What O Sensei's teaching shows through a practical application is that this separation and negation is not necessary, and there is another more creative way, epitomized in the context of a direct physical conflict.
This is, for me, a keystone to your response. I say that because, when I look at the question this way there are some questions that tend to come up (just questions, really, not criticisms).
An epitome may be an ideal or typical example, or "embodiment" of something larger.
Here, Ron talks about the larger picture in terms that an existentialist would recognize as pointing to the concept of alienation, or a Buddhist, living in samsara.
Suppose we agreed that Aikido is a way of "reconnecting" physically, and that it "epitomizes" reconnection in a larger sense. Does my practice then provide simply an object lesson on the larger issue? Or should it be viewed as a modality or reconnecting rather than an epitome of it?
If it simply "epitomizes," should I view the potential benefit to me as a kind of cognitive therapy?
Even in a more narrow context of Aikido as a martial art, how does the "ki of my thoughts (intent)" in the context of practice represent oscillation as a principle?
Interesting how the mind/body duality manifests itself in this discussion.