Quote:
Lee Salzman wrote:
Mike, seriously, what is the beef with Erick proposing a hypothesis about what he sees as a predictive model of aikido?
|
Hi Lee:
Well, note that Erick's hypothesis has little to support it other than assertion. That's the beef. The demonstrations Ikeda makes, the descriptions of Dan's demonstrations, Ushiro's, Tohei's, Shioda's, etc., etc., all hang together with classical traditional phenomena and classical descriptions AND there has been interplay between a number of those people so that there is satisfactory agreement that they're all talking about and (mostly) doing things based on the same general principles.
Erick's descriptions are simple assertions by himself that he is doing the same things, yet his explanations (even the math and physics ones) mean nothing. Opening a door involves "angular momentum" and shear forces, so that sort of description tells us nothing. So when Erick enters debates that hinge upon the *assumption* that he is doing the same thing (no supporting indicators and no one with known skills has vouched for Erick on the forum), then it's a valid question, don't you think? Or are you suggesting that Erick shouldn't be questioned because all explanations are equally valid?
Regards,
Mike