thanks for the honest/interesting answers.

it does seem that some of you are hesitant to claim the better life that Aikido looks to promise , but are still focused on that 'better life' or 'bettering person (which leads to happier life under my definition)' aspect of this martial art.

on the other hand, none of you claim the 'invincible fighting technique' as your motivation though some imply it may have been the hook to get you caught.

now, if this is so, why is there so much argument over which Aikido flavor teaches better killing techniques, or is true budo, or is the "real" stuff, or that Daito Ryu or another Ryu is the "real" thing, or that Yoseikan is the "real" thing or that Ki-Society is for wimps or that Aikido can't be used against "real" attacks or not?
why is there years of bad blood because the claims of who is Aikido's "true" heir?

yes yes we are human and where there's more than two , God and politics will show up. but we are also Aikidoka and this is a reflection of our collective education under the Aikido umbrella.

I thank you sincerely for your answers, which were more enlightening than what I was imagining could be an answer.

I chose to make this post anonymous because i didn't want my person to be part of the question, and wanted your own perspectives.

I also want to keep the question going, because it's relevant. Why is Aikido different, why is a more fulfilling path than say the shooting range. Is the CONTENT, the ETHOS of the art the important part, or is it just another way to fight.