PDA

View Full Version : Overriding uke's determinism


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


graham christian
11-07-2011, 10:05 AM
This point was brought up in the complacent uke thread quite a bit but not as a topic but more as a reason not to do something. Thus I wonder if it's the wrong word being used instead of pain or do those who say this believe that's a rule?

Trust was brought up too to go along with this not overriding of determinism.

I say a dojo is a place of inherent trust but that has nothing to do with overriding ukes determinism and in fact your whole job in Aikido is to do just that.

Aikido is all about overriding determinism and so is harmony may I add.

I would also say that if you can't do that then you will lose the trust of uke.

Is this not the case?

Regards.G.

kewms
11-07-2011, 10:41 AM
Your post makes no sense. There are too many pronouns and not enough nouns. Please clarify.

Katherine

graham christian
11-07-2011, 11:13 AM
Your post makes no sense. There are too many pronouns and not enough nouns. Please clarify.

Katherine

I Am saying that Aikido is about overriding ukes determinism.

Regards.G.

kewms
11-07-2011, 11:24 AM
I Am saying that Aikido is about overriding ukes determinism.

Regards.G.

Ok. But what does that even mean?

Katherine

Ketsan
11-07-2011, 02:33 PM
I Am saying that Aikido is about overriding ukes determinism.

Regards.G.

By determinism are you refering to the fact that uke invariably ends up on the floor and because of this there is a tendancy for uke to develop a defeatist mentality and so rather deterministically they do anything they can to get themselves on the floor.

SeiserL
11-07-2011, 04:11 PM
Do we "override" their determinism or blend and redirect it?

Since energy follows our thoughts/focus, and I tend to think in words, the semantics make a difference.

Thoughts?

raul rodrigo
11-07-2011, 04:11 PM
"Determinism is the general philosophical thesis that states that for everything that happens there are conditions such that, given them, nothing else could happen."

Gorgeous George
11-07-2011, 04:19 PM
"Determinism is the general philosophical thesis that states that for everything that happens there are conditions such that, given them, nothing else could happen."

...there's the definition of a word...then there's Graham's definition of a word at any particular time.

Gerardo Torres
11-07-2011, 04:23 PM
...there's the definition of a word...then there's Graham's definition of a word at any particular time.
Tsk, tsk, you just don't understand. It's all good.

Keith Larman
11-07-2011, 05:28 PM
Determinism contains the notion of a particular chain of events being the only possible outcome. If it is possible to "change" this somehow, it is not strictly deterministic. So are we using the term more loosely to say we're trying to make uke do something a bit other than what he/she wanted? In which case it seems like a rather banal and self-evident proposition. Unless your martial art involves simply being punched out I would imagine the idea is to somewhat alter the course of events... But then again that doesn't sound nearly as deep and mystical as you wave away the bong-fog...

raul rodrigo
11-07-2011, 05:43 PM
I thought it was about overriding uke's intention to stay vertical.

graham christian
11-07-2011, 08:50 PM
Raul and Keith. This seems like a good starting point, clarifying the meaning of the word.

Raul your definition of general philosophical thesis, wow, I don't know that one. Keith yours again of some unchangeable chain of events, wow, I don't know that one either. So before anyone says I'm using an unknown definition, a graham definition, I assure you I am using pure, clear, standard as per dictionary definition. So any misunderstanding isn't from me.

Determine......root meaning (detrminare- latin-to set limits to)

Definition.....a)to make up ones mind very firmly b)to fix or settle beforehand, decide. c) to be the deciding fact in reaching (a certain result)

So it's to do with the above. now add self as in self determined.

So the meaning I am using here is action caused and done by self will. In other words not caused by exterior forces. So a bang making you jump is an other determined action (caused by something else)
Jumping because you want to is a self determined action.

So that clears what I mean by sef determinism I hope.

So my original statement above says to override what uke wants, demands, is doing.

Regards.G.

Shadowfax
11-07-2011, 08:53 PM
Hmmm..... been trying to understand this discussion all day but even after examining the meaning of the word determinism I'm having trouble. You see I have been taught that as uke I should be looking to override nage's determinism......

While I am still learning how to make it happen I believe I am supposed to always be looking for the opportunity to reverse the technique therefore, in my mind ,as uke there is no unavoidable, inevitable, outcome. Of course now I am only a 3rd kyu with only two short years of training so perhaps I am still not understanding what the OP is trying to discuss.....?

graham christian
11-07-2011, 09:00 PM
Ok. But what does that even mean?

Katherine

Katherine. If you have read the above post then you have what I mean by self determinism.

Now the basic concept of the thread called compliant ukes is to do with an uke doing what the nage wants wouldn't you say. Isn't that what compliancy is? It's being other determined rather than self determined.?

So I'm basically saying that uke when he holds or attacks should be self determined. ie: of firm made up mind, resolute. Non compliant.

That's ukes job. Therefore nages job is learning how to overcome that.

That's the simplicity of what I'm saying.

