Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Language

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-30-2009, 05:41 PM   #51
Tim Fong
 
Tim Fong's Avatar
Dojo: Aunkai
Location: California
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 175
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
Name anyone else who has even attempted to put this stuff in a rigorous bio-mechanical framework. Certainly not those guys -- which is again NOT a criticism, simply a point of fact. Nor even some of the technically minded people they have worked with, who have been mentioned. The reason is that the categories of information involved on either side (East and West) do not map on-for-one between data sets. The traditional terminology and concepts in the history of these arts and the more common mechanical conventions and concepts that we would use (usually force-vector or f=ma) cannot be trivially substituted. To do so is meaningless and misleading. But they are BOTH coherent and they BOTH relate -- once you break them down into parts and definitions that WILL relate correctly . There are many more than one convention available to use in defining a physical problem or dynamic state. This is what I have done, and it does not take more than a knowledge of a certain branch of 18th c. mechanics and a little late 20th c. knowledge of neuro-muscular functions to grasp the essential working points on the Western side. I am frankly constantly amazed at the resistance to trying to look at it in this way. Amazed, I say. Who knows, they might even prove me wrong....
Bogus. You aren't putting the movement of aikido into a rigorous biomechanical framework. This is because doing that would require you to conduct instrumented testing to objectively verify your conclusions. You haven't done that.

What you have is narrative. You are using the tools of legal analysis, i.e. hermeneutics. You pick out some bio-mechanical concept and try to show, through narrative and definitional games, how it is "the same" as a certain aikido movement. This is standard first year legal reasoning, which is entirely appropriate in court. It does not analyze motion.

One should not use kinematics to resolve thorny social problems. Likewise, one should not use hermeneutics to analyze motion.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 06:15 PM   #52
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

LOL.... Busted AND pwned!

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 06:21 PM   #53
raul rodrigo
Location: Quezon City
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 777
Philippines
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Good post, Tim.

Quote:
Tim Fong wrote: View Post
Bogus. You aren't putting the movement of aikido into a rigorous biomechanical framework. This is because doing that would require you to conduct instrumented testing to objectively verify your conclusions. You haven't done that.

What you have is narrative. You are using the tools of legal analysis, i.e. hermeneutics. You pick out some bio-mechanical concept and try to show, through narrative and definitional games, how it is "the same" as a certain aikido movement. This is standard first year legal reasoning, which is entirely appropriate in court. It does not analyze motion.

One should not use kinematics to resolve thorny social problems. Likewise, one should not use hermeneutics to analyze motion.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 07:29 PM   #54
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,499
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
David Orange wrote: View Post
Erick, the problem is that all your statements, whether you wish them to compel or not, simply show that you just don't understand what the major IS proponents are even talking about.
Fine argument to make. So show that. Demonstrate something that I have stated that shows that. I've said alot -- pick something...

Quote:
David Orange wrote: View Post
There's just no relevance.
That I will categorically deny. Well understood physics, bio-mechanics and neuro-muscular actions are completely relevant to any action involving the human body. My position on the application of that information might conceivably be shown to be physically wrong, but the information is completely relevant -- and since I do in fact apply it in action and correction of action, I would say, purely empirically -- it is not completely wrong, either....

Quote:
David Orange wrote: View Post
It's not necessary to prove you wrong. You do that, yourself by addressing something totally unrelated in your tortuously elaborate rationalizations.
Non intellego ergo non vero ? Complex = wrong? Uncommon = wrong? While we are at it, let's just set the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle at three and save ourselves the nasty math headache.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 07:50 PM   #55
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,499
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Tim Fong wrote: View Post
Bogus. You aren't putting the movement of aikido into a rigorous biomechanical framework. This is because doing that would require you to conduct instrumented testing to objectively verify your conclusions. You haven't done that. What you have is narrative.
Bogus back. The mechanisms are well-documented. The application is not well-described. That is a narrative task. What we have are simply competing narratives. But they really are NOT in competition.

