Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I am not a eastern scholar, but I believe most eastern philosophies are based on the concept of nondualism,
I think this is key to the understanding of aikido and life in general.
Aikido and or better yet, Aikibudo, is about unifying, therefore, at least philosphically, budo is inclusive of all.
Stripping away labels and social constructs such as "doctor" and you simply have a person that is caring for another person.
The perspective all depends on how much you are willing to limit your paradigm of view of the things that you observe.
whoaaa, too much coffee tonight!
Buck, what is your definition of Budo or budoka? How do you decide what to include or exclude?
How do you know when you are viewing a budoka?
|
Kevin, my response isn't just an inclusive response to you.
We often use words too liberally to fit our own personal definitions. It really deflates the meaning of words.
Pls, pardon my ignorance on Subjectivism, and Metaphysics. I don't see paring philosophy and the word inclusive fit together. Cause when I call and say my house is on fire, I get what is commonly known as fighter fighters; guys who use water hoses, wearing special gear, who try and put the fire out and not MMA guy who wants to prove MMA is better than Aikido.
If their are people in MMA who consider themselves budoka's, or what they do as a Koryu, or Gendai, or think they are Knights, swash buckling Pirates, or Robinhood's Merry men, am not in the business to change their minds.
So then variables exist that many MMA are not trained for because they train to fight in a highly controlled fight and specialized environment. Does this make them ineffective in the street, no just not as well equipped to deal with street variables that unlike a ring fight are far more unpredictable. In the ring you don't worry about someone threatening or trying to stab you a knife. You just have to worry about not getting hit where your K.O.ed, giving up your back, going the distance, fighting your fight and not his etc. All the things inclusive in ring fights. In the ring there are state officials, refs, judges and doctors. You wear a cup, a mouth piece, gloves, you wear no shirt or shoes, just skin tight briefs, or a gi. You know who you will be fighting, how much he weighs, his height, his build, his fighting styles, where and when you will fight, etc. You don't get any of that on the street.
Apples and oranges, Aikido and MMA. One isn't a ring fighter, the other is. Thus, the approaches, purpose, and circumstances are different ranging from narrowly to widely. Instead of saying the what ifs of Aikido and MMA-a pro-fighters like this and hundreds of other threads, why not say what if your car jacked at gun point as you get out of the car then what options and training does Aikido provide vs. that of pro MMA?
I prefer to use the word inclusive with numbers or in terms of language.