View Single Post
Old 06-12-2005, 03:24 PM   #210
Pankration90
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 74
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido minus mysticism: a step forward

Quote:
Michael Gallagher wrote:
But if you train long enough and become an instructor, guess what you end up doing? Passing on what was passed to you; it doesn't matter in what.
If I reached a high level in aikido and started teaching, I Wouldn't teach my students that I was teaching them "love". I wouldn't force them to wear hakama. It would probably be a really informal class...

Quote:
Michael Gallagher wrote:
Yeah, you want to tell the BJJ people to stop doing that? They want to be on the cutting edge, shouldn't they stop weating gis? Esepcailly as the Gracies are Brazillian, not Japanese.
Most bjj'ers also do no-gi and quite of a bit of them do vale tudo training as well. The gi in bjj or judo and the kurtka in sambo seem more like a piece of equipment for those sports.

Quote:
Michael Gallagher wrote:
True; there are even multiple theories about whether it comes out through the fingers, back of the hand, or the palm. But how do you prove something ISN'T there?
If people could agree on what exactly 'ki' is, then disproving it (or proving it depending on the defition... as I said some people think it is just good technique) would be a lot easier.

Quote:
Michael Gallagher wrote:
Maybe. But if results are all that matters, then it doesn't matter, especially if ki visualization works.
You might actually get better results teaching people without using the term 'ki' because they might understand it faster.

Quote:
Michael Gallagher wrote:
Yeah, god forbid martial arts masters who have forgot more than you or I will ever know should know something.
What does the term 'master' mean to you? I've seen plenty of demonstrations where so-called 'masters' performed party tricks or demonstrated on compliant students. I've yet to see any of them in a fight.

Quote:
Michael Gallagher wrote:
The point is not that it changes the technique; the point is that martial arts are about MORE than just the techniques.
You're confusing your reason for training with the reason these martial arts were developed. You seem to be caught up in the mindset where martial arts aren't about hurting people, but self improvement. That mindset was an attempt to get rid of the bad image jujitsu etc. had during the early 19th century. People thought jujitsu was only for thugs, so Kano developed judo and claimed it was for self improvement. You see this trend again after WW2 with aikido.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I can tell you why...it has nothing to do with the technical skills you gain from the art. It has everything to do with the mental aspects of developing qualities you want in warriors.

For the Army at least, those things are Leadership, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service,Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage.
Well the Army isn't trying to teach people that the techniques they are learning to maim or kill their enemies are "love". From what I've heard and read, martial arts training in the military is more about developing aggression and confidence.

How does submission grappling, boxing, etc. (which the Marines do) develop leadership, duty, selfless service, etc?

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
Martial arts is much the same way. You don't study them for the technique you learn, but for the friendships you gain, the values the art emulates, the spirit it evokes so on ans so on.
Maybe that's why you train but many, many people don't.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
...the very essence of KI.
If you know what the essence of ki is, you must also know what ki itself is. Care to explain your flawless defintion that everyone can agree on?

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
....those mental skills can be learned through training. They make you feel good and strong.
The mental attributes necessary for fighting (confidence etc.) are more easily achieved through hard training than through what you might find in a lot of aikido dojos. It's hard to be sure of yourself if you've never tested yourself...

Last edited by Pankration90 : 06-12-2005 at 03:32 PM.
  Reply With Quote