Regards.G.

graham christian
11-07-2011, 09:05 PM
Hmmm..... been trying to understand this discussion all day but even after examining the meaning of the word determinism I'm having trouble. You see I have been taught that as uke I should be looking to override nage's determinism......

While I am still learning how to make it happen I believe I am supposed to always be looking for the opportunity to reverse the technique therefore, in my mind ,as uke there is no unavoidable, inevitable, outcome. Of course now I am only a 3rd kyu with only two short years of training so perhaps I am still not understanding what the OP is trying to discuss.....?

Hi Cherie. I think you are using the same definition so that's fine.

So you see it's brought up a view, your view, which you feel is different. O.k.

Well let me ask you this. Step one. uke holds nages wrist. What is uke doing self determinedly?

Regards.G.

graham christian
11-07-2011, 09:08 PM
By determinism are you refering to the fact that uke invariably ends up on the floor and because of this there is a tendancy for uke to develop a defeatist mentality and so rather deterministically they do anything they can to get themselves on the floor.

No, I'm saying uke is self determinedly trying to do something to you.

Regards.G.

graham christian
11-07-2011, 09:25 PM
Do we "override" their determinism or blend and redirect it?

Since energy follows our thoughts/focus, and I tend to think in words, the semantics make a difference.

Thoughts?

Hi Lynn. By your question I see you get it and have already questioned how and if it relates to blending.

I look at it this way. As nage it is my job to allow them to keep their self determinism. To allow them to complete their mission. So blending with takes on a slightly different perspective. It's to completely join with what they are doing at which point you are at one with. At that point then for them there is nothing to go against, no opponent, so they change their mind. You, by harmony have caused this to happen and as they let go of their self determinism they thus join with yours.

So in effect you have overridden their self determinism without going against it. As you say by blending.

Now the point of redirecting it. Well, aikido wise, your dterminism was to bring about a harmonious ending so that place is already there and now they follow you or your energy to that place.So once again the redirection is done by them entering into accordance with you.

That's my view. Hope i've put it clearly.

Regards.G.

graham christian
11-07-2011, 10:17 PM
Hmmm..... been trying to understand this discussion all day but even after examining the meaning of the word determinism I'm having trouble. You see I have been taught that as uke I should be looking to override nage's determinism......

While I am still learning how to make it happen I believe I am supposed to always be looking for the opportunity to reverse the technique therefore, in my mind ,as uke there is no unavoidable, inevitable, outcome. Of course now I am only a 3rd kyu with only two short years of training so perhaps I am still not understanding what the OP is trying to discuss.....?

Cherie. I'm adding another answer to your post here because I've got to go now before youreply to the last one. So I thought I'D say this;

Your idea that uke is meant to overcome nages determinism is also true. Both are true. That's the game in Aikido.

When you hold the wrist or tsuki then at that point or prior to that point the nage didn't want to be hit did he so you are already overriding his determinism. Then it is for him to harmonize and oveeride yours. Then if he doesn't do it properly and you regain 'balance' you can counter and overcome his.

So there you are, both sides are trying to do it.

Now the first difference here I would say is to remind ourselves what the first action in the cycle is meant to represent. It represents an unasked for determined physical act against you. As uke that's the original role you are playing, the bad guy.

So that shows that uke is in fact doing something you wouldn't like. A hold says what? That question isn't as strange as it may seem for it represents something.

A hold says gotcha! A hold says you can't move. A hold says you're trapped. So uke when holding is meant to represent such things. People don't like feeling got, or that they cant move or feeling trapped.

That's why overcoming these has great psychological benefit as well. The benefits riplle out into life.

Regards.G.

Keith Larman
11-07-2011, 10:38 PM
FWIW...

Determinism. de·ter·min·ism/diˈtərməˌnizəm/ Noun: The doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will.

Or to use Webster's

de·ter·min·ism noun \di-ˈtər-mə-ˌni-zəm, dē-\

Definition of DETERMINISM

1
a : a theory or doctrine that acts of the will, occurrences in nature, or social or psychological phenomena are causally determined by preceding events or natural laws
b : a belief in predestination
2
: the quality or state of being determined
— de·ter·min·ist noun or adjective
— de·ter·min·is·tic adjective
— de·ter·min·is·ti·cal·ly adverb

Definition 2 pretty much encapsulates the notions of definition 1 including the predestination aspect.

I see what you're saying now, but again I think you're making up meanings as you go. That's not exactly conducive to communication...

Anthony Loeppert
11-08-2011, 12:04 AM
So that clears what I mean by sef determinism I hope.
Regards.G.

You still miss the point that determine or its past tense, determined, isn't the same thing as adding ism at the end which totally changes the meaning. The word you are for some reason avoiding is determination.

kewms
11-08-2011, 12:32 AM
So I'm basically saying that uke when he holds or attacks should be self determined. ie: of firm made up mind, resolute. Non compliant.

Resolute and non-compliant are not synonyms. But never mind that. I'm still failing to see the point.

I mean, I read the words, and I think I understand what you're saying. Thank you for that clarification. It just seems to be a somewhat obvious statement.

Katherine

kewms
11-08-2011, 12:43 AM
Now the first difference here I would say is to remind ourselves what the first action in the cycle is meant to represent. It represents an unasked for determined physical act against you. As uke that's the original role you are playing, the bad guy.

Maybe. Or maybe nage is the bad guy, and I'm grabbing his wrist because he was about to draw his sword on me. Or hit me. Sometimes good guys need to attack, too. :D

Katherine

Tim Ruijs
11-08-2011, 01:31 AM
I would not say 'override'.
In my view you try to make aite believe he can achieve his goal, but by the time he is there the context has changed. When aite strikes chudan tsuki, I let him attack and execute kimu subi to maintain proper ma ai. At the moment aite's fist arrives at his initial targeted point of impact I have moved without him being able to do anything about it (he was commited to the attack). So he did strike, I was not hit. Did I really override him? I believe not.
Another approach is act when aite is about to strike: you enter deep (irimi) and block his attacking arm. Aite is committed to strike, but you override his body and prevent the strike. Aite was still very determined, did I override that? I believe not.
In both cases I 'meremly' override his manifestation of his determination...

Tim Ruijs
11-08-2011, 01:34 AM
Maybe. Or maybe nage is the bad guy, and I'm grabbing his wrist because he was about to draw his sword on me. Or hit me. Sometimes good guys need to attack, too. :D

Katherine

I am not so sure that taking the initiative in a fight makes you the 'bad' guy....
The bad guy it would seem is the one with bad intentions, but that is OT. :D
And that is relative too....

Demetrio Cereijo
11-08-2011, 02:37 AM
I Am saying that Aikido is about overriding ukes determinism.

Do you consider uke as a wave or as a particle?

sorokod
11-08-2011, 03:45 AM
Do you consider uke as a wave or as a particle?

probably both, so that the fall of the uke corresponds to the wave function collapse.

Tim Ruijs
11-08-2011, 04:04 AM
Heisenberg anyone?
when you know where aite is, you do not know how fast he is going
when you know how fast he is going, you do not know where he is

Demetrio Cereijo
11-08-2011, 06:05 AM
But the uke in the box is dead, alive or both?

Marc Abrams
11-08-2011, 06:19 AM
FWIW...

Or to use Webster's

Definition 2 pretty much encapsulates the notions of definition 1 including the predestination aspect.

I see what you're saying now, but again I think you're making up meanings as you go. That's not exactly conducive to communication...

Keith:

Some people just like to hear themselves talk, see their own posts..... regardless of how inane their thoughts and actions might be. Perhaps the funniest aspect of it all is the over-riding insistence of always being right. I think it falls under "I Think, therefore I am right, therefore I am god-like :eek: ."

Regards,

Marc Abrams

gates
11-08-2011, 06:27 AM
But the uke in the box is dead, alive or both?

Is being neither alive nor dead the same as being both?

Walter Martindale
11-08-2011, 06:39 AM
I think I think, therefore I think I am...

jonreading
11-08-2011, 07:56 AM
Raul and Keith. This seems like a good starting point, clarifying the meaning of the word.

Raul your definition of general philosophical thesis, wow, I don't know that one. Keith yours again of some unchangeable chain of events, wow, I don't know that one either. So before anyone says I'm using an unknown definition, a graham definition, I assure you I am using pure, clear, standard as per dictionary definition. So any misunderstanding isn't from me.

Determine......root meaning (detrminare- latin-to set limits to)

Definition.....a)to make up ones mind very firmly b)to fix or settle beforehand, decide. c) to be the deciding fact in reaching (a certain result)

So it's to do with the above. now add self as in self determined.

So the meaning I am using here is action caused and done by self will. In other words not caused by exterior forces. So a bang making you jump is an other determined action (caused by something else)
Jumping because you want to is a self determined action.

So that clears what I mean by sef determinism I hope.

So my original statement above says to override what uke wants, demands, is doing.

Regards.G.

1. Let's get past this definition thing. Determinism is not the correct word for what is being discussed. An ism is a noun-forming suffix root used to change the meaning of a noun from a specific noun to general doctrine or system. Let's accept that was the wrong word and go on.
2. I believe you mean to use either "determined" or "determinedly" as an adverb to describe the manner in which uke attacks.

Uke absolutely needs to develop the ability to attack nage with the expectation that if nage does not properly execute waza, uke will prevail and the attack will succeed. Nage absolutely needs to develop the ability to properly execute waza. The aikido confrontation is about control: physical control, mental control and spiritual control. I am imposing myself upon my partner on one or more levels for the purpose of establishing control of my partner. While not necessarily a bad word, I am not so much "overriding" my partner's will to affect me ("overriding" has an implication of domination or force) as I am creating a scenario in which aite realizes his efforts will not prevail. In this sense my partner is changing his intention from offense to defense. This also puts him in the position to receive my offensive as I transition from getting to giving.

