View Single Post
Old 10-01-2006, 02:47 PM   #61
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,499
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "Aikido"?

Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
I would argue that the correct practical experience would include explanation - in whatever terms proved effective, and presupposes only a common communicative framework between the shower and the showee. ...
Surely, almost anything that works to give the correct result will do .. up to a point. But giving the sense of what is POSSIBLE before it is learned, this drives people to continue the path. And in seeking to deepen understanding requires a deeper body of knowledge that is accessible to the seeker. The mystique of the unfamiliar works for some people, up to a point -- and not for others at any point.

Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
I believe that the 'traditional' paradigm *can* be explained in *relatively* comprehensible terms, and I think there are people working hard on bridging the gap.

Keep in mind that it is not traditional for this material to be highly accessible.
I think you have hit the problem exactly, and what distinguishes aikido -- in a definitive break with that aspect of tradition. Some view Aikido as a exclusive body of learning -- one is initiated and the fundamental secrets may ultimately be revealed. I do not believe this is true to the vision of the Founder.

Aikido is catholic. It is intended to be universal in its accessibility and universal in its potential appeal. O-Sensei himself played down the more esoteric aspects of his Shinto background. Aikido has no secrets, or more accurately, its secrets are hidden in plain sight.
Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
That's why I think it's important, *if there is to be discussion of these fairly concrete topics* that the discussion be focused in fairly pragmatic terms.
I'll admit to struggling a bit here : "Physics is NOT pragmatic" ... ???
Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
I used the example of a roto-rooter snake to roughly describe how torque can propagate through a mechanical system without recourse to virtual gyroscopes or anything nearly so esoteric.
Let me put it more plainly -- kokyu is not sprung torque, it is not LIKE sprung torque in a fixed form or otherwise-- even though torque forces are in play in any gyroscopic mechanism. Sprung torque is energy stored in strain the way a deformed spring operates. It still obeys gyroscopic laws when it begins to do work and expend that stored angular momentum.

The application of a torque to a freely moving gyroscopic system is resolved by an alteration of the inherent inertia of the system, causing it to tumble freely in three axes, unless it is restrained. This precessional cascade will reach equilibrium unless the input is maintained, but without any requirement of significant strain energy. The energy that would create twisting strain in the input axis is shifted to another axis and the inertia is eaten up in reorienting the body in that axis -- not on the axis of the input force. What is required is that there be rotational intertia already on the input axis to be transformed -- i.e. that there is a real attack happening.

Done imperfectly, the arm receives a component of torquing strain in the technique. Done well, the input axis receives none because there is no residual component of the input force in the torque axis of that limb. The wrist/arm/shoulder/spine/ tanden are all falling freely into the path of least energy.

Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
How is that a 'Chinese metaphorical method'? At least allow me the dignity of a proper dressing-down, and tell me that my method of argumentation is insufficiently rigorous for your purposes - if that's what you feel.
Testy, testy ... It was not a criticism -- only an observation, nor even a negative one. Chinese traditional knowledge is a highly rigorous system of metaphoric connections describing operative holistic principles in what the West would sometimes view as distinct and separate regimes of knoweldge. Sometimes, the Chinese approach to observational knowledge leads to valuable things that Western analytical theory paradigms do not easily admit as useful, although they can certinaly be understodd in those termns once that threshold of assumptions is overcome. My point was YOU are approaching knowledge in that mode, and not in the Western mode of analytic thought. It is not a bad thing, it just is.
Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
Okay, your approach to nikkyo has been registered. Would you say you can make this technique work on pretty much everyone?
Pretty much like nikkyo always works. Did I say anywhere that nikkyo is different than it is?
Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
I haven't volunteered a description of kokyu - although I will say that I don't think 'kokyu' is really the primary factor involved in 'how joint locks transmit force' - although it almost sounds like you do. Note, I'm not saying kokyu is uninvolved in the application of joint locks, just that analysis of joint motion, etc. in locking techniques is probably not the right tree to bark up to *define* kokyu.
Probably not, since "joint locks" are not the principle on which aiki rests, nor does the application of kokyu require anything like a "joint lock" -- although they may well easily result from its application. The assumption the other way is a post hoc fallacy -- not a straw man.

Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
Why take an example meant to make a simple point, and twist it so far past its intended purpose.
To illustrate the limits of such forms of explanation.
Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
I think this conceptual strategy is part of the problem (if there is one) with your Gyro Theory. I could probably come up with a theory based on time travel ....


Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
Human bodies are *not* gyroscopes.
Anything that rotates obeys gyroscopic laws of mechanics. Period - no exceptions. Whether those dynamics or material strains predominate in a given movement is a legitimate mechanical question, and one which in the case of aiki is resolved in favor of dynamics and agasint material strain.

Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
The complexity comes from the subject matter itself - which is perfectly adequate to obscure it from those not willing to work hard just to 'get it'.
Another hint of the 'elect' sensibility that I find of concern to the future of the art. This is not koryu. We have no "ultimate secrets' to hide for the chosen trusted few that are made menkyo kaiden. All the secrets are in the open for the taking It is meant to be more missionary and far less exclusive than you seem to assume. Perhaps my reading of your intent is in error, but the theme is there throughout this discussion.

Quote:
Chhi'mčd Künzang wrote:
According to the logic implied by your argument, everyone's Aikido would be improved by prematurely accelerating the degeneration of their bodies then, right?
I have known of none in aikido of any sufficient experience in the art who would not agree that to the extent the movement requires less overt strength -- there is more aiki in it.

[I'll respond to the balance of your post a little later]

Last edited by Erick Mead : 10-01-2006 at 02:56 PM.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote