Finding our own way in and out of Aikido

Erick Mead wrote: " It's turtles all the way down" ...

That's "it".The turtle says, 'mu'.
and, If you really wanna know, ask an old lady, seems like one shows up for every version of the back-story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down

:-)

[Google it, if you have no Catholic background] is now a finalist in my "Cool email signature competition", thanks for that .

Do you believe just because Dawkins says it? ("Credo quidquid dixit ________ ...") [Google it, if you have no Catholic background] Sounds like you just changed the names in the blank.

Dawkins makes a rational argument, one is free to follow it and make his/her own conclusions. It might even be available in Latin ( Deus Delusion ?) . Here is a condensed version.
I am not sure what is it that you intent to do with your "supernature". We agree that it is out there (a fact) and disagree on the "size" of it (a subjective thing, as we did not define anything relevant). Will you demonstrate an Aikido-relevant effect that is "supernatural"?

Blair Presson wrote: A number of posts also seem to equate the general principles and philosophy of Christianity and aikido, to imply that the two are in many respects no different. Superficially at least that argument can be made, since both do stress the importance of "peace" and "harmony". Yet the same statement can be said for any number of different religions, philosophies, and ideologies. Many have as their basis the search for peace, harmony, and truth.

It may not be a superficial relationship at all, but much deeper. There really is good cause to believe (and therefore reason to inquire much further) the evidence suggesting that a specifically Christian ancestry underlies a significant strain of the Shinto system, particularly in the Zoka Sanshin, the Creator trinity. They possess marks of a wholly distinct nature from that of all other kami understood in Shinto. Similar points of connection of different type can be seen in Shingon, Tendai and the Miroku and Amida sects.

If it were true, as seems suggested by Yoshiro Saeki's initial work int he early 20th cen., that a 7th-8th cen. layer of Christian influence entered Japan through the Chinese Tang capital, much that seems otherwise very ad hoc begin to take on a much more coherent character of historical development.

Assyrian Christians were in the Chinese Captial, and already by then speaking of their Christian concepts quite competently in a well-schooled Eastern religious idiom. From their connections in that same place and time, a distinctive strain of Buddhism was forming itself in Japan (Shingon and Tendai) and the Kojiki was being compiled in written (Chinese) form.

If it were true, then much that is curious about the strongly syncretic elements of Japanese religions, makes far more sense. It means that a continuous historical thread connects, from a very early period, otherwise difficult sensibilities of Japanese thought. Many more things fit together than not: both native and Buddhist religious sensibilities as they took on their distinctive character, and their easily "merged" nature, the powerful "savior" strains of Buddhism in popular piety, from the medieval period to the modern day, as well as the swift and wide-ranging Christian conversions in the 16th cen., the continual wrestling with the implications of monotheism within Shinto in the Kokugaku movement in the 18th and 19th cen, the oddly parallel development of the "secular savior" problem in the early and mid-twentieth century, in the Italian, German and Japanese autocracies, and the many resulting "New Religions" in the late 19th and 20th cen. It explains many more questions than it creates.

David Soroko wrote: [Google it, if you have no Catholic background] is now a finalist in my "Cool email signature competition", thanks for that .

De nada.

David Soroko wrote: Dawkins makes a rational argument, one is free to follow it and make his/her own conclusions. It might even be available in Latin ( Deus Delusion ?) . Here is a condensed version.

The argument from design while noted by St. Thomas is actually not the strongest that there is. The response to Dawkins complexity counter-argument is "non sequitur." His argument is about the process of evolutionary change -- not the existence of the Creator. The Church does not have a bone to pick against evolution, only against the essential reductionism that it is often used to support, as Dawkins uses it.

Dawkins therefore commences with a category error, at least as regards God (vice "creationism" as such, which is plainly error) This category error was also noted by St. Thomas, and the reason why Catholic theologians mostly do not support the "intelligent design" thesis. The error is this: The creation of forms by mutation from other forms is a process of subsidiary creation, but only of derivable forms, not of their existence or of their essence in the first place.

That process of change is the method of "design" so far as we are able empircially to determine it. But that is not of the same category of the eternal nature of creation of existents (beings) ex nihilo. Something from nothing. It is actually an observable phenomenon -- hard vacuum incessantly fluxes from being to non-being -- constantly -- from what our measurements tell us.

The fact that the universe has an aspect of self-organization, in forming deep chaotically organized eddies of mixed being and non-being, does not explain how it came to BE that it might self-organizein this way. The fact that it is, ontologically, self-organizing, eliminates the "who designed the designer" question -- it IS self-designing. The nature of being of the universe is inherently self-organizing with the flux between being and non being, as its essence -- it is what it is, and it does seem to BE in that way -- but the fundamental question is why IS it at all, and only secondarily why it is in that way. The ontological argument is both primary and stronger. The fact that it self-organizes with the constant flux of being and non-being, in artful concentrations and combinations, means that the act of existence, creation is much an eternal act as the essenital process of design, everywhere and throughout all time. .

David Soroko wrote: Will you demonstrate an Aikido-relevant effect that is "supernatural"?

Takemusu Aiki -- Divine technique. It is in aikido, it is in surfing, in gymnastics, tennis, you name almost any form of human endeavor that prizes efficient intuitive action or processes -- It is real, and it is not rational. It provokes unexpected awe in the doer and the observer -- it is kami, in other words. It is why we keep showing up to train.

Erick Mead wrote: Takemusu Aiki -- Divine technique. It is in aikido, it is in surfing, in gymnastics, tennis, you name almost any form of human endeavor that prizes efficient intuitive action or processes -- It is real, and it is not rational. It provokes unexpected awe in the doer and the observer -- it is kami, in other words. It is why we keep showing up to train.

and this is related to quantum mechanics how?

David Soroko wrote: and this is related to quantum mechanics how?

A chaotic system cannot be decomposed; and as such it has an analogue of quantum entanglement in it, because motion on one coordinate axis is always coupled (spookily) with motion along the other coordinate axis. The image of asagao the opening morning glory flower, was classically used to show this coupling in motions realted to aiki -- it is found throughout the proper motions of aiki arts, and operates in either direction. It is the foundation of things such as Sanchin no kata as well See here: http://www.naturefootage.com/video_clips/BF41_157

Any given motion at a given energy level will not necessarily betray that it is chaotic, and that such coupling is present. Chaos is apparent in the distribution of energy levels the system exhibits, but not at any given energy level. Wigner's distribution for the spectrum of nuclear interaction quanta, turns out to be almost identical to the distribution of spectrum of energy levels in classical chaos. http://www.spectro.jussieu.fr/Chaos/...rticles/15.pdf (p. 3 of 4)

Every aikido interaction is a three body problem (at least) -- two players + planet = (potentially) chaotic system. (Yes, I know one relatively immobile body leaves large basins of classical stability, but not in relative motion terms. When the two players start moving but maintain only a small amount of (rather critical) relative motion between them, respectively, then -- you have chaotic relative motion, planet included. Moreover, if you look at the subsidiary elements of human structure you see several different ways of defining complex pendula, which give rise to resonance behavior and exhibit chaotic motion when driven at their critical frequencies.

Blair Presson wrote: Joe, exactly what aikido "is" appears to devolve into the same argument regarding apprehension and understanding which the question of what religion "is". If you randomly asked five people in this forum to define aikido I think you would get five at least slightly, and possibly highly, different responses. The answer to your question would have to be that aikido for me is what I want it to be, what it is for someone else could be much more expansive in nature. [etc.]

If I say, "apple," is the one you see the same as the one I see, or are they different? And where exactly do you see it?

And when I say "Aikido"? What now?

Again and again it comes up, and still no one has defined Aikido. To everyone, Aikido is "what I understand Aikido to be." And then we argue. So ask: "Is Aikido what I think it is, or is it something else?"

Hard style or soft style? Tomiki style, Iwama Style, Yoshinkan style, Ki Society style, ...? Self-defense focus, flowing ki focus? Which is Aikido? Are they the same or different?

Aikido does not require definition. It does not become anything. It is what it is. The rest is how you perceive it, your preferences and dislikes, and so forth. No big deal.

Whatever it is that you are practicing, just practice. No big deal. After all, when the bokken is screaming toward your head, you won't be worried about the other nonsense anyway.

That's Aikido.

... at least how I perceive it

Let's see if I can decompose this

1 .

A chaotic system cannot be decomposed; and as such it has an analogue of quantum entanglement...

Chaotic systems have a quality, and quantum systems have a quality. Technically, they are different qualities but they sound kind off similar.

2.

Every aikido interaction is a three body problem (at least) -- two players + planet = (potentially) chaotic system.

Every Aikido interaction is a chaotic system.

3.
Consequently Aikido is related to quantum mechanics, and we have that Takemusu Aiki is "supernatural"

Did I miss something?

BTW. the morning glory video is very nice.

David Soroko wrote: Did I miss something? BTW. the morning glory video is very nice.

My pleasure. And yes, you did.

Let us sum up the discussion so far, so we can see where:

D: Religion is not a useful concept; the supernatural is not within rational comprehension.

E: Supernatural is not other than nature, just other than the nature that is knowable or observable.

D: The nature that cannot be known or observed is trivially small. and all such things are comprehensible by humans.

E: Not all are rationally comprehensible, but are still comprehensible or at least relatable. Real but inobservable phenomena cannot be compared in quantitative significance to the observable; by definition inobservable quantities cannot be measured.

D: No it isn't, and Dawkins says God is not probable and I believe him.

E: What's Dawkins got to do with it? And the class of observable and inobservable phenomena are at least equal by all evidence and the sum of very small things is very large - What's God got to do with it ? Linear probability cannot describe nonlinear systems; because there are things that emerge or recede that we cannot know .

D: Supernature -- what is supernatural in aikido?

E: Takemusu Aiki -- an application of something real and not rational -- and generic.

D: So, .... how 'bout them quantum mechanics?

E; What's quantum mechanics got to do with it? But since you asked ... same pattern of behavior as in Takemusu Aiki

D: They have different names so they must be different; Overgeneralizing (takemusu aiki is chaos so all aikido must be chaotic); and misapplying the overgeneralization in a non-sequitur
---------------------------------------------------------
All told not a bad discussion.

To conclude then -- the things that quantum mechanics says are real but inobservable, and the patterns that chaotic systems produce that are real and recognizable but not repeatable are not merely similar sounding they are directly physically correspondent phenomena to a high order of statistical significance, and follow the Wigner spectrum distribution.

Things we are incapable of perceiving in operation (but dimly) and that produce wondrous effects with little change or action, inspire awe and are supernatural -- or as we might say -- kami, or as the quantum physicists like to say -- "spooky action at a distance."

Not fair! Where did this "can not be known or observed" came from? We agreed to call a bunch of stuff "supernatural" (your choice of adjective). Now you equating them to "nature that can not be known or observed" and I do not accept this.
Many of your arguments seem to rely on solid scientific work done by physicists. Quantum effects are well known and constantly observed. While counter intuitive and surprising, the "supernatural" is constantly being researched and harnessed by scientists and industry.

D: No it isn't, and Dawkins says God is not probable and I believe him.

Umm...more likely: "Dawkins argues God is not probable and I understand and think it is a fine argument". Bringing god into the discussion was probably a mistake, I got excited by all that Yeshua (more correctly Yehoshua) stuff.

This being a martial arts forum, the question "what does all this has to do with Aikido" arises naturally. I am surprised that after all your references to QM, you say: "What's quantum mechanics got to do with it?"