This is (I think) where we break down as "uke". We attack like morons and our bodies are never positioned to defend if nage ever did want to transition into an attacking role... So rather than making our uke better learn how to transition from offense to defense we threw out the offensive role for nage... Again, I don't like "overriding" here because that implies that uke is not altering his position to respond to nage. And we are back to this concept that nage must be responsive to uke but uke does not have to be responsive to nage. I think good aikido is about the communication between uke and nage that creates a dialog - "Don't go there, that won't work. Oh, shoot, well I better move here then. Thanks."

Gorgeous George
11-08-2011, 08:09 AM
Do you consider uke as a wave or as a particle?

HAHAHA!

It's discussions like this that I can see really helping to better my aikido practice.

...if I didn't just scroll past all the verbal masturbation, that is.
What is uke?
What is determinism?
...what is a word...?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lq65hlbxdmk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Keith Larman
11-08-2011, 08:10 AM
Keith:

Some people just like to hear themselves talk, see their own posts..... regardless of how inane their thoughts and actions might be. Perhaps the funniest aspect of it all is the over-riding insistence of always being right. I think it falls under "I Think, therefore I am right, therefore I am god-like :eek: ."

Regards,

Marc Abrams

Well, I don't know his intent but I was just trying to unwind a bit what he was saying. From my understanding of English and philosophy for that matter it made no sense and I was curious how one could work determinism in to this stuff we do. On the other hand, if we temporarily redefine the meaning to encapsulate what he seems to intend, well, then it becomes (as Katherine mentioned and I mentioned before) rather self-evident. So I don't see the point. I see it as either silly or self-evident and trivial. I was wondering if I missed something deeper (wouldn't be the first time).

I do find it interesting in that it seems the subtle (and often not-so-subtle) misuse of words to create a confused, shifting meaning to be a common thread here. So many are willing to wax on poetically. And while I find no problem with that, it does tend to require a solid base if you're going to claim some sort of objective reality and substance for that object of that prose. If is a form of fallacy in argument when one starts to shift meanings around. Shifting grounds kind of problem. It just seems so much more prevalent in Aikido discussions for some reason. Or maybe it's just a few peoples' way of communicating that causes cognitive dissonance in me.

Basia Halliop
11-08-2011, 08:11 AM
I kind of got the impression he meant something like 'keeping uke from doing what uke is trying to do, and getting uke to do something else instead'.

And (here I'm guessing slightly more) 'in the dojo, we should try to trust each other and assume that others will trust us' and 'if you can get uke to do what you want he or she will trust you because they can see that you know what you're doing'. Or something like that?

A word of advice from George Orwell himself (author of 1984 and Animal Farm if that jogs your memory): "never use a long word where a short one will do". Even if you use a word which is also accurate (which you didn't), more often than not it communicates your idea far less clearly; in fact, sometimes it hides your meaning rather than revealing it. Save the big words for when there honestly isn't any other word that captures your thought, and then be sure you're using the word accurately.

Sometimes people use more complex or unclear language intentionally because they believe it makes them look more intelligent, other times it's just a habit. Either way, it's more likely to make you sound confused than intelligent. Intelligent IDEAS make you sound intelligent. (No idea if this is why Graham is using his kind of language or not - as often as not it's just a habit people get into).

Orwell's essay 'politics and the english language, which he wrote in 1946' is worth reading for anyone.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm

At the end he summarizes some writing tips.

"But one can often be in doubt about the effect of a word or a phrase, and one needs rules that one can rely on when instinct fails. I think the following rules will cover most cases:

(i) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
(ii) Never us a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

These rules sound elementary, and so they are, but they demand a deep change of attitude in anyone who has grown used to writing in the style now fashionable. One could keep all of them and still write bad English, but one could not write the kind of stuff that I quoted in those five specimens at the beginning of this article. "

Graham Farquhar
11-08-2011, 09:20 AM
You still miss the point that determine or its past tense, determined, isn't the same thing as adding ism at the end which totally changes the meaning. The word you are for some reason avoiding is determination.

Agreed! That was my initial thoughts!

raul rodrigo
11-08-2011, 09:39 AM
Why not use the phrase "uke's intention" instead of "determinism" and be done with it? Determinism has a given meaning already.

Gerardo Torres
11-08-2011, 10:21 AM
Do you consider uke as a wave or as a particle?
Both! No, wait, uke's a string! It's all good.

Demetrio Cereijo
11-08-2011, 12:07 PM
Both! No, wait, uke's a string!

Then he/she/it has "flavor"..... om nom nom

SeiserL
11-08-2011, 12:21 PM
Perhaps I am more determined they will go where I want to put them as opposed to me going where they are determined to put me?

Perhaps the outcome is determined by the intent and intensity of training?

Thoughts?

Basia Halliop
11-08-2011, 01:06 PM
Lynn, I think you also need to determine whether or not the content of the training is such that it gives you the tools you need.

graham christian
11-08-2011, 02:59 PM
FWIW...

Or to use Webster's

Definition 2 pretty much encapsulates the notions of definition 1 including the predestination aspect.

I see what you're saying now, but again I think you're making up meanings as you go. That's not exactly conducive to communication...

Think what you want but admit when you're wrong and casting false aspersions. Those definitions given are from a dictionary so I'm not making anything up thank you very much.

Some people ie: Lynn, were obviously used to that definition being used so just because you were not means just that, you were not. (along with some others) So it has now been clarified.

Ref. for those who feel pedantic. World book dictionary, thorndike and barnhart, determine definitions 1,2, and 3. vt.

Regards.G.

graham christian
11-08-2011, 03:10 PM
You still miss the point that determine or its past tense, determined, isn't the same thing as adding ism at the end which totally changes the meaning. The word you are for some reason avoiding is determination.

O.K. Anthony. Self determination. Thank you. You still have to look at the word from a verb point of view though to see the concept. He is trying to determine what happens.

If someone told me someone has great determination (noun) I would see he decides for himself, he determines what happens uninfluenced, focussed.

So I will use your more grammatically correct definition.

Regards.G.

graham christian
11-08-2011, 03:18 PM
Maybe. Or maybe nage is the bad guy, and I'm grabbing his wrist because he was about to draw his sword on me. Or hit me. Sometimes good guys need to attack, too. :D

Katherine

O.K. Agreed it seems like a banal statement, but on further inspection it brings questions.

As you say above that could also be a scenario. Have you trained like this? Have you ever had nage holding something, willing to use it, so that grabbing the wrist has more reality to it?

Thus yours is a good observation no?

Regards.G.

graham christian
11-08-2011, 03:21 PM
Do you consider uke as a wave or as a particle?

Ha, ha. Do I consider you as background noise or a heavenly song?

kewms
11-08-2011, 03:24 PM
As you say above that could also be a scenario. Have you trained like this? Have you ever had nage holding something, willing to use it, so that grabbing the wrist has more reality to it?

Quite often. Though nage isn't always holding a weapon, we teach people -- from day one -- that uke is grabbing for a reason, not just to hold nage's wrist.

The distinction between uke and nage is entirely artificial. It's useful for training purposes, but the assigned role shouldn't make much difference in a person's attitude

Katherine

graham christian
11-08-2011, 03:56 PM
Perhaps I am more determined they will go where I want to put them as opposed to me going where they are determined to put me?

Perhaps the outcome is determined by the intent and intensity of training?

Thoughts?

Hi Lynn.
I would say the outcome is purely to do with the level of skill, ability. But we digress no?

The whole concept of Aikido is about overriding ukes determination. That's the point I need to clarify. That's the bold statement I make.

Uke: I am saying uke represents a determined aggressor, that's his job.

Nage therefore represents Aikido.

When we read statements by O'Sensei such as 'there are no enemies or opponents in Aikido, or there is no attacking in Aikido or there is no pushing against or pulling in Aikido and such things then it appears to me that the attacker is representing something outside of
Aikido and therefore the nage is representing Aikido.

Thus I believe that I am presenting an interesting view that has more truth to it than first glance.

So I am saying uke represents rules which may be outside of the principles of Aikido yet Aikido is to handle such without going into those same rules ie: without fighting etc.

So in effect overriding or changing the attackers determinism.

Regards.G.

Demetrio Cereijo
11-08-2011, 03:59 PM
Ha, ha. Do I consider you as background noise or a heavenly song?

Is there any difference (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background_radiation)?

graham christian
11-08-2011, 04:08 PM
Quite often. Though nage isn't always holding a weapon, we teach people -- from day one -- that uke is grabbing for a reason, not just to hold nage's wrist.

The distinction between uke and nage is entirely artificial. It's useful for training purposes, but the assigned role shouldn't make much difference in a person's attitude

Katherine

O.K. Fine by me. I shall now refer you to the following: To give distinction between uke and nage.

Have uke representing something that's not Aikido. (principle wise) Then see from that view a massive distinction.

For example, trying to stab someone is hardly in accordance with the philosophy of Aikido. However Aikido philosophy states it can handle such with harmonious motion etc.

Therefore it's good to look at it this way I say from the view of nage representing Aikido while uke is representing a determined yet non-harmonious other.

Regards.G.

kewms
11-08-2011, 04:49 PM
Have uke representing something that's not Aikido.

Why? Why should the uke side be practicing something different from the nage side? Why would you spend half your mat time practicing something that isn't aikido?

Katherine

graham christian
11-08-2011, 04:59 PM
Why? Why should the uke side be practicing something different from the nage side? Why would you spend half your mat time practicing something that isn't aikido?

Katherine

Precisely grasshopper. So are you saying trying to stab someone or chop off their head with a sword is Aikido?

Regards.G.

Janet Rosen
11-08-2011, 05:13 PM
Initiating and delivering with intent a proper attack is part of aikido. Yes, trying to cut somebodys head off may be the called - for attack.

kewms
11-08-2011, 05:26 PM
Precisely grasshopper. So are you saying trying to stab someone or chop off their head with a sword is Aikido?

To say that "trying to stab someone" is or is not aikido is not really relevant to dojo practice. In the dojo, someone is assigned the role of attacker and should fill that role with the same sort of connection, body movement, etc. that one uses when defending, ie according to aikido principles.

Outside the dojo, the correct question is not "is X aikido," but "is X morally correct?" Once you identify the morally correct action, then yes, absolutely, you should bring aikido (or whatever other skills you have) to bear in order to accomplish it.

Katherine

robin_jet_alt
11-08-2011, 05:45 PM
Why? Why should the uke side be practicing something different from the nage side? Why would you spend half your mat time practicing something that isn't aikido?

Katherine

Hang on. Isn't that the point of uke? Shouldn't uke be playing the role of an attacker in order to allow nage to practice their technique in a simulated attack scenario? If uke was all about blending and being 'aiki' all the time, then how would nage be able to practice effectively?

Gerardo Torres
11-08-2011, 06:28 PM
Hang on. Isn't that the point of uke? Shouldn't uke be playing the role of an attacker in order to allow nage to practice their technique in a simulated attack scenario? If uke was all about blending and being 'aiki' all the time, then how would nage be able to practice effectively?
If uke is just a crash test dummy, and doesn't manifest the same aiki, etc., that nage does, how can uke ever counter nage (kaeshi waza)? If half the time you're training aiki and preserving your balance (nage), and half the time you're just performing some conventional move/attack and/or giving away your balance (uke), how can you progress? Perhaps we just understand aiki differently, but if I were to preserve the uke/nage training paradigm, I would have both uke and nage apply the same body/mind principles all the time so as to condition the body/mind more efficiently. IME you can still have a martial encounter within these parameters.

Janet Rosen
11-08-2011, 06:28 PM
Hang on. Isn't that the point of uke? Shouldn't uke be playing the role of an attacker in order to allow nage to practice their technique in a simulated attack scenario? If uke was all about blending and being 'aiki' all the time, then how would nage be able to practice effectively?

I don't think of nage's job as being "blending".
I think of both nage and uke's roles as being to make an effective center to center connection:
uke in order to make an effective attack which means an attack on nage's structural integrity either via a grab, blow, strike, etc - nage in order to effect uke's structural integrity to effect a pin, roll, fall, etc.

robin_jet_alt
11-08-2011, 06:47 PM
If uke is just a crash test dummy, and doesn't manifest the same aiki, etc., that nage does, how can uke ever counter nage (kaeshi waza)? If half the time you're training aiki and preserving your balance (nage), and half the time you're just performing some conventional move/attack and/or giving away your balance (uke), how can you progress? Perhaps we just understand aiki differently, but if I were to preserve the uke/nage training paradigm, I would have both uke and nage apply the same body/mind principles all the time so as to condition the body/mind more efficiently. IME you can still have a martial encounter within these parameters.

I'm certainly not saying that uke should be going through the motions or giving away their balance. That's not what I mean at all. What I am saying is that if nage is practicing shomen-uchi ikkyo, then uke should be trying to hit nage in the head. IMHO this is not particularly 'aiki'.

kewms
11-08-2011, 07:04 PM
What I am saying is that if nage is practicing shomen-uchi ikkyo, then uke should be trying to hit nage in the head. IMHO this is not particularly 'aiki'.

Why not? What do you understand "aiki" to mean? Why can't one manifest it while attacking?

Katherine

robin_jet_alt
11-08-2011, 07:14 PM
Why not? What do you understand "aiki" to mean? Why can't one manifest it while attacking?

Katherine

Well, I'm not saying that uke can't exhibit elements of 'aiki'. In fact they should. Uke should maintain balance, and blend with the technique once it has begun, which can lead to kaeshi-waza etc etc etc. However, when it comes down to it, they are still trying to hit nage in the head.

As for what I understand aiki to mean, I suppose a large part of it is harmonising forces. Whether those forces are within, or come from an attacker or are metaphorical or whatever is up to the interpreter. In any case, I am yet to be convinced that hitting someone in the head is particularly aiki. I am, however, willing to be convinced. Could you explain how you see it?

kewms
11-08-2011, 07:28 PM
As for what I understand aiki to mean, I suppose a large part of it is harmonising forces. Whether those forces are within, or come from an attacker or are metaphorical or whatever is up to the interpreter. In any case, I am yet to be convinced that hitting someone in the head is particularly aiki. I am, however, willing to be convinced. Could you explain how you see it?

Instead of a strike, consider a wrist grab. Consider using the contact point at the wrist to connect to nage's spine through his arm, and using that connection to take him down, or to immobilize him for a strike. Is that a manifestation of "harmonizing forces?" As I see it, yes, absolutely.

A strike is simply a more explosive version of the same idea.

Katherine

robin_jet_alt
11-08-2011, 07:58 PM
Instead of a strike, consider a wrist grab. Consider using the contact point at the wrist to connect to nage's spine through his arm, and using that connection to take him down, or to immobilize him for a strike. Is that a manifestation of "harmonizing forces?" As I see it, yes, absolutely.

A strike is simply a more explosive version of the same idea.

Katherine

I vaguely see where you are coming from, but if striking someone is just a more explosive version of harmonising forces, doesn't pretty much everything that is effective fall under that category? What about shooting someone, or firing a missile? I'm still struggling to see where you draw the line.

kewms
11-08-2011, 08:29 PM
I vaguely see where you are coming from, but if striking someone is just a more explosive version of harmonising forces, doesn't pretty much everything that is effective fall under that category? What about shooting someone, or firing a missile? I'm still struggling to see where you draw the line.

The kyudo folks would probably say that they strive to make the same connection. I don't study kyudo, so I'm not going to comment. The same idea is definitely present in sword and jo work, though.

I didn't say that *all* strikes manifest aiki, just that it is *possible* to use aiki principles in strikes. And that the attacker in an aikido interaction should be practicing aiki principles.

Why does there need to be a line? Ueshiba Sensei did not invent aiki, so why can't it appear in places other than the nage side of aikido waza?

Katherine

robin_jet_alt
11-08-2011, 08:40 PM
The kyudo folks would probably say that they strive to make the same connection. I don't study kyudo, so I'm not going to comment. The same idea is definitely present in sword and jo work, though.

I didn't say that *all* strikes manifest aiki, just that it is *possible* to use aiki principles in strikes. And that the attacker in an aikido interaction should be practicing aiki principles.

Why does there need to be a line? Ueshiba Sensei did not invent aiki, so why can't it appear in places other than the nage side of aikido waza?

Katherine

I think I see what you mean now. Uke should definitely use aiki principles, and no, I don't think there should be anything that should be excluded from having aiki as an element of it. In that sense I absolutely agree with you. It can definitely appear in places other than aikido waza.

My bone of contention is that a large part of uke's role should be to simulate an attack. That is a situation of disharmony. Whether they are using internal aiki principles or not, in order to allow nage to train effectively, there needs to be some disharmony created. That's all I mean.

kewms
11-08-2011, 08:55 PM
My bone of contention is that a large part of uke's role should be to simulate an attack. That is a situation of disharmony. Whether they are using internal aiki principles or not, in order to allow nage to train effectively, there needs to be some disharmony created. That's all I mean.

*shrug* If there were no disharmony in the world, then martial arts would be unnecessary.

As I pointed out upthread, it's entirely possible for the nominal "nage" to be the initial source of disharmony, and that uke's "attack" is actually his attempt to defend himself and restore the balance.

I just haven't found the attitude that "uke is being un-aiki" to be conducive to good ukemi, OR to good training for nage.

Katherine

Shadowfax
11-08-2011, 09:57 PM
Re: the discussion on whether attacking is not a part of aikido. I have heard a number of references that actually indicate that, at a higher levels, it is Nage who attacks first in order to draw uke to retaliate in a way which sets him up for a technique....looking at old videos of Ueshiba I noticed that in a large number of instances he is not waiting for his uke to perform some sort of attack but is actually going after them first. Uke has not decided anything. Nage is, or should be, in full control from the first moment of interaction. Therefore attacking is a part of aikido, as far as I currently understand. The attacks just have a different goal than to destroy the opponent.

Anthony Loeppert
11-08-2011, 10:08 PM
My bone of contention is that a large part of uke's role should be to simulate an attack. That is a situation of disharmony. Whether they are using internal aiki principles or not, in order to allow nage to train effectively, there needs to be some disharmony created. That's all I mean.

Or they are creating the opportunity for someone to learn something by simulating an attack. Assuming the other party wants to learn something, then I fail to see the disharmony... i.e. there isn't a victim here.

robin_jet_alt
11-08-2011, 10:12 PM
Or they are creating the opportunity for someone to learn something by simulating an attack. Assuming the other party wants to learn something, then I fail to see the disharmony... i.e. there isn't a victim here.

Well, I can't disagree with that. I think I'm going to have to re-read this thread. I have forgotten where this all started :sorry:

Anthony Loeppert
11-08-2011, 10:17 PM
I have forgotten where this all started :sorry:

me tooism!

SeiserL
11-09-2011, 12:30 AM
Lynn, I think you also need to determine whether or not the content of the training is such that it gives you the tools you need.
Total agreement.

The right tool for the right task.

The right training for the right tool.

The right determination to train in the right tool for the right task at the right time from the right person.

Thoughts?

SeiserL
11-09-2011, 12:42 AM
I would say the outcome is purely to do with the level of skill, ability. But we digress no?
IMHO, the level of skill determines the level of determinism.

To "override" (enter, blend, and redirect) our own past programed determinism or the current situational determinism presented by the uke/attacker is a direct function of our level of skill (mindfulness and physical).

No digression. Only practical application.

Thoughts?

jonreading
11-09-2011, 08:05 AM
Here are a couple of things from my perspective:
1. Aiki is not morality. I think equating aiki with a [good] morality leads us to make erroneous judgements about what is and is not aikido. Saying something like "uke is not doing aikido because he was to cut off nage's head" presumes that the person cutting is bad. This presumption may be wrong.
2. Harmony is subjective. We use word like harmony in aikido with the presumption that harmony as we view it is the absolute harmony. This presumption may be wrong.

