Meaning of Competitive?

Paul Sanderson-Cimino wrote: I hadn't seen the Tomiki/wrestler video before. That was interesting.

I assume you meant Tohei.

The last part was clearly demonstration but the first part it really looked like the wrestler was trying to come to grips and was nicely controlled.

Peter Rehse wrote: I assume you meant Tohei. The last part was clearly demonstration but the first part it really looked like the wrestler was trying to come to grips and was nicely controlled.

Sorry; it was a typo. I recognized it was Tohei, but I guess when I started typing some synapses got crossed and I used the wrong "T-name".

Sort of how like they say avoid writing a story with two characters whose names start with the same letter...it's surprisingly confusing.

This has become a very competetive converstion.

We are a family (like it or not). While we're competing we are removing ourself from our family time (inversely related to above post about scavenger hunt and glasses..sorry don't remember which number). If we were cooperating in task then we would never be leaving our 'family time' or our musubi. We would be in consistent principle..

While we're competing we are removing ourself from our family time

I guess some people never had fun playing monopoly, clue, racing, who can push who off the couch first using only their feet, last one there's a rotten egg, potato-sack races, had a snowball fight, etc or any other good spirited games with friends and family when they were little... competitive games can sometimes be very fun games to play _with_ family, IMHO, if the attitudes towards it are good. Of course if the attitude is unhealthy, then it can be totally different (like a bad gym class or whatever).

[quote=Tarik Ghbeish;178814]I'm very interested in his budo, and his humanity and his passion. Like every other human being, his foibles are what make him interesting, but why would I want to model my life after a man who did the things he did and made the choices he made? I want my children to know me and enjoy spending time with me.

I'm sorry Jen, but your comments about nature completely violate everything I've ever learned by actual observation. Nature is extremely competitive. As a gardener, you should have some idea about that.

As someone who majored in biology in college, and studied anatomy, and who is fascinated by nature and it's examples, I would offer the following current conclusions:

1) Competition is a fundamental part of nature and natural systems.

2) What we really are learning when we learn "aiki" is not natural at all. If fact, it is directly counter to our instincts of how to deal with opposing force. It works by studying nature and working WITH natural movements and responses and reaction to create a new outcome, but the chosen actions of tori are not 'natural' in any normal sense of the word, although they certainly do have to become relaxed and 'natural' movements.

What I am exploring in my training today is in fact to remove my natural responses and reactions to being attacked and to have the ability to choose something else. Hardly 'natural', IME, to change my internal responses to being hit, pushed, or otherwise attacked.

Ask me again in 10 or 20 years and we'll see if I've modified this opinion.

Jennifer Smith wrote: Nature is simple. Re-aligning our lives and egos with it is not. Nature is the most complex system in existence. The global warming fiasco is a great example of an oversimplification of science and an understanding of how and why the world is changing. I had steak for dinner last night. Mmmmmm. Regards,

Tarik, Just because it violates your personal understanding doesn't make it wrong.


Please look into Master Fukuoka's texts 'Mu Farming" or 'The One Straw Revolution' before you attempt a discussion about what I should know about nature and how it works. After that, we can talk. Until then, keep scarfing the meat.

Jennifer Smith wrote: We are a family (like it or not). While we're competing we are removing ourself from our family time (inversely related to above post about scavenger hunt and glasses..sorry don't remember which number). If we were cooperating in task then we would never be leaving our 'family time' or our musubi.

In my dojo family, we cooperate precisely BY competing appropriately with each other. To do any less is to lie to my brothers and sisters. Yet... somehow, we are closer than any other dojo family I've ever been a part of.

Hmmm.

The painful truth is that many (if not most) of the rabidly anti-competition "peace and love" folks I've experienced are, in reality, extremely passive-aggressive abusers who talk a good game, but whose true heart is actually very different from what they'd prefer to believe it is.

<sarcasm>Oddly</sarcasm>, we don't seem to have (m)any of those folks in our family.

Direct honesty and appropriate use of competition in training either weeds these people out or changes their nature.

I have been taught to view the whole art and it's practicioners as my family, not just my dojo. My 'great-grandfather' taught that the art was not for competition. I have yet no reason to dis-believe him.

Jennifer Smith wrote: This has become a very competetive converstion.

I agree. It's the only kind of "conversation" I like to take part in. What's absolutely important is: we need to define our terms if we're to have a conversation that is productive. If different meanings are going to be used for the same word/s then we will continue to be at loggerheads and be wasting our precious breaths.

I'd rather not take part in: adverserial, antagonistic, combative, argumentative, passive-aggressive "conversations" or discussions that are really attempts to "defeat" or "win over" the "opponent" to a way of thinking or belief system while protecting one's own position.

Nothing wrong with that stuff in the appropriate venue. A courtroom for example, or a debate that is designed and intended to be adverserial. An academic that is being questioned on a therory that is being tested to try and disprove the theory. It must be vigorous and often adverserial in nature. I'm willing to do any of these all the way up to physical combat if I have decided it is absolutely necessary (and have done so in the past on many occasions. Unfortunately, the first time I was young and too naive and ignorant to understand I didn't have enough good information to make that decision. I learned.)

As pointed out earlier in this conversation/discussion it is very important to determine which common definition of "competition" you need to use that is germain to the general nature of the point at hand.

From the Oxford American Dictionary:
Compete: strive to gain or win something by defeating or
establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same

From the Webster's Dictionary:
Compete: to come together or to strive consciously or unconsciously for an objective.

It is agreed however that both words come from the Latin root competere which is defined as follows: to strive together, from the Latin: to meet, come together, agree; from com - together + petere to seek.

I prefer Webster's version when applied to the aikido ideal as do a lot of people I know and love to train with.

People keep using Ueshiba Morihei's statements about "competition." Please go to the trouble of looking into what he really said, not what other's have translated it as. There are many versions. Since very few people are alive today that heard him, we should be very careful about how we commit ourselves and our passion.

If we use language properly we can figure out, along with our gut level knowledge, what each other really is about. In a conversation, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind or beliefs... I want to find out what those are at whatever level the other person is willing to share. I'm looking for information, knowledge, and education, and am willing to share with anyone so we can all grow and enjoy each other if possible.

Sorry for the length of this, but it seems a bit silly to me to keep talking around the fact that we need to be specific about our terms and be willing to widen our view. If not, then we aren't having a "conversation" or a "discussion".

Similarly, I've learnt not to judge others' technique as inferior or worse than mine,

Hmmm, not sure I could tell that from the posts on this thread...

This is one of the perennial conversations on aikido boards. There are so many posts discussing this it's not even fun anymore. The only thing I can add is that we would probably get more mileage from looking at the Japanese word Ueshiba used when he made his statement on "competition", and understanding it in the culture in which it was used. The latin root, the common use in English etc., does very little to enhance our understanding of what Ueshiba meant.

Best,
Ron (I do find it odd that the ones who most espouse being open minded, often seem to me to be the most close minded. But then I've been told I'm rather odd...so...)

Kevin Leavitt wrote: I think competition can be looked at macroscopically and microscopically, or internal verses external. To me, there are two basic types of competition. Sports competition is one form, and then competition in which we desire to possess something that may not be possessed. It is possible to compete in say a judo tournament and still stay focused on your internal goals of self improvement in a healthy way, using competition as a means to assess, grow, and establish a bond and cooperative spirit with your fellow judoka. However, once your attitude becomes "win at any cost", and you become focused on winning is the only thing...it becomes unhealthy. I think it is okay to compete in sports and maintain the right perspective on the meaning of winning. Winning and losing in sports is not the same thing as winning at all cost. I think many lose sight of the distinctions and lump "competition" into one huge category and view it as a bad thing in any form.

Sorry for the duplication, but I thought this post would fit here also.

Jennifer Smith wrote: This has become a very competetive converstion.

I almost made the same point earlier. I find it ironic that people want to argue over explicit definitions instead of being willing to discuss how one explicit definition can actually be helpful or instrumental to the learning process. Instead people jump on and call everyone losers who acknowledge what they're doing as appropriate competition . How ironic, indeed.

Jennifer Smith wrote: Tarik, Just because it violates your personal understanding doesn't make it wrong.

Certainly not. What makes it wrong is that it violates the current consensus of theory and observation in today's comprehension of nature.

Jennifer Smith wrote: Please look into Master Fukuoka's texts 'Mu Farming" or 'The One Straw Revolution' before you attempt a discussion about what I should know about nature and how it works. After that, we can talk. Until then, keep scarfing the meat.

Working more efficiently with natures own processes (which include competition) does not change how nature works.

Regards,

Here is an example of where I think this conversation could most profitably go...

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showth...tion#post15050

Or, in plain english, this is where the meat is...

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale wrote: Best, Ron (I do find it odd that the ones who most espouse being open minded, often seem to me to be the most close minded. But then I've been told I'm rather odd...so...)

Amen brother.

Dan

To make it clear from my own heart... I am completely in agreement with anyone that dosen't take part in sports (kyogi) type competition. I did for many, many years in judo and would not do it again. However, other facets of competion are, in my experience, necessary in learning budo. Of course, at some point, we actually can rise above it... if we are willing to go through the process of experiencing and learning what it is we need to rise above. I don't think it can be done only by intellectual conceptualizations and philosophical argument. I know people that I think have done it... I'l be the first to say that I have not... but I'm in the midst of it and on the journey. I wouldn't trade it for anything.

just to leave things clear
just one more thing
or two...

I do understand the different meanings people are giving to "competition" in this conversation

some keep confusing competition with testing
I find no problem with testing
I like hard training, and a good, strong uke, that resists my technique
there's no competition there
but if you like, of course, you can call it competition
you can also say that the moon is the sea, and that Friday is the day after Monday

Then there are those who are fond of competition
because they use it as a carrot, to motivate themselves
and do unpleasant, although useful or necessary, things
this is ok, I've heard it is very effective
although I've never seen the need for such a trick
maybe I'm not the right kind of donkey

many thought I'm competing
and I believe it is because they have the competition-mind very deep in their souls
so be it
some people just don't get it, and there's no solution for that
although it is a pitty, and I'm sorry to see it

oh, well
the possitive side is that I chose to change my motto
now it's: "winners don't compete"
it sounds better
and the subconscious message is that competition is like a drug


enjoy

tiago

Took some little digging, but found what I was looking for. Man, it's Peter G.' first post on the board! Talk about history...

Hello, Everybody, This is my first post in this forum (so please be nice!). Cyber-shihan Ubaldo Alcantara first asked me for information on this topic and it took me some time to realise that it was in connection with Jun Akiyama's web site. I sent Ubaldo a reply, but then realised it was better to contribute to the forum myself. So here is what I have discovered in O Sensei's writings about competition. 1. The word which O Sensei uses for 'competition' is ‹£‘ˆ�@(‚«‚傤‚»‚¤: KYOU-SOU). The first character is composed of the Radials 117 (standing) and the character (344 in Nelson's dictionary) for 'ani' (brother). The second character is also read as 'araso' and the meaning of the compound is basically 'rivalry'. The word ŽŽ�‡�@(‚µ‚ ‚¢ SHI-ai) has the sense of two teams meeting for a game or match and is not used by O Sensei. 2. Where does O Sensei discuss competition in Aikido? I have seen no evidence for any general declaration made by O Sensei against competition. There is a reference to sports understood by O Sensei in a western sense on Page 50 of Hideo Takahashi's book, "Takemusu Aiki", which records lectures given by the Founder. A translation of O Sensei's ideas is given on Page 21 of Issue 117 of Aikido Journal. There O Sensei does talk about competition as applied to aikido, always using the Chinese character I explained above. His views are clearly old-fashioned and he makes statements about Japan and western sports which are no longer true. 3. The reference to Tomiki Sensei and competition appears on pp.184-188 of "Aikido Ichiro", by Kisshomaru Ueshiba. Doshu explains that Tomiki Sensei became a professor at Waseda University in 1954 but often came to visit the Founder in Iwama and Tokyo. Tomiki Sensei was a POW in Siberia and developed a system of aiki-taiso, probably to stay alive, and explained his system to O Sensei. In Kisshomaru Doshu's words, "On seeing this (sc. Tomiki Sensei's system), my father said, ‚»‚̂您‚¤‚È‚à‚Ì‚ð�@�‡‹C�@‚Æ�Ì‚³‚ê‚Ä�¢‚é "If you call this sort of thing "Aiki", it will cause problems." Kisshomaru Doshu then goes on to discuss what happened afterwards. I muself have had lengthy conversations with Kisshomaru Doshu and with Okumura Shigenobu Sensei (9th dan), who first learned aikido at the hands of Tomiki Sensei and was later deputed to negotiate over whether Tomiki Sensei should use 'aikido' for his art. Okumura Sensei was clearly torn between loyalty to his sensei and loyalty to the Founder. Best regrds to all, Peter Goldsbury

The link to the thread is here:
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=998
and is important for the follow up posts...

Best,
Ron

Tiago,

I don't know if it's the language difference, or if it's that internet thingy getting in the way. But you come off sounding WAY condescending and smug. No biggie...but you might want to at least be aware of it.

Best,
Ron

sorry,
and the last, I promise
Tarik,
the only competition that there is in nature
is the one you bring
if you don't understand this
you don't understand, period
go think about it
instead of assuming that people don't know what you are talking about

thanks Ron
I can see what you mean
but if you look at the thread, it was this ironic joke of mine
that produced some irate responses
you can do with it as you like
it is not my choice to lie in order to make anybody feel better

it is not my choice to lie in order to make anybody feel better

Hmm, well, wouldn't want you to compromise your principles, such as they are.

Best,
Ron

Santiago Torres wrote: but if you look at the thread, it was this ironic joke of mine that produced some irate responses

Are you still joking in post #93? My sarcasm-detector doesn't work on your posts...

Actually, Tiago, I appologize.

This sideline is way off topic...I'd rather focus on the posts by Peter and others, than my own sniping.

Let's take it to PM if we must, or start a new thread. Jun, my bad, feel free to move my junk to new thread, or just delete.

Best,
Ron

Ron,
sorry, that did sound harsh, right?
but in a way, I cannot admit that the moon is made of water, because someone chose to call the sea "moon", and I don't want to disturb his mistake...
and there might be a language component also
but I cannot help but feel very sad for this people who are looking forward to "resume normal family time"
I'm really sorry, I know it's me, so don't bother to get angry
I wish everybody many years of normal family time
just as much as I wish my family will never get to be normal

Christian,
There is no joke in post #93
although I see it sounds strong
(especially the "go think about it" part, I could have said "please, try to consider it...", but it wouldn't have had the same effect)
my point is strong
if you read from my first post, you'll see I tried to explain everything in the best way
but some people just get angry at what they don't understand
instead of asking "what do you mean"
they just accuse you of whatever, trying to feel safe and in control again
so be it

thanks both, I apreciate your concern

tiago

sorry, Ron, didn't read that last post of yours before posting mine
I agree

"some people apparently have a problem with being a loser."

If so, I'm surprised its not more than "some". Anybody who does not, has already mastered a very difficult concept preached by (Cheng Man-Ching?) regarding Tai Chi -- "invest in loss". If so, I'm way behind in my practice. Seems in my experience that most outside the Tai Chi or Aikido community (and even some inside them, including me) have a problem with being a loser. The extent is different for each, though. Some want to have a problem with being a loser, and others are working on the problem, while others are not aware of the problem, and some don't.

Not inferring criticism from the comment, just positing my worthless thoughts.

Eric