D: They have different names so they must be different; Overgeneralizing (takemusu aiki is chaos so all aikido must be chaotic); and misapplying the overgeneralization in a non-sequitur

No, I am not saying that they are different and I am not saying that they are the same. You are claiming that they are related so the burden of proof in on you.

To bring some of these concepts to more mundane level I'd like to point out the Billiard table+balls is a chaotic system (with no friction and extra bouncy walls) and so are Dow Jones/FTSE/NASDAQ indices. No one refers to these systems as "supernatural", they do not have essential quantum properties and no Kami arises out of them.

David Soroko wrote: Not fair! Where did this "can not be known or observed" came from? We agreed to call a bunch of stuff "supernatural" (your choice of adjective). Now you equating them to "nature that can not be known or observed" and I do not accept this. Many of your arguments seem to rely on solid scientific work done by physicists. Quantum effects are well known and constantly observed. While counter intuitive and surprising, the "supernatural" is constantly being researched and harnessed by scientists and industry.

You are entitled to your belief, but the both the mathematical conclusions as well as the empirical conclusions are that some things are irrevocably hidden from us as a matter of ontological consequence, because of what they are, and not as an epistemic consequence, because of any defects in our knowledge of them. It seems we are permitted to see the shadow cast, but not the body nor the light that cast it.

David Soroko wrote: This being a martial arts forum, the question "what does all this has to do with Aikido" arises naturally. I am surprised that after all your references to QM, you say: "What's quantum mechanics got to do with it?"

I relate aikido and chaotic motion; you and I are also discussing God and creation, and Godel and quantum mechanics came up. There also happens to be a principle of correspondence between chaotic processes and their emergent properties and quantum mechanics and their complementary "receding" properties. They happen to correspond in physical terms, according to work on corrsepondence in quantum chaos, and that's it. It is an observation of the state of the art, no more.

Takemusu Aiki is an exercise in emergent properties or forms -- but most of aikido practice in the early going especially, is "going through the motions" until the aware but unconscious mind/body can express itself in such emergent forms. No one exercises non-locality in Aikido -- well... not that I am aware of, anyway -- but those aspects of quantum mechanics and chaos are very much related -- and both supernatural in the way I understand the term -- which is not "other than nature," or "nature we do not know yet," but a "greater nature" that we cannot know directly.

David Soroko wrote: No, I am not saying that they are different and I am not saying that they are the same. You are claiming that they are related so the burden of proof in on you.

Wigner distribution is precisely in common with both. Not proved as to the full nature of the correspondences that connect them so very tightly in this way -- but the correlation is extremely strong and neither coincidental nor trivial -- just as the better understood quantum-classical correspondence is. It is all one thing. We just have three different settled basins of accessible knowledge, and only mostly impassable mountains with narrow passes between them; passes not fully explored. The fact that pass is narrow or that there may be other passes says nothing about the size of the mountains, nor diminishes in any substantial way the immovable barrier that they present.

David Soroko wrote: To bring some of these concepts to more mundane level I'd like to point out the Billiard table+balls is a chaotic system (with no friction and extra bouncy walls) and so are Dow Jones/FTSE/NASDAQ indices. No one refers to these systems as "supernatural", they do not have essential quantum properties and no Kami arises out of them.

You haven't hung out with commodities traders much, have you? Most superstitious bunch of number crunchers I've ever seen.

Eric,

Interesting concept you "relate aikido and chaotic motion." I presuming you are talking about chaos theory. I don't see it that way. I relate it to the simple observation (without the application of mathematical or scientific theory, we can discuss that latter) that Aikido is controlling and diffusing chaos. In a couple of flagship words in Aikido, it is the harmonizing of chaos and then the resolution of chaos to peace.


To whom it may concern,
That to me is one example of the gross philosophical/spiritual component that also does underpin Aikido very strongly, that Christians shouldn't have an issue, and that isn't being argued Aikido shares superficially some parts of Bible. Aikido, and the Bible does look at peace. But an underpinning that Aikido has that is different from the Bible is that Aikido blends with violence to resolve to only one end, that being peace, on an individual scale. Whereas, the Bible uses violence, offensively in more dynamic means and ends other than peace. It may be said then Aikido does share some ideas with the Bible, but the Bible's philosophy of peace and the use of violence is really different.

Philip Burgess wrote: Interesting concept you "relate aikido and chaotic motion." I presuming you are talking about chaos theory. I don't see it that way. I relate it to the simple observation (without the application of mathematical or scientific theory, we can discuss that latter) that Aikido is controlling and diffusing chaos. In a couple of flagship words in Aikido, it is the harmonizing of chaos and then the resolution of chaos to peace.

"Chaos" in physical terms has a very well-defined meaning. Chaos is a non-linear recursive system with high sensitivity to initial conditions. Chaos is, in fact, a very complex form of order, vice truly random events (if such even exists).

Extending that physical principle by analogy to the ethical situation, what the attacker seeks is actually highly ordered and very linear: You dead -- him not-dead. Game over. Do not pass go; do not collect two hundred dollars. Binary decision.

Aikido does not seek linear order, nor does it seek "peace" in the trivial sentimental sense -- as achieving harmony in aiki terms is perfectly consistent with an ongoing raging war all about you, that you are an active participant in. The eye of the storm is the notion of peace in aiki.

As for the rest, katsu jinken - setsu ninto -- your choice.

Philip Burgess wrote: To whom it may concern, ...But an underpinning that Aikido has that is different from the Bible is that Aikido blends with violence to resolve to only one end, that being peace, on an individual scale. Whereas, the Bible uses violence, offensively in more dynamic means and ends other than peace. It may be said then Aikido does share some ideas with the Bible, but the Bible's philosophy of peace and the use of violence is really different.

I see a parable of sorts to the Christian Bible that relates to Budo/Aikido. In the old testiment we get a much more severe image of what happens when you fall out of line. You get turned into salt. And even when you've lived a long life of noble devotion, you can get miserably sick and lose your whole family. I think this points to the severity of life; the kill-or-be-killed reality that people had to deal with more on a day-to-day-basis than today. The first written law as I recall was Hamurabi and his eye for an eye: if a roofer's shingle falls and kills someone, the roofer dies. It's harsh, but it's orderly.
Then, after an uncertain amount of time, Christ comes along and suggests something more subtle. He seems to be a man of peace, but he also spoke of beating plows into swords and turning the other cheek (as a sign of defiance, as I understand it). He shows respect to people who're not supposed to be worthy of it. And while he still dies, it's presumed to be a sacrifice for something greater.
I'm getting distracted by other things so this isn;t as poetic as I'd like, but long ramble cut short I'd say the origines of budo are to the old testiment as the relatively modern budo is to the new testiment. I see the old as being a simple tit-for-tat "tough-guy" response and the new as being transcendent...if I'm making any sense.
...and sorry if I'm not, I'll see what I can come up with a little later maybe.
Take care,
Matt

Water dripping from a faucet is another chaotic system.

Faucet drips water
You watch the sink and wait
where is that Kami?

David Soroko wrote: Water dripping from a faucet is another chaotic system. Faucet drips water You watch the sink and wait where is that Kami?

Literally -- hidden in the spacing between them.

Erick Mead wrote: Chaos is a non-linear recursive system with high sensitivity to initial conditions. a very complex form of order, vice truly random events (if such even exists). Extending that physical principle by analogy to the ethical situation, what the attacker seeks is actually highly ordered and very linear: You dead -- him not-dead. Game over. Do not pass go; do not collect two hundred dollars. Binary decision.

Huh? Is it or isn't it?

Aikido does not seek linear order, nor does it seek "peace" in the trivial sentimental sense -- as achieving harmony in aiki terms is perfectly consistent with an ongoing raging war all about you, that you are an active participant in. The eye of the storm is the notion of peace in aiki. As for the rest, katsu jinken - setsu ninto -- your choice.

You'er creatin' new Aikido myths ther' ain't chya, Bubba?

Erick Mead wrote: Literally -- hidden in the spacing between them.

So Erick we are dealing with negative space or variables related to intrinsic fluctuations allowing for a non-absolute outcome and stuff, or the laws of mother nature, or Darwin? Or is it a function of a Zen thingy. Or most of all does it really matter, and we should shift back on topic?

Philip Burgess wrote: Huh? Is it or isn't it?

Attacker isn't -- Aikidoka is -- non-linear, that is.

Philip Burgess wrote: You'er creatin' new Aikido myths ther' ain't chya, Bubba?

Nope. Applying them.

Philip Burgess wrote: . Or most of all does it really matter, and we should shift back on topic?

Oh, chaos matters, you betcha, and it is on topic. Aiki is a chaotic system. No myth. "Going in and out of aikido" takes one across the border from linear order to randomness, and back again, and that border region is where the aiki lives. I think I used a ridge trail analogy, between valleys, in respect of fear and anger, in another post, but the same is true of linear order and randomness. It is a supercritical region, and easy to fall off to either side.

Erick you convinced me, in a most periocular way.

Philip Burgess wrote: So Erick we are dealing with negative space ...

In negative space no one can hear your KiAi

OP has pinned himself with the thought that his beliefs today will limit his Aikido tomorrow.

Where do you see a knot that needs untying?

Philip Burgess wrote: Eric, That to me is one example of the gross philosophical/spiritual component that also does underpin Aikido very strongly, that Christians shouldn't have an issue, and that isn't being argued Aikido shares superficially some parts of Bible. Aikido, and the Bible does look at peace. But an underpinning that Aikido has that is different from the Bible is that Aikido blends with violence to resolve to only one end, that being peace, on an individual scale. Whereas, the Bible uses violence, offensively in more dynamic means and ends other than peace. It may be said then Aikido does share some ideas with the Bible, but the Bible's philosophy of peace and the use of violence is really different.

This is one of the differences between the philosophy of aikido as opposed to Christianity. The principle of harmony and peace is focused exclusively of specific individual and specific situation. It can be said that in aikido we accept the violence blend with it to the purpose of achieving peace. Peace is this circumstance being defined as a lack of present conflict against the individual themselves, even when this means use of violence in the blending process to produce this result. The use of aikido itself however does not ensure that the individual themselves is necessarily any better after the blending other than the lack of violence itself presently. The focus thus is the use of violence to the extent necessary to prevent harm being done to us or those around us.

There is a great deal of violence surrounding Christianity and as set forth in the Bible. For sake of this discussion, I will only touch on the broadest aspect of violence within Christian theology and the Bible. The Bible is a revelation of God to man, and a history of God's plan in reconciling man to himself. The three essential elements of God's character is righteousness, judgment, and grace. All three of these being integral and interrelated to each other. Violence in this context most closely related to the aspect of judgment. There can be said to be a necessity to a certain level of violence to achieve certain objective within specific contexts. Within discussion of aikido we state that violence can be, and usually is a necessary element in bringing about peace. Within this context judgment (and aspect of violence) is necessary to protect and vindicate the element of righteousness. Grace can be understood as the element of love, which gives itself when righteousness would otherwise require judgment. The peace which is the ultimate objective of the Bible revolves around reconciling (seeking harmony)( of sinful man to a righteous God through a process of salvation (which itself involved violence).

Aikido can be said to focus on the finding of peace or harmony directed inwardly toward the individual's attitude and his relationship with the world around him or her. The peace which is the objective of the Bible focuses on peace through reconciliation with God which extends beyond this current world or nature itself.

So, God, Aikido, and Christianity, walk into a bar...

(Anthropomorphism.)