View Single Post
Old 11-15-2012, 11:20 AM   #44
Tom Verhoeven
Dojo: Aikido Auvergne Kumano dojo
Location: Auvergne
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 295
Re: Requirements to demonstrate "IP"?

Dave de Vos wrote: View Post
I see your point. I didn't notice that I changed the qualification.
But to me it's a matter of degree from good to great. I mean, if a great athlete would have great IP, a good athlete would have good IP.

I think the IP / IS of this thread would be called neijin ( in chinese martial arts. Which to me seems a more specific concept than the Taoist or Buddhist qualities you are referring to. So I don't think that talking about these more general qualities will reduce the confusion about the more specific topic of neijin. In my opinion neijin has little to do with refined craftmanship and charismatic virtue.
Well, it is always nice to have an opinion.
Ever read Plato's view on this?

The choice here is
1. to see IP / IS as a specific way of training that has no relationship with Taoist martial arts like T'ai Chi Chuan or that at most uses a part of it, like a structure to get the notion of IP / IS across.
I have no problem with this whatsoever - but it does raises questions on what the nature of this IP / IS is. The answer "it has to be felt" has no scientific value whatsoever. Someone must be able to show some scientific equation or some theory with empirical evidence. Otherwise IP / IS might just well be something like phlogiston or a new sort of Mesmerism.

Without a basic theory of what IP / IS is I find it presumptuous to equate IP / IS with Aiki.

2. IP /IS is the same as neijin. Neijin is a Taoist concept. With it comes the whole Chinese Taoist philosophy - if you want to understand neijin, then you will have to get some basic understanding of Taoism. It has nothing to do with one's own opinion or preference.
Just to add to this; Buddhism has criticized this Taoist concept, so to get a more complete understanding it would help if you also get a basic understanding of Buddhism.

If we are talking about Neijin then the concept is fairly easy to understand as there is a solid theory that we can refer to. And any discussion about neijin should therefor offer no problem.

  Reply With Quote