View Single Post
Old 12-01-2006, 02:24 PM   #319
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Erick Mead wrote:
That is better. And this is how I have understood what you are talking about. I get your position, and I'll explain why it is right as far as it goes and why it cannot be applied to address the problems that concern me.
Yeah, but I'm not sure that you DO understand my position, Erick. You have said nothing to encourage me toward that conclusion. For instance, your unnecessary addendum of "how" a bicycle might work in usage does nothing to assure me that you can actually ride a bicycle. I'm talking about what "time" is; you're talking about how to build a watch. And I'm not being contentious... you're attempting to establish some terms to form a common vocabulary, which is fine, but I have seen nothing yet that indicates you really understand the subject yet, so your terms simply hang there neither accepted nor rejected because they appear to be, IMO, off the point.
I get, and have always gotten, the points you have made about how this functions in jin terms, and my own conception of it in mechanical terms. I can do many of the things you represent as jin manipulation in just this way, understood mechanically. I have no problem generalizing the mechnical description of it in common terms. I just wanted your mechnical description for comparison. I would still like to hear your description of the manner of propagation or conversion of those vectors from input to output, if I have assessed your position incorrectly below.
You seem to be saying that you understand my position (which implies my communication hasn't been in vain)... why is it that you can't simply start there and then work toward whatever your unclear goal is? What do you mean "propagation" or "conversion"? I've specifically laid out several attempts, including Inaba's which concurs with the way I look at it, of descriptions about how forces are used in "Aiki". I will take his concept of "Aiki", Sunadomari's concept, Abe's, and others, because they all generally agree with the way I look at it, over yours. They all were in a much better position to say what O-Sensei meant than you are.
In that context, the kokyu practice you are illustrating with force vectors has a great deal of relevance, which I have never disputed. It is channeling the reaction of the ground from joint to joint according to the middle third rule, as an catenary (or inverted catenary) profile across linkages.
No, I disagree with that description and some of your others, including the necessity for a catenary arch to be involved in the description. The mind leads the ki. I can form resultant force-vector paths that go out across the gap from my middle to my forearm and then, without moving shift it to my shoulderblade or to the sole of my foot, or whatever. I don't "resist" an incoming force; I simply vector-add to it in order to give me a resultant commensurate with what I want to do with Uke. Because he becomes a part of my force equations, he is part of my movement and we don't conflict. "Resistance"? I think at most you're quibbling with the idea that there is an origin to forces; they don't resist each other unless they are zero-sum equilibrium.


  Reply With Quote