AikiWeb Aikido Forums

AikiWeb Aikido Forums (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/index.php)
-   Announcements & Feedback (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Double standards (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22089)

lars beyer 12-25-2012 10:02 AM

Double standards
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_standards

There seem to be (to me) a general consensus of applying double standards when it comes to discussing everything Aiki(do) around here.
Do you feel it is OK to apply double standards discussing your individual art and / or is it just a piece of the cake in the sence that discussing budo is a question of gaining victory at all cost ?

Happy new year
Lars

Demetrio Cereijo 12-25-2012 10:44 AM

Re: Double standards
 
Is about keeping the traditions.

"Call the warrior a dog, call him a beast: winning is his business." Asakura Soteki, Hanawa, ed., Zoku zoku gunsho ruiju, vol. 10, pp. 1--9; PV. cited in Theodore de Bary et al (Ed), Sources of Japanese Tradition, Vol 1, p 428.

lars beyer 12-25-2012 11:01 AM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: (Post 320910)
Is about keeping the traditions.

"Call the warrior a dog, call him a beast: winning is his business." Asakura Soteki, Hanawa, ed., Zoku zoku gunsho ruiju, vol. 10, pp. 1--9; PV. cited in Theodore de Bary et al (Ed), Sources of Japanese Tradition, Vol 1, p 428.

IŽll look into that, but in the meantime, IŽll have to ask: What is the traits of an exemplary budoka ?

DH 12-25-2012 11:53 AM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Lars Beyer wrote: (Post 320911)
IŽll look into that, but in the meantime, IŽll have to ask: What is the traits of an exemplary budoka ?

When it mattered?
To win.
In times of peace, when they had a bunch of bored and potentially dangerous Samurai, they came up with the idea of having them become men of letters, warrior /scholars. You can also trace many of the effective arts starting to falter during that time.

You can trust that people like nice people more than effective fighters. And like effective fighters who are nice people even more. But one has nothing to do with the other.
The notion that any type of budo makes nice people is as bogus as budo making good fighters. There is more fantasy surrounding budo than many other activities I have seen adults involved in. There are so many polished, very nice, poetic, examplary budo people who are about as combatively effective as a pissed off soccer mom. I will leave you to decide which floats your boat. I'm bettin most will take the well spoken, poetic, teacher with great stories, over an effective fighter any day of the week, and most wouldn't know the difference anyway. After all, effective in a dojo doesn't really mean much.
Effective, is a very relative word. It really doesn't take much to be "effective" with your average budo person of any type, you'de have to go to the combative sports guys and *some* of the IP guys for a more substantial version of what is effective. And they're very nice to boot!!

Dan

lars beyer 12-25-2012 12:08 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Dan Harden wrote: (Post 320912)
When it mattered?
To win.
In times of peace, when they had a bunch of bored and potentially dangerous Samurai, they came up with the idea of having them become men of letters, warrior /scholars. You can also trace many of the effective arts starting to falter during that time.

You can trust that people like nice people more than effective fighters. And like effective fighters who are nice people even more. But one has nothing to do with the other.
The notion that any type of budo makes nice people is as bogus as budo making good fighters. There is more fantasy surrounding budo than many other activities I have seen adults involved in. There are so many polished, very nice, poetic, examplary budo people who are about as combatively effective as a pissed off soccer mom. I will leave you to decide which floats your boat. I'm bettin most will take the well spoken, poetic, teacher with great stories, over an effective fighter any day of the week, and most wouldn't know the difference anyway. After all, effective in a dojo doesn't really mean much.
Effective, is a very relative word. It really doesn't take much to be "effective" with your average budo person of any type, you'de have to go to the combative sports guys and *some* of the IP guys for a more substantial version of what is effective. And they're very nice to boot!!

Dan

Ok, but what do you feel examplifies an aikidoka or budoka for people to follow and to be inspired by ?

