Mike Sigman wrote:
Wow, Eric. [nei-jia nei-jin] ... You just made a series of ludicrous statements showing that you have no idea about internal strength, which is ki/qi, which a supposed Aikido teacher should know. ... Instead of a general rant using unsupported statements, try to explain what you mean. Maybe start with posture. Frankly, you appear to have no idea of what "internal strength" means and surely you don't think that Taiji is "resistive", do you? Yet it uses "internal strength"... as do all CMA's. You're simply lost.
Where to start on matter of "rant?" Willful obfuscation of the generic for the specific on matters of relatively specialized distinction -- i.e. (internal strength v. internal arts in general). A tone of distinct disrespect in respsone to a merely observational post. I really don't care, actually, but the lack of engagement is noticeable.
I explained (fairly succintly) what I mean by aiki in erms of the discussion on movement, power and these ideas of internal arts. The reply was, in short, evasion, plus ad hominem, ad hominem, and some more ad hominem for good measure. A point or two of actual engagement would be fun.
Try responding to the points in argument, or do you really maintain that nei-jin (internal strength) as a concept is not within the set of nei-jia (internal family [of arts]) as related principles of action??