Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

aikido articles


dojo search
image gallery
links directory

book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews


rss feeds

Follow us on

Home > AikiWeb Aikido
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > AikiWeb AikiBlogs > LinTal's Blog

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

LinTal's Blog Blog Tools Rating: Rate This Blog
Creation Date: 07-14-2011 07:52 PM
Aikido's a lot more than I first thought it would be.
Blog Info
Status: Public
Entries: 31
Comments: 52
Views: 165,636

In General Justification from yet another angle Entry Tools Rate This Entry
  #15 New 12-03-2011 06:11 AM
Okaaaay kiddies, thanks GC for this post; it's had me spinning for quite a few days.

I talk more about the intellectual and emotional dilemmas of learning/practicing aikido than anything else because it seems the greatest (in more than one sense of the word) characteristic of this discipline is that it offers choice. Choice to maime or not, choice to run or not, choice to impose the self on an outcome or to allow the self to be imposed upon. The choice to choose.

If you are only aware of one way to respond then there can be no decision. Or shame in the decision itself further on down the track (though remorse, for example, can be attached to other parts of the experience). What I am talking about, though, is the inevitable complexity of this response when a choice is possible. And further, the intellectual and emotional situation that may introspectively tangle us long after the physical has occured.

[A few side arguments. If one has choice but lacks introspection, has the significance or maturity of the choice been made negligible? If this is negligible, is there still a choice being made? Can we draw a parallel between the journey of learning aikido and learning about onesself, and does the second emerge to supercede the first over time?]

It would seem superficially that we seek justification for the undesirable choices we make. Further, to who? A simple answer would be that we either seek to please our society, our family, our God, etc. and either justify the lack of positive influence we would like to be known for or appease the expectations of others/ourselves. This is the simple answer. Reputation (either with self or others) seems the most typical motivator for those living in an egalitarian-style setting.

A more complex answer can be likewise simple, but requires a modicum of thought.

We seek justification for our actions and choices that are less than ideal. Negative outcomes, for example, where our judgement is within blame. Blame! The converse! Justification for poor choices from ourselves, blame for the poor choices of others. One seeking balance through grasping for positivity, the other seeking balance through distancing the negativity. Both concepts lie within a collective consciousness.

What is it about this collective consciousness that promotes individuals one-upping themselves? 'Survival of the Fittest' enacted? This can't be so, or the coercive effect of community couldn't wield so much influence. Then why do we have such unfailingly idealistic expectations of ourselves and others, that concepts such as blame and justification can even come into it?

Let's illustrate, test, with a concrete example.

A man wakes on a desert island without supplies.
a) He see a wild animal, kills it in rage at his situation.
b) He see a wild animal, kills it in sorrow at his situation.
c) He see a wild animal, kills it to eat.
d) He see a wild animal, kills it to restock his backup supplies just in case he ever needs it.
e) He see a wild animal, kills it by accident.
f) He see a wild animal, tries but fails to kill it.
g) He see a wild animal, does not try to kill it even when starving.
h) He kills himself in his rage at his situation.
i) He kills himself in sorrow at his situation.
So. All examples were removed from external society, coersive or not. All consequences were limited to one man and one animal. Which examples would have inspired blame or shame or justification? All, some, none? Which ones? Why?

I'm not going to answer this; partly because of the sheer variety that every answer would bring, mostly because people read on to the next line in blogs for an answer without pausing. Go think it over yourself.

I will leave the post with this though (not much more to this facet, that's for another day). We talked about blame and justification both being present, both seeking balance. In what situations? What is the fulcrum? Balance for what? To what purpose?

Questions, questions...
Views: 2716 | Comments: 6

RSS Feed 6 Responses to "Justification from yet another angle"
#6 12-09-2011 06:24 PM
If that is wise then it is good. Results determine.
#5 12-08-2011 05:15 AM
LinTal Says:
"Can we see?" raises interesting points; is it possible to conceive of all experiences shaping the person? Part of me yells no! Isn't it inevitable that conflict arises from this impossibility? In response to comments on the necessity of our true selves lining up with solution (which if they do must be good if our true self is), I'd suggest that they let the greatest possible number of people act in a way that nourishes their true selves, even when not in line with their projection of it.
#4 12-04-2011 12:06 PM
I see it this way: The problem is how to bring about good solutions, in alignment with our true selves. Thus it points us to an uncomfortable fact, we as a race and individually are not very wise. So in my mind we need to 'grow up' spiritually and mentally. Wisdom says you can solve situations in such a way that everyone wins, everyone improves both in condition and well being. But can we see such solutions? Are we aware enough? G.
#3 12-03-2011 07:55 PM
LinTal Says:
For this line of argument I would suggest that perhaps the intentions are necessarily good, but this doesn't translate to the person in entirity. Perhaps every not-so-good action can be broken down to situations where beliefs and priorities conflict. (I agree with you by the way, I just haven't finished thinking through why I do.)
#2 12-03-2011 07:55 PM
LinTal Says:
'Basically', as in the essential core self, the undeniable backbone of one's nature, yes? In that case intentions would be divorced from our actions, otherwise actions would unify with intention. Disparity; if one is good and doesn't do/be good, are they still? Likewise, if one isn't good but acts within a coherent system (such as self-preservation, the preservation of property or kin), can't goodness be justified?
#1 12-03-2011 05:44 PM
Hi Lin. The reason why? Because we are Basically good, we are Basically loving, we are Basically kind. Thus we try to reconcile with ourselves or others when our choices or actions don't live up to that. In this way we thus go against ourselves. G.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:21 PM.

vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
Copyright 1997-2024 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate