In the context of aikido, why would we only look at "martial" and not equally at "art"?
"The function of fighting techniques is to effectively cause injury or incapacitation to another person so as to end a fight. The purpose of a martial art however can be to improve the individual's capacity when necessary to efficiently and humanely defend themselves by fighting techniques and, when possible, potentially make use of such violent force superfluous. It's the Martial that provides the how, but it's the Art that decides the why. For techniques alone do not hold values, Arts do. It is here where meaning is found for practice to go beyond utility for potential self-defense situations.
You may read the full article " The Challenge of defining a martial art" here:
I myself look equally at art. Firstly though I do not see Aikido as fighting so the above doesn't apply. I do not see Aikido as self defence either as I see it as a 'selfless' pursuit. To handle the attacker without thought of self and therefor no self defence. The martial is indeed the how. Art does not imply purpose to me and therefor has nothing to do with the why. Why is only and always be solely to do with your purpose. The purpose of the art of aikido in my opinion is harmony. To reach a competency level of 'artist' is another matter.