Tom Verhoeven 12-25-2012 12:14 PM

Re: Double standards
 
It is about integrity.
This is a quote from the Shido Yoron where integrity is compared with the joint in a bamboo stem :
"The setsu of the samurai (shisetsu).
When your shiki (samurai ki) is overflowing you should go on to work on your setsu. Setsu is a name which is taken originally from the joints of bamboo; although bamboo has the spirit to grow and pierce the heavens, if it was not for the tightness of the joints it would not be able to endure the frost and the snow, go through all the four seasons and change its colours. If the spirit of the samurai lacks setsu how can he function properly?"

To apply a double standard shows a lack of shisetsu.

Tom

DH 12-25-2012 12:15 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Lars Beyer wrote: (Post 320914)
Ok, but what do you feel examplifies an aikidoka or budoka for people to follow and to be inspired by ?

That is impossible to outline. As a thread, you will get any number of answers that are as different as people are different. We all admire different qualities in people. And most Budo people (not not all) want an Asian face they can project their budo fantasies on to start with. People don't like to admit and even deny it...but it is patently obvious.
As the muppets said: "Peoples is peoples."
I like kind, well balanced people, who don't take themselves too seriously. That has nothing to do with budo though. There I will take someone I can learn from, warts and all. I don't have to like them.
Dan

lars beyer 12-25-2012 12:54 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Dan Harden wrote: (Post 320916)
That is impossible to outline. As a thread, you will get any number of answers that are as different as people are different. We all admire different qualities in people. And most Budo people (not not all) want an Asian face they can project their budo fantasies on to start with. People don't like to admit and even deny it...but it is patently obvious.
As the muppets said: "Peoples is peoples."
I like kind, well balanced people, who don't take themselves too seriously. That has nothing to do with budo though. There I will take someone I can learn from, warts and all. I don't have to like them.
Dan

Thanks Dan, I think I get the basic idea. I like kind well balanced people myself too, like most other people I guess.

Cheers,
Lars

Chris Li 12-25-2012 07:29 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote: (Post 320915)
It is about integrity.
This is a quote from the Shido Yoron where integrity is compared with the joint in a bamboo stem :
"The setsu of the samurai (shisetsu).
When your shiki (samurai ki) is overflowing you should go on to work on your setsu. Setsu is a name which is taken originally from the joints of bamboo; although bamboo has the spirit to grow and pierce the heavens, if it was not for the tightness of the joints it would not be able to endure the frost and the snow, go through all the four seasons and change its colours. If the spirit of the samurai lacks setsu how can he function properly?"

To apply a double standard shows a lack of shisetsu.

Tom

Well, Saito Setsudo (Shido Yoron) was another late Tokugawa Confucian scholar who had some romantic ideas about the samurai - without ever having really experienced battle. Like Nitobe, he also turned towards the West later on. There's nothing wrong with his ideas, some of them are quite nice, but I wouldn't take them as standard practice for the samurai class in Japan.

Going back to the original post - I'll agree that double standards are not usually a nice idea, does anyone really disagree with that? But of course, since people may disagree about whether double standards are being applied or not, without a specific example the question is kind of meaningless...

Best,

Chris

Tom Verhoeven 12-25-2012 09:24 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 320930)
Well, Saito Setsudo (Shido Yoron) was another late Tokugawa Confucian scholar who had some romantic ideas about the samurai - without ever having really experienced battle. Like Nitobe, he also turned towards the West later on. There's nothing wrong with his ideas, some of them are quite nice, but I wouldn't take them as standard practice for the samurai class in Japan.

Going back to the original post - I'll agree that double standards are not usually a nice idea, does anyone really disagree with that? But of course, since people may disagree about whether double standards are being applied or not, without a specific example the question is kind of meaningless...

Best,

Chris

Who said anything about the ideas in Shido Yoron as being standard practice for the Samurai?

The term "romantic" does not apply here. Saito Setsudo was a neo-confucian scholar with some very well formulated ideas. Quite a number of budoka still find his words inspiring.
If you do not agree with his ideas then do try to come up with some understandable counterarguments.
It is true that he had no battle experience - and how is this relevant? How much samurai battle experience do you have?

Tom

Chris Li 12-26-2012 12:17 AM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote: (Post 320932)
Who said anything about the ideas in Shido Yoron as being standard practice for the Samurai?

The term "romantic" does not apply here. Saito Setsudo was a neo-confucian scholar with some very well formulated ideas. Quite a number of budoka still find his words inspiring.
If you do not agree with his ideas then do try to come up with some understandable counterarguments.
It is true that he had no battle experience - and how is this relevant? How much samurai battle experience do you have?

Tom

Well, you cited his ideas as a reference to the samurai and integrity. If you aren't of the opinion that they apply to the samurai then why quote them?

As I said, there's nothing wrong with those ideas, except I don't think they're a good example of samurai ethics (if there really was such a thing). And yes, I think some of his ideas are "romantice" when we're talking about their application to the samurai.

The thing about experience is the same thing that hampers the Hagakure as a realistic source of information about the samurai, that's all, no need to get excited. :)

Best,

Chris

Mary Eastland 12-26-2012 07:54 AM

Re: Double standards
 
For me, Aikido is about not fighting. Winning is not the goal.

When what other people write on here bothers me I have to check myself and see what is going on. Sometimes I reply with a snarky comment that I might regret later. Sometimes I let people lead my mind and I get upset about how someone else is being treated. I am responsible for my feelings and comments.

Part of my training is to let what is written here be, to let others be, and to have my own say.

I think the standards that Jun has established and upholds here are fair.

stan baker 12-26-2012 11:51 AM

Re: Double standards
 
I think part of the misunderstanding for alot of
Aikido folks is in this concept of winning.lf we have
High level aiki we can win without winning.
Not so easy but worth the pursuit. Dan is just trying to show a
Higher level. It is hard to open the mind after many decades
Of practice sometimes

Stan

Tom Verhoeven 12-26-2012 12:54 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 320934)
Well, you cited his ideas as a reference to the samurai and integrity. If you aren't of the opinion that they apply to the samurai then why quote them?

As I said, there's nothing wrong with those ideas, except I don't think they're a good example of samurai ethics (if there really was such a thing). And yes, I think some of his ideas are "romantice" when we're talking about their application to the samurai.

The thing about experience is the same thing that hampers the Hagakure as a realistic source of information about the samurai, that's all, no need to get excited. :)

Best,

Chris

I did not cite his ideas as a reference to samurai.

I cited the quote from the Shido Yoron as it explains nicely the idea of integrity.

The quote mentions the words Shisetsu (samurai integrity) and Shiki (samurai ki), but that does not mean that I refer to samurai.

I defined having double standards as a lack of integrity (shisetsu). It refers to double standards, not to samurai.

I have never implied that Bushido of Nitobe, Shido Yoron of Saito Setsudo or the Hagakure of Yamamoto are realistic sources about samurai. It is totally beside the point.

Believe me, I will never get excited about your way of argumentation.

Tom

Chris Li 12-26-2012 01:04 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote: (Post 320966)
I did not cite his ideas as a reference to samurai.

I cited the quote from the Shido Yoron as it explains nicely the idea of integrity.

The quote mentions the words Shisetsu (samurai integrity) and Shiki (samurai ki), but that does not mean that I refer to samurai.

I'm sorry Tom but that line's just too fine a distinction for me to see. Maybe I need stronger glasses. :)

Best,

Chris

Tom Verhoeven 12-26-2012 02:37 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 320967)
I'm sorry Tom but that line's just too fine a distinction for me to see. Maybe I need stronger glasses. :)

Best,

Chris

Or a course in correct argumentation !

Tom

Chris Li 12-26-2012 02:59 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote: (Post 320970)
Or a course in correct argumentation !

Tom

OK, you cited a post defining "shisetsu" as "samurai integrity". Then you said (in the same post) "To apply a double standard shows a lack of shisetsu.".

Maybe you can explain it to me, but I really don't see how that does not refer to the samurai.

Best,

Chris

Tom Verhoeven 12-26-2012 09:34 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 320971)
OK, you cited a post defining "shisetsu" as "samurai integrity". Then you said (in the same post) "To apply a double standard shows a lack of shisetsu.".

Maybe you can explain it to me, but I really don't see how that does not refer to the samurai.

Best,

Chris

I did not define "shisetsu" as "samurai integrity". It is a direct quote from the Shido Yoron, that includes a translation of the word shisetsu.

My point was that having a double standard means a lack of integrity. The quote from the Shido Yoron was an illustration, an example of an expression that reflects the point that I had made.

It was not the beginning of an explanation or an argumentation on the ethics of Samurai in any historic period.

It is really not a matter of a "fine line of distinction". It is a matter of understanding argumentation, of seeing what you validly can counter-argue and what you cannot.

Perhaps another example makes it clearer to you.

Suppose that someone states; "Mr A always gives very laconic answers". Then you may counter with; "I know Mr. A very well as I work with him daily and his answers are always very elaborate". That is a valid counter argument. But you cannot counter with "the Spartans were really not that brave". And you cannot support it with "but laconic pertains to the Spartans", even though that in itself is true. That is because the statement does not really have anything to do with Spartans or their bravery. The statement is about Mr. A giving short and to the point answers.

I mean this in a serieus and sincere way; since I joined Aikiweb earlier this year, I have been reading quite a few of your posts. I get the impression that you desparately want to be right, no matter what - but you do not always have your facts right. Worse then that, you all too often come up with invalid argumentation or arguments that are completely of the mark, like in this discussion. You may want to ignore my advice, but personally I think it would be worth your while to make an effort to learn the skill of argumentation (for it is a skill).

Tom

Chris Li 12-26-2012 10:02 PM

Re: Double standards
 
Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote: (Post 320983)
I did not define "shisetsu" as "samurai integrity". It is a direct quote from the Shido Yoron, that includes a translation of the word shisetsu.

I never said that you defined it that way, I said:

Quote:

you cited a post defining "shisetsu" as "samurai integrity"
Which seems to be pretty much the same thing that you repeated above. Did you read my reply?

Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote: (Post 320983)
My point was that having a double standard means a lack of integrity. The quote from the Shido Yoron was an illustration, an example of an expression that reflects the point that I had made.

It was not the beginning of an explanation or an argumentation on the ethics of Samurai in any historic period.

Well, the original post specifically cited double standards in conversations relating to Aikido and Budo. You cited a passage specifically citing integrity as relating to the samurai. Can you see how the connection would be naturally assumed in the context of the conversation?

As to double standards and integrity - I don't see anywhere that we've disagreed about that, but I'm not sure what point the original poster is really trying to make, and I said as much several posts ago:

Quote:

Going back to the original post - I'll agree that double standards are not usually a nice idea, does anyone really disagree with that? But of course, since people may disagree about whether double standards are being applied or not, without a specific example the question is kind of meaningless...
What I'd really like is a clarification from the original poster - I have my own ideas about what is being implied, but I'd rather have them state it straight out.

Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote: (Post 320983)

I mean this in a serieus and sincere way; since I joined Aikiweb earlier this year, I have been reading quite a few of your posts. I get the impression that you desparately want to be right, no matter what - but you do not always have your facts right. Worse then that, you all too often come up with invalid argumentation or arguments that are completely of the mark, like in this discussion. You may want to ignore my advice, but personally I think it would be worth your while to make an effort to learn the skill of argumentation (for it is a skill).

Tom

If you want my advice, I would say to stay away from what you perceive are my personal flaws and stick to the discussion of what was said, as I have.

Otherwise I'll have to get started on what I perceive as your personal flaws, and the places where you don't have your facts right, and we'll never get anywhere. :D

Best,

Chris

Walter Martindale 12-27-2012 09:01 AM

Re: Double standards
 
And THEN Akiyama san will lock the thread.

lbb 12-27-2012 10:26 AM

Re: Double standards
 
Lather, rinse, repeat...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:05 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.