Uke and nage are transitive roles within an confrontation. The assignment of morality, harmony, justice, etc. to one role over the other will break down as soon as uke becomes nage, and nage becomes uke. In henka waza the roles of uke and nage may transition a number of times. Uke and nage both should be practicing aiki; either uke is better than nage or nage is better than uke.

kewms
11-09-2011, 09:42 AM
Here are a couple of things from my perspective:
1. Aiki is not morality. I think equating aiki with a [good] morality leads us to make erroneous judgements about what is and is not aikido. Saying something like "uke is not doing aikido because he was to cut off nage's head" presumes that the person cutting is bad. This presumption may be wrong.
2. Harmony is subjective. We use word like harmony in aikido with the presumption that harmony as we view it is the absolute harmony. This presumption may be wrong.

Both excellent points.

There's an old saying: you can safely conclude that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. If you think all of your actions are necessarily "good" because you are using aiki, you probably don't understand aiki very well.

(A point that becomes obvious when applied to other people...)

Morality is morality. Aikido is aikido.

Katherine

Basia Halliop
11-09-2011, 10:17 AM
"There's an old saying: you can safely conclude that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do."

I love that - thanks!

Janet Rosen
11-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Uke and nage are transitive roles within an confrontation. The assignment of morality, harmony, justice, etc. to one role over the other will break down as soon as uke becomes nage, and nage becomes uke. In henka waza the roles of uke and nage may transition a number of times. Uke and nage both should be practicing aiki; either uke is better than nage or nage is better than uke.

Very well put.

Gerardo Torres
11-09-2011, 11:06 AM
I'm certainly not saying that uke should be going through the motions or giving away their balance. That's not what I mean at all. What I am saying is that if nage is practicing shomen-uchi ikkyo, then uke should be trying to hit nage in the head. IMHO this is not particularly 'aiki'.
Sorry if I misunderstood you. I agree with you, uke should provide an “attack” that is on target and realistic enough to provide a challenge. My point was that the same mind/body principles apply whether you’re defending or attacking. Uke should move from the center, in a connected way, and applying aiki principles. And if uke is the senior (aikido has this backwards imho), s/he would feel whether the nage is doing it right or not and can offer feedback.

graham christian
11-09-2011, 11:12 AM
IMHO, the level of skill determines the level of determinism.

To "override" (enter, blend, and redirect) our own past programed determinism or the current situational determinism presented by the uke/attacker is a direct function of our level of skill (mindfulness and physical).

No digression. Only practical application.

Thoughts?

Ah Lynn, the way you use determinism there then I can't disagree with what you say.

So yes, from that view no digression.

Remember I qualified the meaning I was using and even emphasized it by calling it self-deteriminism.

I used the word to convey an attitude if you like. You see there is intention, there is desire, there is decision, but these are all inherent in determinism, So I'm talking about that fella is determined to hit, determined to hold and not let you go, determined to go through you. That's how I'm using the word.

Thus a person of very little skill technically can be extremely determined to knock your head off. In fact when he finds he can't, that when he tries he is the one who gets hit, only then does he realize that it alone don't work. He now get's determined to learn those skills that he doesn't currently possess.

So from that view his determinism has expanded into learning skill. So his own personal determination to improve is there, it can lessen at times, it can increase at times, but generally it's there all the time, the same, unless he gives up. So here we have skill increasing yet determinism the same, constant.

Regards.G.

Gerardo Torres
11-09-2011, 11:13 AM
I have forgotten where this all started :sorry:
That's a very good thing. Don't worry about it, we're fine. :D

graham christian
11-09-2011, 11:20 AM
Here are a couple of things from my perspective:
1. Aiki is not morality. I think equating aiki with a [good] morality leads us to make erroneous judgements about what is and is not aikido. Saying something like "uke is not doing aikido because he was to cut off nage's head" presumes that the person cutting is bad. This presumption may be wrong.
2. Harmony is subjective. We use word like harmony in aikido with the presumption that harmony as we view it is the absolute harmony. This presumption may be wrong.

Uke and nage are transitive roles within an confrontation. The assignment of morality, harmony, justice, etc. to one role over the other will break down as soon as uke becomes nage, and nage becomes uke. In henka waza the roles of uke and nage may transition a number of times. Uke and nage both should be practicing aiki; either uke is better than nage or nage is better than uke.

Hi Jon. I'm glad you make those two points.

I'm glad because my view is totally the opposite. Now, seeing that view and no doubt how many view Aikido from that view then is highlights the basic difference of view between those who don't get where I'm coming from and me wondering where they are coming from.

So what can I say but well said.

Regards.G.

kewms
11-09-2011, 11:34 AM
I'm glad because my view is totally the opposite. Now, seeing that view and no doubt how many view Aikido from that view then is highlights the basic difference of view between those who don't get where I'm coming from and me wondering where they are coming from.

I'd like to agree with you, really I would.

Unfortunately, the list of skilled aikidoka having less than exemplary personal character is too long. The amount of disharmony within the aikido world itself is too great.

Aikido may not be value-neutral -- I certainly think it's helped me be a better person -- but it is, at best, only one contributor to an individual's moral compass.

Katherine