Quote:
Erick Mead wrote:
I don't have a side -- and my only concern is where these discussions seem bent on creating them. Not that it seems intended that way -- but it does seem to end up coming off that way. Rhetoric should support an argument -- not lead it.
|
Agreed. I was thinking the same - when I decided we could all rally under something we can all agree about - which is what can we do to help each other improve. If challenging old ideas for new ones (or older ones as it were) is helpful then great. If you could meet Dan and totally own him - or be even steven on skills - or get totally owned, then it would be great to hear you explain some of your his bizzare aiki stuff in physics terminology because that might really speak to some people.
But it probably wouldn't speak to me at this point. I think that is something for AFTER I make some more physical power jumps using simple mental imagery and the duldrums of a lot of difficult practice. I would still read it and I would attempt to work out the free-body diagrams myself and try to see if I could use any conservation laws and differential equations to approach your ideas (but that's because I'm still a nerd who likes math; and I get really bored rocking my son when he is asleep but not deeply enough to transport him from rocking chair to bed.
Rob