Quote:
Tim Fong wrote: View Post
You are using the tools of legal analysis, i.e. hermeneutics. This is standard first year legal reasoning, which is entirely appropriate in court. It does not analyze motion.
Uh. No. What law school did you go to? In Louisiana maybe -- civil law uses a hermeneutic method because there is only the text to consider. Legal reasoning according to the common law method of cases goes like this. "In such and so case, such and so court decided that X is like Y in Z setting. Such and so court is binding/persuasive authority, and this case is the same as/analogous to X and/or Y and/or Z so the decision here must/should be the same or similar." THAT is legal reasoning. Stacking Analogies. I am doing nothing of the kind -- I am not talking in analogy -- and there is no text.

Quote:
Tim Fong wrote: View Post
Likewise, one should not use hermeneutics to analyze motion.
... Or a counter-hermeneutic to a physical problem ...

Last edited by Erick Mead : 09-30-2009 at 08:04 PM.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 08:02 PM   #56
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,796
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

whoa! you folks still here try to define the "IT"? you realize that the IT that can be defined is not IT? unless the IT comes up and kicks you in the nuts, then it's IT. of course, by then, you don't really care about IT, unless IT is a bag of ice.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 09:18 PM   #57
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
<snip>
Erick, the heart of the matter is, until you've been vetted, by meeting someone with I.S. skills (Ark, Mike, Dan, or someone else), or someone that's met someone with I.S. skills, no one's going to pay attention to you.

Have you met anyone that's met Ark, Mike or Dan, and had them feel your tech?
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 09:25 PM   #58
HL1978
Dojo: Aunkai
Location: Fairfax, VA
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 424
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

I am an engineer by education as well as occupation. My understanding of engineering concepts has done little to further my progress of developing "it" nor recognizing when others possess "it".

Only hands on time with people recognized in having it and a lot of solo training has develop any understanding of "it" and when others possess some variation of "it." The Aunkai in tokyo has more than a few members with science/engineering degrees all the way up to the PhD level and I am fairly certain they would agree with my opinion.

A more productive discussion of what is it and what isn't would center around where we do see movement in uke/tori and where we don't, what it feels like etc rather than describing the mechanics.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 09:49 PM   #59
thisisnotreal
 
thisisnotreal's Avatar
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 693
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

couple of points that keep rattling around in my poor brain:
-it is 'fun' to have a 'villain'. look at all the talking points that have (over time) been focused at one/them. it's done a lot to keep things lively (at the very very least). Will it be missed when the 'scientific-objectioners or questioners' inevitably lose their motivation? Was there a purpose served by the 'madness'?
-IT will never ever be 'stolen'. It may be given freely, or shared..but it will not be wrested by any act of violence (logical, scholarly or otherwise)
-Surely those that can do IT well (i.e. at high levels of skill) have thought long and hard and specifically about what exactly (mechanically, muscularly, fascially, intentionally, etc) is going on. They will not be goaded into explaining it; or correcting a wrong explanation of it. That goes to the previous point. Shared or given away...but not to be stolen or tricked.
-I like what Hunter said: "A more productive discussion of what is it and what isn't would center around where we do see movement in uke/tori and where we don't, what it feels like etc rather than describing the mechanics." I'm a fan..but it does not happen all that often here on Aikiweb.
-Regarding the more productive discussion: it seems to me that those who certainly know and those who are working on it are less and less inclined, these days, to have that conversation. I wonder why ?
just some late night random thoughts.

Last edited by thisisnotreal : 09-30-2009 at 10:01 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:12 PM   #60
Buck
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 950
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
I think the chances of you finding internal power to any appreciable level in aikido are slim to none. Personally, I have never met anyone in Aikido with internal power /aiki. Nor have I seen a video of any teacher- Japanese or otherwise -who exhibited much.

