A lot of thoughtful responses. Like Ted Marr, this is something that I both agree and disagree with.
Western medicine has just developed the tools to investigate the human brain. What theories are developed in the future, could be very diffent than what concepts are utilized now.
Because of its very nature, the human brain is hard to subdivide into distinct categories. How the various parts relate to each other and how they interact, is still unknown, like Anders and Mark noted. Personally, I think it's too early to develop some type of concept that could be applied to a martial art.
I do have to agree with Ian Dodkin rather than Ian Hurst. Even in something like randori, I have a hard time trying to recall what happened. My memories of the event are hazy rather than camera-sharp.
The one thing I've come to realize Kevin, as far as the martial part of Aikido goes, is that it is really not that useful in modern conflicts. The samurai fought as individuals, they didn't fight as a team or unit. The concern for the modern field commander is accomplishing the mission with available units, rather than having everyone run pell mell into battle.
Of course the individual counts, but in the context of the unit. Certainly Aikido and the martial arts have developed good training, but the modern conflict concerns the unit more than the individual. Just like Aikido talks about individual coordination, it seems modern tactics deals with coordination of units to resolve conflict.
BTW Victor, the Ki Society has generally by-passed the feeling of flowing energy and doesn't emphasize unbendable arm using the "waterhose" imagry. Problems were discovered in teaching and newer methods are used.
Calling those concepts "hocus pocus" was provocative. Saying that marital arts training is just training the reptilian brain, is a radical concept. It is something that I don't presently agree with, but it is a concept that should be recognized.