Thanks Jon. I wasn't talking about the means or the result. I was talking about the philosophy. My original comment about killing techniques being the antithesis of aikido was about learning atemi designed to kill - not that could kill. I think that is a fundamental difference. In aikido you learn how not to kill.
But break it down to a simple level. If a ten or eleven year old child attacked you with a knife you wouldn't use a technique that could maim or kill. You take the knife away.
There is no philosophical difference if it is a 100 kg man attacking you with a knife. The only point is if your level is high enough to do it or not.
I understand your point. good example.
I think it depends on many factors. I believe in your example you are basically saying that size makes a diference on your ability to control..and I would agree that size is definitely a factor that gets weighed into the situation and you would (should) use appropriate enough force, provided you have control of the situation.
Therefore, based on your assumptions, it would take less of X to control an 11 year old child than a 100KG man.
The issue I have is with "killing techniques" vice "non killing techniques".
I don't think (as I outlined my perspective above), that you can divide techniques out into categories.
For example Kotegaeishi is the same regardless...you can perform it on a spectrum however, and as you state, your skill level AND degree of control of the situation etc...may afford you some choices....of which you in all cases use minimal force necessary.
In that respect...yes...I do believe in aikido, as in all martial arts I have studied....a big part of the study of the practice is to understand minimal force and the spectrum of our martial movements.
There is a big danger, I believe though in separating things out based on a philosophical basis and trying to take a philosophical high ground as is done ALOT in aikido.
When you do that...I think you have set a dangerous and delusional precedence for your martial training that could get you are someone else hurt when dissonance hits reality!
So, maybe I am splitting hairs but I think that the statement
" My original comment about killing techniques being the antithesis of aikido was about learning atemi designed to kill - not that could kill. I think that is a fundamental difference."
....I think it is an incorrect perspectives. You learn atemi period. and you should learn good atemi. Good atemi done correctly will get the job done...and it may killl or not kill...that depends on many factors...but in the end...the atemi is the same.