection.

Darwin rejected this straight-line progression in favor of what is now called branching evolution ...

The concept of a tree of life still begged a "how" for evolution, a gap that led to Darwin's most revolutionary idea, the theory of natural selection."

P. 42.

There's enough here to fuel different views, I dare say.

If we are talking about evolution in the sense of natural selection, there needs to be a selection mechanism -- see Kevin's post a few pages back questioning this, and the resulting dialog with Gene, who holds to his view that, while not biological evolution, Aikido is subject to selective pressure -- it must adapt and be effective to survive.

If we are talking about evolution in one of the other senses listed in most dictionaries, as unrolling, emitting, or deriving, then quite a few different meanings come into play.

Like in the OP, when talking about the evolution of Aikido, which may use "evolve" in the sense of the first sample definition:

"The principles which art involves, science alone
evolves." --Whewell.

This aphorism leads me to note, FWIW, that if we are talking about Budo as an "art," (another metaphor or analogy), then to say, "there is really nothing new in Budo," is to say that the principles one might tease out of an analysis (evolve) are already "involved" in the art, qua art.

Regards,

DH

[GeneC]

... If we are talking about evolution in the sense of natural selection...,DH

We're not.

[C. David Henderson]

Gene,

I respect that you've taken a position, and I'm not trying to change your mind.

But if you are saying that Aikido must improve, what mechanism do you think is at work here?

If the answer is competition, then that is the same mechanism involved in natural selection.

I'm not suggesting your view is that Aikido is subject to biological evolution; but it seems to me your position does involve the idea of survival based on competition in the "marketplace" of martial arts.

If so, and I'm not critiquing your position, then it seems to me you are using the idea of evolution in a similar sense to the idea of biological evolution, as opposed to one of the other definitions of the word.

Those other definitions don't necessarily involve the idea of improvement, or competition, or survival of the fittest/more effective/more popular, or more-what-have you.

The concept of natural selection is very similar to the idea of competition in classic capitalist economics and even 18th Century democratic theories of free competition in the marketplace of both goods and ideas.

So, my friend, if you do mean evolution in a sense different from what I understood, could you tie your idea to one of the other accepted meanings of evolve?

Regards,

DH

[Kevin Leavitt]

Hi Buck,

Not only does this sound right, sport was long seen as a way of training the young for war. Many games develop rules that highlight things like teamwork, sacrifice, etc.

My understanding as a Yank has been that the British in the heyday of the Empire saw sport as positive because it prepared the children of the elite to become officers -- Someone who knows --does that sound right?

DH

All militaries involve sports and competition to enhance their readiness and skills to fight.

In the last 5 years, the Army has established the Modern Army Combatives Championship.

We also have other events as well. In fact, I am headed to Italy in a few weeks to see the international Military Biathlon Championships.

Militaries have always had the need to throw, jump, run, climb, and fight. Those will always be things that militaries must do. We will always have competitions that involve those elements.

[mathewjgano]

Oh yes, my intent for competition is strictly to enhance one's "DO" and whatever the Japanese word(s)/character(s) for a person's skill at an art and his mettle in battle and mercy in battle and integrity in battle and purity of heart/character. In English it's Gentleman.

Well those are certainly all good things in my book. My view is that the truest measure of a warrior is the ability to bring peace above all else, and mercy is one of the greatest "weapons" there is for such a thing.
I'm fairly sure you answered this earlier, but do you think competition is necessary for physical efficacy or is something that can help develop it?

[RonRagusa]

...Gene, who holds to his view that, while not biological evolution, Aikido is subject to selective pressure -- it must adapt and be effective to survive.

This, I think, sums up the core issue of this thread quite nicely. Taken as an hypothesis, it is up to the supporters of this view to supply evidence to prove its veracity. Some questions, then, that need answering:

Definition of terms:

1. How is "selective pressure" being defined within the context of the conjecture?

2. How is "survive" being defined within the context of the conjecture?

3. How is "effective" being defined within the context of the conjecture?

Procedural

1. How and by whom is selective pressure being applied to Aikido that is forcing it to adapt in order to survive?

2. What constitutes survival of Aikido?

3. What measure of effectiveness is to be applied to gauge whether or not Aikido will survive if the measure is not met?

4. The number of people studying Aikido continues to grow. Is it the position of the supporters of the hypothesis that Aikido growth will stop and Aikido will decline and fade out of existence if the criteria for its continued existance are not met?

I've tried to provide a framework to struture the debate. David provided the hypothesis based on his view of what Gene has been proposing. Please feel free to add to the list or change things around as you see fit. Perhaps, at some point we will reach a consensus and then let time test the theory, as in any event, it most surely will.

Ron

[Kevin Leavitt]

Thank you Ron. This would go a long way into framing the issues if these questions were addressed AND we kept on the topic based on the framework that was offered! Gotta get rid of all the emotional talk, ego, and semantics.

[Buck]

I was just wondering, do you talk like that in person (the the "thingy" thing)?

Yes we do, whether some realize it or not. There's all kinds of examples of competition all around us, one just has to notice.



Clarence I was hoping for something more substancial here to discuss in your reply. :)


There goes that "thingy" thing again. What's up with that? Once again (for the 3rd or 4th time), you're talking about biological evolution, which applies to all things in Nature. That's different than the evolution that I'm talking about, which also applies to Aikido , which is the Industrial evolution, which can happen in a matter of weeks or overnight and applies to most all things not occuring in Nature. Now, since the pinciples of Aikido are based on Natural Principles, then it falls under the "Natural biological evolution" and those will have to evolve naturally, but all other things in Aikido can be evolved much sooner.

I don't really like to go here, but, I am confused by you here, and not on a surface level. As far as I see it, and explained it, you can't evolve Aikido. Only the person who does Aikido evolves to understand it. And that is why I use the biological sense. In fact, I the String theory is better for Aikido, as it is an evolved theory.


Wow, sounds like you're as cynical as House and you may be right about everyone's roles( on House), that takes nothing away from the fact that the statement is absolutely true.-"If it wasn't for competition, we'd all still be single cell organisms."

Cynical as the character and just as brilliant. As far as competition that is how we see it. Does the cells see it as such? Or is that what is really happening? As far as Aikido, Aikido flourished successfully under the philosophy of non-competition. Competition will also render a species extinct. Cooperation is over looked as unevolved people don't see that. Well because that is people see what they want to see.

Aikido evolved from violence (warring arts) to peace (self-defense/spiritual exercise). Mirroring the political science adage, from swords to plowshares. A society evolves from warring states to...well the rest of the stuff you know.

Evolution applied to Aikido isn't really something important to learning or mastering Aikido. Again it is the person who starts a new student and through time develops understanding of principles and thought that are reflected as skill, and character. It is that type of thingy that Aikido is about. That is a fact. :)

[Buck]

Hi Buck,

Not only does this sound right, sport was long seen as a way of training the young for war. Many games develop rules that highlight things like teamwork, sacrifice, etc.

My understanding as a Yank has been that the British in the heyday of the Empire saw sport as positive because it prepared the children of the elite to become officers -- Someone who knows --does that sound right?

DH

Agreed Dave great points, in fact your insight tiggers the Spartans and their culture, and even the Samurai (??) to add to your list. Great minds like alike :D

[Buck]

My point is that he advises to "step in (and cut)" even without an opening. Not only is that not martially sound, but isn't that the very scenario we train for? Don't we hope our opponent "steps in " without an opening? Imo, that's bad advice and a point of evolution.

Sure if you are taking it literally and without high degree of understanding. He is talking in poetic form. And with any poetic form there are levels of understand written it. I first thought like you, but after years of study in Aikido and other knowledge I came to realize the emphasis isn't on the literal. He is talking about right action. But that isn't all, also it is about strategy on many levels. Going beyond the impossible, or doing the impossible, it is determination to succeed where it doesn't seem you can. I hate to quote O'Sensei, but I think he said he learned Budo from his teacher who fought in many life and death situations, and was a fighter-violent, killing enemies. There then must be some credibility to what he is saying.

Really, we are way past the usefulness of this discussion. :)

[GeneC]

I respect that you've taken a position, and I'm not trying to change your mind. DH

Dave, you'll not change my mind (especially the way you're going about it), but I think I see the problem we're having here( And I'm a man of few words- which reminds me of a joke- a man meets a woman in a bar and they decide to go home together and he says,"I'm a man of few words" and she says,"Your place or mine?" and he says,"Well if your'e gonna argue about it, forget it").

You're recognizing things that're similar and concluding that they must be the same, but they're not. I explained this in an earlier post, but I'll go over it again here( and believe it or not, I'm not trying to be condescending{well, maybe alittle}).
We are dealing with two different evolutionary processes, but neither are social. The two we're dealing with are Biological (Natural) and industrial. The reason we're dealing with the biological evolutionary process is because Aikido is based on Natural principles of Physics( motion and force), which put that part of evolution in Aikido in the biological evolutionary process.( Now, I ask here that there's folks out there defying Physics, so is that an evolution of Physics?), BUT, there's alot of other parts of Aikido that's NOT about the priciples of Physics, that has to do with the other things, but which puts it in the Industrial evolutionary process,which can be imporved upon immediately. Did you get all that?

[C. David Henderson]

What, in your view, drives what you call the industrial evolutionary process?

Is it competition?

By the way, feel free to say what you need without fear of confusing me. I still recall most of what I learned earning my master's degree in anthropology, so I think I can follow along adequately.

[Buck]

GeneC,
This refers to your post #667.

The evolutionary model is one applied to different areas like, law, Aikido, industry, etc. That model applied to differ areas or fields doesn't change the model of evolution which was created from Darwin's observation of the natural living world. It doesn't matter the field we apply evolution to, the theory keeps its useful, staying the same.

Like I said, let's talk String theory instead of evolution for Aikido, as String theory is the evolved theory. Aikido is physics, and not evolution. :)

[C. David Henderson]

Hi Buck,

You may find this interesting, as it ties string theory to evolution (in the sense of an unfolding driven by a selection process):

"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Lee Smolin

***

Lee Smolin (born 1955 in New York City) is an American theoretical physicist, a researcher at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, and an adjunct professor of physics at the University of Waterloo.

Smolin is best known for devising several different approaches to quantum gravity, in particular loop quantum gravity. He advocates that the two primary approaches to quantum gravity, loop quantum gravity and string theory, can be reconciled ****

Smolin's most famous suggestion may be his theory of fecund universes, also known as cosmological natural selection, which attempts to apply principles of biological evolution to cosmology, suggesting that universes evolve in favor of the production of black holes."

Well, that's ironic -- the evolution of black holes.

[GeneC]

Sure if you are taking it literally and without high degree of understanding. He is talking in poetic form. And with any poetic form there are levels of understand written it. I first thought like you, but after years of study in Aikido and other knowledge I came to realize the emphasis isn't on the literal. He is talking about right action. But that isn't all, also it is about strategy on many levels. Going beyond the impossible, or doing the impossible, it is determination to succeed where it doesn't seem you can. I hate to quote O'Sensei, but I think he said he learned Budo from his teacher who fought in many life and death situations, and was a fighter-violent, killing enemies. There then must be some credibility to what he is saying.

Really, we are way past the usefulness of this discussion. :)
Ok,so let me try and understand you.....
OK, stop the presses, Phil knows the intent of all of Osensei's words. We can stop wondering and guessing now. What a relief!
Poetic form? Funny, nothing rhymes (but I reckon Japanese poetry doesn't rhyme,right?)
Right action? So, poetically the right action is to, without an opening, "step in and cut", but not really?
Succeeding where you (seemingly) can't? Marines know all about that( too many campaigns to mention here), but they also know, still, there's a fine line between being smart and being stupid. Stupid gets you killed and even at the most basic level, attacking when there's no opening, will most probably get you killed.

Btw, I'll not argue the point that there's alot of credibility/meaning to what Osensei (even tho I may take issue with some of it) said, alas, I'm afraid you don't have a clue about it.

[C. David Henderson]

That's unfair

[GeneC]

On a lighter note:

When you breathe, you inspire. When you do not breathe, you expire.

- Mushrooms always grow in damp places and so they look like umbrellas.

- Thesaurus is an ancient reptile with an excellent vocabulary.

- It has recently been discovered that research causes cancer in rats.

- Before giving a blood transfusion, find out if the blood is affirmative or negative.

- Genetics explain why you look like your father and if you don't why you should.

- Dew is formed on leaves when the sun shines down on them and makes them perspire.

- Sterility is hereditary: If your grandfather didn't have children and your father didn't have children, you won't have children too.

- Life is a sexually transmitted disease

[Buck]

That's unfair

Thanks David.

Not only being unfair, it shows the character and depth of the individual. People can get emotional and have strong feelings about what they believe, and that can get personal and heated with great passion. But in this case, the individual choose personal attacks in the absence of any substantial response. I don't think he could argue string theory and how it relates to Aikido. Or realize that the evolutionary model applied to any field, is still the same evolutionary model. He argued differently. But this kind of stuff he wrote really has no weight up the discussion. I just scratch my head, and think he feels defeated as a motive for his behavior while moving on. :)

[GeneC]

What, in your view, drives what you call the industrial evolutionary process?

Is it competition?

By the way, feel free to say what you need without fear of confusing me. I still recall most of what I learned earning my master's degree in anthropology, so I think I can follow along adequately.

Ok....Uhhh...YES.....and...money. Actually money spurs competiton.

[GeneC]

That's unfair

Hey,you're the one not paying attention.

[GeneC]

Thanks David.

You're just plain full of hate. I don't intend to argue anything. If you'd like to discuss something with me, talk to me. Peace to you.

[GeneC]

Btw, String theory has been shot down as self defeating theorum( plus, it's all about gravity, which has nothing to do with the evolution of Aikido):
"Like any other quantum theory of gravity, it is widely believed that testing the theory experimentally would be prohibitively expensive, requiring feats of engineering on a solar-system scale. Although some critics concede that string theory is falsifiable in principle, they maintain that it is unfalsifiable for the foreseeable future, and so should not be called science."

[akiy]

This thread has devolved into petty arguments and personal attacks.

Thread closed.

-- Jun