Dan
I agree and disagree- its a ying and yang thing. And I don't care to explain too much other than the way of these bullet points:

1. Aikido doesn't have Internal Power according to the ownership and design of and by the Chinese martial arts defining Internal Power. Yet, Aikido has its own Internal Power. O'Sensei clearly demonstrated it, as many of his deshi did as well. But, it may not be classified as such according to the Chinese's martial art's definition.

2. I have read that some people define Internal Power by their own definition of what they do which they don't associate with Internal Power as being of the Chinese martial arts.

3. Is there a standardize definition of Internal Power, the Chinese martial arts is the model. But theterm is subjective as definitions exist and vary greatly depending on whom you talk to. And who you consider on not consider an expert in Internal Power. And there are some who use Internal Power as a term interchangeable with the words or concept chi or ki.

5. If Internal Power is Physics applied say to Kinesiology then it is a matter of skill, and knowledge of creating internal power. In stead of relying on muscular development and use. Personally, I think that is what the old books by Chinese masters are referring to when it comes to internal power. They are early scientists without the scientific langauge or training to covey their findings. Physics existing in Aikido allows for Aikido's principles to be internal power.

6. If Internal Power isn't physics, and is related to another function, such as stated by some by the use of the fibrous connective tissue sheath of the body to create power as martial art technique coupled or not couple with #5. Or a force such as chi or chi gong etc. then it varies widely on the definition depending on who you are talking to. This allows for Aikido's principles to be internal power too.

I think this topic will be argued and will create many opinions regarding it. But, until there is an ultimate authority on what is or isn't internal power, because it is a subjective term, it will be a term of debate. It will be right up there with all similar debates of religion and God.

Last edited by Buck : 09-30-2009 at 10:16 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:22 PM   #61
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,499
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Hunter Lonsberry wrote: View Post
I am an engineer by education as well as occupation. My understanding of engineering concepts has done little to further my progress of developing "it" nor recognizing when others possess "it".
What sort of engineering? It has aided mine. My background is in aerodynamics and architectural structure -- hands on applied rather than purely conceptual. My own design-built treehouse, fwiw, survived two direct hit Cat 3 hurricanes, the first of which topped or toppled fifteen mature trees in my yard -- so my structural and dynamic intuition is hardly idle. Shear mechanics, shifting moments and rotations and resonance are my background -- and are key focus of my observation and effort on these topics -- Their neuro-muscular relationship to spinal reflex arcs is a point I have only recently uncovered.

Quote:
Hunter Lonsberry wrote: View Post
A more productive discussion of what is it and what isn't would center around where we do see movement in uke/tori and where we don't, what it feels like etc rather than describing the mechanics.
I tend to agree but that is why I've done that. But why should we not seek to visualize the feel according to the proper mechanics ? These are concrete images for the structures of the body -- not equations -- images like multiple pendulums and complex harmonic motion, and Coulomb's arch of spheres in static funicular loading. http://www.aikiweb.com/blogs/but-why...d-chains-2960/. Furitama is the resonance frequency of the human body -- not an idle concept to apply destructively. http://www.aikiweb.com/blogs/but-why...ng-bones-3214/

Tenchi follows torsional shear stress arcs. http://www.aikiweb.com/blogs/but-why...-dynamic-3259/ So do asagao forms of motion which convert shear stresses and displacements between different coordinate planes, a kind of precession of moments as well as rotations. I can receive compressive stress in one shear stress spiral and relieve it with stretching along the other shear stress spiral, and gain kuzushi without pushing back into or altering the compression connection. That is just Poisson ratio volumetric change in torsional shear with an adaptive control.

Now I know that these are all correct because I saw them operating intutively, worked to relate them conceptually to known mechanics and I apply them consistent with the mechanics I have identified. . I see people like Ark applying some of them, notably in his strikes, his postures and his destabilizations. I see people like Dan and Mike talking about things like windings and ground which are perfectly correct impressions of the things I am addressing.

It may or may not help you, but that does not mean it is not there.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 02:01 AM   #62
Lorel Latorilla
Location: Osaka
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 311
Japan
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

No offense Erick, but your scientifical superspiritual lyrical descriptions are dreadfully boring and it educates no one here maybe except yourself.

