View Single Post
Old 05-19-2005, 02:00 PM   #33
Stefan Stenudd
 
Stefan Stenudd's Avatar
Dojo: Enighet Malmo Sweden
Location: Malmo
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 530
Sweden
Offline
Re: The tower of Babel

Dear Mike,

I believe that there is a slight misunderstanding. In the reply of mine you quote, I discuss not only your views, but those of others as well. You seem to think that all I said was in regard to your posting on the subject.
I am sorry for being so unclear.

A few details:
Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
However, we're not talking about language, Buddhism the religion, etc.
Well, we are talking about religion, or at least metaphysical concepts - among other things. At least I am, and I believe them to be comparable to esoteric aikido theory, to some extent.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
IF they understand it, they can demonstrate it... it's that simple. They can do the jo trick, release sudden great power, be very strong despite small size, etc..
That's one kind of understanding. There are other kinds. For example, there are people who can do, but cannot explain at all. And there are those who understand the theory, but still need practice to accomplish it. I guess it's a question of how the word "understanding" is defined.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
If the implication from someone is that they don't need to do all these things..
I never implied such a thing. Quite the contrary. Everyone must study/practice. There is no shortcut.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Insofar as statements like "Bernhard Karlgren got so good at the Chinese language, he could teach the Chinese scholars a thing or two about it", the literalist in me forces me to ask, "did he teach them ALL a thing or two?". Some of them? A few of them?
I dare say that in the field of sinology, he is still highly respected - also in China. No "average joe, at best". Well, have a look:
http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...rd+karlgren%22

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
These things are not that simple, even though I thought so at one time, too.
I never thought so. I never said so.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
To me, an admitted literalist in many things, your last sentence tells me that you don't believe there is a certain way to repair an automobile engine or to solve a mathematical equation because there is no such thing as a wrong way to do those things.
I talk about culture, not natural science. Art and not technology. Belief and not proven fact.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Are you also of the belief that it is impossible to do any Aikido technique incorrectly, because relativism precludes any such thing as "wrong Aikido"?
Well, I have practiced for many shihan, and what they do certainly seems flawless - but they're all different. Clearly, there are many ways to do ikkyo and shihonage and the rest. What is "right" and what is "wrong" in aikido? Big question.
I think that the answer is something like: When you do in your aikido accomplish what you set out to do with it, then it's right. But it probabaly still needs improvement
Some people do aikido for self defense, so it should "work on the streets", some do it for relaxation, so they should be relaxed after it, some do it like purification or healing, so they should feel purified and healed, some do it like dancing, so they should enjoy the tango - and so on.
Right or wrong in aikido? They do exist, but they are countless.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
However, the information doesn't just reside in the "classics"
I never said so. But there is valuable information in the classics.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
I was just contributing some information, not offering to argue.
Feel free not to.

Best,

Stefan Stenudd
My aikido website: http://www.stenudd.com/aikido/
  Reply With Quote