I've talked to someone who has met you, and this person reported that you had no internal skills to speak of*. You won't put up a video because you know that you know nothing. The fact that you can unload all this scientific verbiage on us does not hide the fact that you have an authority on the things that Mike, Dan, and Rob talk about. In fact, all that fancy jargon shows that you know nothing--at least on my side it does.

*You can PM me about this and I'll tell you, with permission from the other person, who he is to confirm
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 03:00 AM   #63
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
<snip>
Erick, the heart of the matter is, until you've been vetted, by meeting someone with I.S. skills (Ark, Mike, Dan, or someone else), or someone that's met someone with I.S. skills, no one's going to pay attention to you.

Have you met anyone that's met Ark, Mike or Dan, and had them feel your tech?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 03:46 AM   #64
Michael Douglas
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 402
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Fred Little wrote: View Post
...There is, after all is said and done, a difference between "going beyond" and "skipping over."
Splendid comment!

Something for the floppy bunnies ;
In one of the interviews compiled by Aikido Journal and on YouTube here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Sugag-Ncs
Ueshiba is subtitled as saying "One time I carried a weight of over 1,200 pounds" when referring to his physical power.
Whether true or a fib, it is clear he once thought of himself as VERY STRONG INDEED...

We may argue that without becoming VERY STRONG in the first place his later perceived internal skills might not have been able to be achieved.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 04:26 AM   #65
jss
Location: Rotterdam
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 459
Netherlands
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Lorel Latorilla wrote: View Post
I've talked to someone who has met you, and this person reported that you had no internal skills to speak of.
Why should I care for the opinion of "someone you talked to"? How skilled is this person? Without that information your post is quite useless. With that information however I can decide how much weight to assign to the opinion of someone who according to Lorel has skill leven N, assuming Lorel knows what he's talking about because he lists "Aunkai" as his dojo on Aikiweb.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 04:46 AM   #66
Mark Freeman
Dojo: Dartington
Location: Devon
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,219
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Philip Burgess wrote: View Post
I think this topic will be argued and will create many opinions regarding it. But, until there is an ultimate authority on what is or isn't internal power, because it is a subjective term, it will be a term of debate. It will be right up there with all similar debates of religion and God.
Can't fully agree with you on this one Buck. There will never be an ultimate authority on what is or isn't internal power. As you say it is a subjective term, and as such it would be like asking for an ultimate authority on 'happiness'. However it is a real phenomenon and due to its very nature, difficult to quantify ones level of skill via text. The only true measure is hands on with another person.
I also see it as anologue rather than digital, in that internal strength skills can be measured on a sliding scale rather than, you either have them or you don't.

The religion/god debate is different, religion is analogue, you can be a little bit or a lot religious. God is digital, he/she/it either is or isn't and so far their is no proof either way!

The thing is, what are we going to do with these skills if we are fortunate enough to aquire them to some degree. Go round berating those that don't have the same skill level? We'd then end up like missionaries bringing the 'real god' to the heathens.
If having these skills does not improve our overall positive contibution to the wider world, then they are not worth having and in that sense, exactly like religion.

For me, internal strength is a core aspect of aiki, without it aiki is unlikely at best. It should be an integral part of all aikido practice. I also know from my own experience that the main component of aiki is 'mind', however, that mind aspect is totally dependant on the correct state of the body (correct posture, alignment, balance, weight distribution, relaxation, etc.). The mental side allows me to engage with a partner before physical contact, to redirect their energy, to upset their intent in some way, to some degree.

Anyway, I might be talking a load of old nonsense as I have not been 'vetted' by any external authorities yet . I may well be deluding myself and my students with what I teach them and with what I get from my teachers. However I am happy, they are happy, and my teacher seems pleased with my progress, so hey ho, back to practice I go...

regards,

Mark

Success is having what you want. Happiness is wanting what you have.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 05:33 AM   #67
Lorel Latorilla
Location: Osaka
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 311
Japan
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Joep Schuurkes wrote: View Post
Why should I care for the opinion of "someone you talked to"? How skilled is this person? Without that information your post is quite useless. With that information however I can decide how much weight to assign to the opinion of someone who according to Lorel has skill leven N, assuming Lorel knows what he's talking about because he lists "Aunkai" as his dojo on Aikiweb.
1) I don't care that you care. I directed that comment to Erick, not to you.

2) How skilled? Irrelevant. The person in question has crossed hands with Akuzawa Minoru, Mike Sigman, Toby Threadgill, and maybe Ushiro Kenji (I'm not sure about this one). The point is he knows how guys with internal skill feel like and feeling Erick, he came to the conclusions that Erick did not have what those other fellas had, which is known here in Aikiweb as 'internal skills'. Perhaps Erick may have another definition of 'internal skills' and according to those standards of the definition, his scientific analysis of such a phenomenon could be potentially valid, but it is clear he has no knowledge of the discussions that Rob, Mike, and Dan have about internal bodyskills. This is not to force Erick into a position where he should train his butt off just so 'he can talk to the big boys about grown man things' as it is up to his discretion whether to pursue these bodyskills these men have. Rather, this to make Erick realize that his long scientific descriptions about internal skills are a waste of his time and the time of those who argue with him, because what he talks about is not what Rob, Mike, and Dan are discussing.

3) "With that information however I can decide how much weight to assign to the opinion of someone who according to Lorel has skill leven N"--Nice attempt to put words in my mouth. I never said that this person had internal skills or not.

Also, admittedly, I'm a beginner in internal skill training, but I never entered the discussion on this thread so you don't need to 'assume' how much I know. However, we can talk shop about internal skills if you like, not to 'show' you how much I know, but to help each other progress in this path.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 06:20 AM   #68
Mark Freeman
Dojo: Dartington
Location: Devon
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,219
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Lorel Latorilla wrote: View Post
1), Rather, this to make Erick realize that his long scientific descriptions about internal skills are a waste of his time and the time of those who argue with him, because what he talks about is not what Rob, Mike, and Dan are discussing.
Hi Lorel,

Rob, Mike and Dan have been posting on Aikiweb for quite a while, and although they are all active in the discussions, they don't always agree and see things eye to eye. They each seem to come to the subject from their own particular corner, so although they are in the same ring, they don't all use the same tactics.

regards,

Mark
p.s. I like Ericks attempts to describe the phenomena in such a scientific way, most of it goes right over my head, but he may well have a line on what is actually happening, even though knowing this information doesn't actually give you access to the 'how to' of the skills in question.

Success is having what you want. Happiness is wanting what you have.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 06:30 AM   #69
jss
Location: Rotterdam
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 459
Netherlands
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Lorel Latorilla wrote: View Post
I don't care that you care. I directed that comment to Erick, not to you.
Then perhaps a PM would have been more appropriate?

Quote:
How skilled? Irrelevant. The person in question has crossed hands with Akuzawa Minoru, Mike Sigman, Toby Threadgill, and maybe Ushiro Kenji (I'm not sure about this one). The point is he knows how guys with internal skill feel like and feeling Erick, he came to the conclusions that Erick did not have what those other fellas had, which is known here in Aikiweb as 'internal skills'.
Damn, you got me there.
If crossing hands with a few people that have internal skill is not enough to know what's it about, there would be little point in trying to learn it, as it would have no observable effect on your opponent/training partner...

Quote:
However, we can talk shop about internal skills if you like, not to 'show' you how much I know, but to help each other progress in this path.
Cool! I'll start a new thread as soon as I come up with a good subject.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 06:35 AM   #70
MM
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,996
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Mark Freeman wrote: View Post
p.s. I like Ericks attempts to describe the phenomena in such a scientific way, most of it goes right over my head, but he may well have a line on what is actually happening, even though knowing this information doesn't actually give you access to the 'how to' of the skills in question.
For your consideration:

1. Brightest minds in the robotics area in Japan are *not* using the human body as a basis to program their top of the line robots. They use a foundation of "what ifs" for their programming. In other words, even they don't know how to program/code/define what the human body does to replicate it in an artificial environment.

2. Brightest minds in the physics world can't define what happens in the human body between our walk-run cycle. In other words, they are clueless as to how to use their very profession, a profession they study in depth their whole life, to define something the human body does naturally, with ease, every day.

3. Even top level CGI studios aren't using human internal analysis to generate special effects. Gollum from Lord of the Rings movies wasn't driven by some computer generated program, but by motion capture devices.

4. All of these people are top level scientists in their field and they don't have a way to define internal human body interactions.

5. As has been noted from Mike, Rob, Dan, etc, there have been Ph.D. level scientists from various fields who *have* felt what these internal people are doing and these Ph.D.s don't have a clue how to define what's going on.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 06:51 AM   #71
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,499
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Lorel Latorilla wrote: View Post
No offense Erick, ....
I've talked to someone who has met you, and this person reported that you had no internal skills to speak of*. You won't put up a video because you know that you know nothing. The fact that you can unload all this scientific verbiage on us ....
Oh, that is rich. My comment reasonably criticizing using nameless shihans in nameless videos to defame countless persons, is rebutted by a nameless secret vetter showing I do not know -- what, specifically and exactly? What did we train ? What made it the be-all app-killer test? Should I put on shows every day, twice on Sunday to make sure I don't fail to impress my secret admirers? Name names, man. There is no privilege here.

If you will re-read this thread, my "verbiage" was brought in, not by me, but by those who objected to my comment about lack of specific criticism on shihans and videos. Instead of offering the specific illustrations requested it was demanded that I provide bona fides before I would be entitled to complain about it. Then we did not move on to some specifics showing those criticisms of videos or specific persons in specific settings but moved deeper into a similar broadside counterattack against non-specific things I "seem" to say that no one "seems" to be bothered to even think through or address -- you know ... specifically?

That approach to the discussion reveals more than I care to say. It is not that I care about the attacks, it is that I understand precisely why they occur, and wish to call attention to it. Several of you, plainly, do not realize the pattern you are repeating -- since as a group you all (aren't broadsides just too easy ?) respond in a remarkably consistent, predictable, and dare I say, reflexive, rather than reflective manner. If you think such patterns make effective budo -- then God bless you. You'll need it.

No, instead of answering the very basic concern about making a criticism of classes of people specific (and therefore rebuttable), David decided that I "seem" to not say what these guys say, because I don't talk like them -- that is -- I choose not to imitate the group. (As an aside, do we have a name for generic, stereotyped class-based attacks on other people who do not imitate a group, in order to control what people in the group do or say ...? Scapegoating, is it? )

I am, quite clearly, and quite specifically trying to describe things in different and more concrete terms. You all know this. It is not news, and therefore it is hardly even an ad hominem rejoinder to a request for specifics when criticizing others.

No one, notably, responded to Russ -- who actually put some specific video up for comment (Thanks, Russ) --That was all I asked about.

Now, ... would anyone care to take apart one or more of the videos Russ kindly offered to specifically document the otherwise useless general broadsides...? Like I asked. I find them very interesting, and well-chosen. Nicely edited, too.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 07:17 AM   #72
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,499
United_States
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
For your consideration:
To summarize:

1. They don't know.

2. They don't know.

3. They don't know.

4. They don't know.

5. They don't know.

Which says what exactly?

Point 1 is wrong. More effective methods are now acknowledged to be imitative and probabilistic, not using inertial parameters or predictive inertial models.

Point 2 is wrong -- FWIW, and gait transitions are period doubling dynamics and have to do with input energy and rhythm and have little to do with specific structure -- the same laws apply to a horse's dynamic rhythm as to a person's dynamic rhythm as apply to a dripping faucet. Reread what I have said about furitama IOW.

Point 3 is simply evidence that the human perception can easily detect even slight hedges in approximation from real animal motion (-- a survival thing, actually), and which I am saying makes honing one's own critical perception on valid mechanics more and not less important in understanding. It is less a matter of book larnin' and more a matter of critical perception and correct categories in which to place those perceptions. It's not diffy-q.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 07:17 AM   #73
dps
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,169
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Lorel Latorilla wrote: View Post

2) The point is he knows how guys with internal skill feel like and feeling Erick, he came to the conclusions that Erick did not have what those other fellas had, which is known here in Aikiweb as 'internal skills'. Perhaps Erick may have another definition of 'internal skills' and according to those standards of the definition, his scientific analysis of such a phenomenon could be potentially valid, but it is clear he has no knowledge of the discussions that Rob, Mike, and Dan have about internal bodyskills.
.
This reminds me of a young evangelical preacher I know who on a retreat to India had a brief chance to meet and talk to Mother Teresa. Talking about the brief encounter he came to the conclusion that she ( Mother Teresa ) was not holy. Perhaps this preacher had another definition of holy.

David
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 07:25 AM   #74
Lorel Latorilla
Location: Osaka
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 311
Japan
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
Oh, that is rich. My comment reasonably criticizing using nameless shihans in nameless videos to defame countless persons, is rebutted by a nameless secret vetter showing I do not know -- what, specifically and exactly? What did we train ? What made it the be-all app-killer test? Should I put on shows every day, twice on Sunday to make sure I don't fail to impress my secret admirers? Name names, man. There is no privilege here.

If you will re-read this thread, my "verbiage" was brought in, not by me, but by those who objected to my comment about lack of specific criticism on shihans and videos. Instead of offering the specific illustrations requested it was demanded that I provide bona fides before I would be entitled to complain about it. Then we did not move on to some specifics showing those criticisms of videos or specific persons in specific settings but moved deeper into a similar broadside counterattack against non-specific things I "seem" to say that no one "seems" to be bothered to even think through or address -- you know ... specifically?

That approach to the discussion reveals more than I care to say. It is not that I care about the attacks, it is that I understand precisely why they occur, and wish to call attention to it. Several of you, plainly, do not realize the pattern you are repeating -- since as a group you all (aren't broadsides just too easy ?) respond in a remarkably consistent, predictable, and dare I say, reflexive, rather than reflective manner. If you think such patterns make effective budo -- then God bless you. You'll need it.

No, instead of answering the very basic concern about making a criticism of classes of people specific (and therefore rebuttable), David decided that I "seem" to not say what these guys say, because I don't talk like them -- that is -- I choose not to imitate the group. (As an aside, do we have a name for generic, stereotyped class-based attacks on other people who do not imitate a group, in order to control what people in the group do or say ...? Scapegoating, is it? )

I am, quite clearly, and quite specifically trying to describe things in different and more concrete terms. You all know this. It is not news, and therefore it is hardly even an ad hominem rejoinder to a request for specifics when criticizing others.

No one, notably, responded to Russ -- who actually put some specific video up for comment (Thanks, Russ) --That was all I asked about.

Now, ... would anyone care to take apart one or more of the videos Russ kindly offered to specifically document the otherwise useless general broadsides...? Like I asked. I find them very interesting, and well-chosen. Nicely edited, too.
Erick, the comment still stands. If you like, you can skip over my comment as an unverifiable anecdote.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 07:27 AM   #75
dps
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,169
Offline
Re: What is "IT"?

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
That approach to the discussion reveals more than I care to say. It is not that I care about the attacks, it is that I understand precisely why they occur, and wish to call attention to it.
Come on Eric, you can't seriously expect those who won't try to understand your explanations to try to understand the article you linked to.

David
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Budo Bear Patterns - Sewing pattern for Women's (and Men's) dogi.



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:36 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate