Trust

My general feeling toward the first reply was that it was -to a small degree- a blunt and dismissively discourteous reply, considering the time I spent formulating what I believed would be a thoughtful, self-revealing, and heartfelt thread. I made myself vulnerable, half-expecting people would appreciate that rather than see an opening to attack. I suppose now that many of the other threads were written at least partially in defense of the woman. Once in awhile, posts that are clear to me to be insidiously insulting, annoy me enough to directly call the person on it. Sneaky insults are just as bad as direct ones, and I decided to employ the futility of fighting fire with fire on this thread, while sincerely speaking my mind all along.

It doesn't matter to me whether you keep this thread open or not, but do realize that when someone tells me I'm an animal abuser without knowing even a tenth of the facts, I get pissed.

Drew

-- "Trouble at t'mill. One on't crossbeams gone owt 'skew on treadle."

-- .....

If you get --- you get it.

Drew Gardner wrote: I suppose now that many of the other threads were written at least partially in defense of the woman. Drew

I can understand and sympathize with feeling angry at a perceived gratuitous swipe.

I hope, though, you will observe that many posts expressed agreement with some or all of the content of the original response to which you initially took offense.

Many of these posts display no evidence of a perceived need by their posters to defend someone who, from all appearances, is quite capable of standing up for herself.

Accepting without question your sincerity, the OP nonetheless was framed in terms of general statements about the benefits of aikido practice, and not simply something of great value to you in your individual practice.

Rather than seeing the responses of people who disagree as motivated by an ulterior purpose, or as statistical outliers that may be ignored, one might see them as providing facts that are relevant to your theory as you stated it.

I guess the question is whether the ideas remain worth discussing.

Sincerely,

cdh

Hi Drew...keep in mind that Janet never did that. The whole animal thing came into play as a result of **your own words** later.

I am more than willing to drop that portion...too heavy a load for me to carry in any case.

I do sincerely believe that you mis-read Janet, but you know what? We can always just start over...same as on the mat.

Best,
Ron

I appreciate your posts, David and Ron. Ron, I usually have fun reading what you write, because even when it's not beneficial in a serious way, you just have a fun sense of humor. David, I think you're mostly correct with your remarks. I just hope everyone realizes that it's not my way to pick on disabled women or dogs.

Actually, with the great dane, that was my brother's dog when we both lived in Tallahassee over a decade ago. When Captain was pretty young, he would chew up my brother's wallet or such, or use his apartment as a restroom. The noodle was really for one of the same three human forms of positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment. I was attending FSU, and mostly doing my own thing, including taking up Aikido. But every now and then, I'd end up at my brother's and his girlfriend's place. She had a pit bull with a somewhat annoying teething fetish, even at one or two years old. Anyway, my brother always made sure not to go within a close distance to the closet o' foam noodle, unless Captain in fact needed to be punished. I think positive or negative reinforcement are the best, but I suppose sometimes punishment is the most effective option, the less traumatizing the better. But oh, Cappy did hate that closet!

As far as Janet's post, mostly it was a matter of me contemplating and forming what I thought would be a really though-provoking (not anger-provoking) thread. I suppose the first reply being informative, but with initials I didn't recognize and the word, "emphatically," that it was a system shock for me. I thought my gut was really onto something. Maybe it was, and she just begged to differ. Also, I knew what I meant by "trust," but after re-evaluating my wording, I believe either others - quite fairly - didn't know what to think, or thought I meant something else. I am steadily recovering from the bad feelings, will gather myself, and either start a new thread or make an effort to clarify this one. I like the discussions we have on Aikiweb, and the last thing I want to do is alienate myself from you guys and gals.

Drew

I like the discussions we have on Aikiweb, and the last thing I want to do is alienate myself from you guys and gals.

Or we from you! Thanks for taking this so well...I don't know that I would, but I'd like to hope so. Looking forward to the continuation or the new thread.

Best,
Ron

Hi Drew,

I do think your observations are worth further discussion, when you are ready.

One area where I think there may be some agreement is how becoming better able to take care of one's self in interactions that may have been fear inducing previously can clear the way to build trust between people over time.

But, for me, its one thing to say that I can take care of myself well enough that I'm willing to engage in a potentially dangerous activity (on or off the mat), and take the consequences that may come. That's different from trusting another person's intent or ability, or their understanding of the limits on my ability to stay safe.

An area where there may be disagreement (not to say you are wrong), is whether training can/should/does develop better intuition about how other people are going to behave. That's harder to say, from my point of view.

I also have to note, as I believe was discussed awhile back in a thread about buying donuts (I'm not making this up), martial arts training can also lead to an increased awareness of potential threat.

Does that lead to increased distrust?

cdh

The thread is about trust and Aikido, Aikido being a Japanese martial art, I would say the trust has to be seen as well from how the Japanese define it. It is my understanding the Japanese don't trust per say as westerners think of it. It was told to me it had to do with the feudal period of Japan. This notion came from a discussion of a picture of O'Sensei posing looking very alert, and on guard, where the caption said something like O'Sensei never relaxed. Meaning he was on-guard and never trusted anyone- not to attack him. I don't know how accurate all that is, and how much of it is fact. I am saying that I see in this way, being on guard is a good training device- if handled properly.

I think there has to be trust (as defined by your favorite English language dictionary) in the dojo, I think Aikido is set up for that. But we don't live in a perfect world. When I was young and in band our school took a trip to some beach in California. We were told by a local adult host that we could go Snipe hunting. We were told to clap, then wave arms up and down and the caw loudly, then repeat until we got the attention of the bird. We where up and down that beach clapping, waving arms and cawing hunched over looking ridiculous trying to get a glimpse of a rare bird that never had existed. Yes, we got punked by adults, people we trusted, look to, obeyed, etc. When we were told it was a prank and Snipes never existed and it was something done to people who don't live in California we all were sad. I remember I never trusted people the same way again.

Point being is I think there is different shades of trust. In the English language trust applies to many things, and it has many different shades and varieties. Trust is necessary for group dynamics to function optimally and successfully. Trust is needed for the most basic of human interactions to complex interpersonal relationships. These are just a few examples of the myriad dimensions of trust.

I think it is in the degree of trust, and the risk that goes with that. The longer you know someone the more you are apt to trust them if the relationship is positive. The less likely you will trust someone if the relationship is starts off or at some point becomes uncomfortable, awkward, and other like things. What are we willing to risk is what sets the level of trust.

If I trust someone in the dojo not to hurt me, then the degree of trust is high because of the risk of injury presented. It is parallel to that trust exercise where you have some one behind you, you trust to catch you and prevent you from falling and hitting the ground. It is an un-nerving exercise with a person you barely know - in some cases someone you know well. Because the risk of injury- a part of self-preservation, and the unwanted experience of pain and bodily damage- is a great risk that out weighs the idea of trust.

Going to the other side of the coin, the lower the risk the greater trust and its readily given. If I work with a partner with a basic technique (a modeled exercise of a technique) that has no throw and little or no risk of injury, an exchange that I can control then there will be a higher degree of trust because the risk of injury in so low between the both of us.

Risk dictates, how I see it, the degree of trust, when it is in the dojo. But not everyone sees it that way and doesn't consider risk, and gives openly to anyone trust for various reasons. Even though the result of the risk isn't a good out-come. For instance, take the trust exercise I described, say the person doesn't catch the falling person. The falling person gets up injured and says lets try that again. Once again the result is the same. I think it is a must to allow risk to dictate the degree of trust when it comes to the dojo.

I think some people based on their own interpretation of philosophy of Aikido provide a standard high degree of trust without taking in the risk, just as I described getting injured and repeating the exercise again. I don't think having "blind trust" in Aikido is a good thing, unless you have experience with your training partners. Foster a "blind trust" as a part of the dojo culture presented to new students because it is the way of Aikido is a good idea.

We all know of how Sensei's have taken advantage of students both veteran and new. So really who can you trust, and are you a person that can be trusted.

As a new student, I would feel more comfortable with a dojo who didn't give trust so readily. And didn't ask me to give trust so readily. Of course this goes with out saying time.

i trust myself...after i get to know you i decide if i trust you.....

on another note....once the bartender at a new job sent me into the kitchen for dehydrated water....the cook sent me back to tell him he didn't have any...it took me about three trips before i caught on.
Mary

Philip Burgess wrote: We were told by a local adult host that we could go Snipe hunting...... Snipes never existed and it was something done to people who don't live in California

So the really funny thing is....there are several species of bird called snipe and I see at least a couple every time I go birding at our local wetland not a 5 minute drive from my house.

Now it seems, I was double punked. So easy to do to trusting kids.

Drew Gardner wrote: I like the discussions we have on Aikiweb, and the last thing I want to do is alienate myself from you guys and gals.

Does this mean the check's in the mail ?

David

Thanks to all your offerings of generous human kindness, I plan on getting back to this thread tomorrow. I believe yin-yang really exists in people. I've been learning for a long time, but it's still not ingrained enough, that I can bring out the best or worst in the same person, and vice-versa.

Drew

Mary Eastland wrote: ...once the bartender at a new job sent me into the kitchen for dehydrated water....the cook sent me back to tell him he didn't have any...it took me about three trips before i caught on. Mary

When you are a new flight student it's either a reel of flight line, or a bottle of prop wash. ;-)

Linda

I agree that we do get more comfortable with strangers. I'd guess the same would be true of dance classes. "You two, hold hands!" It's not a normal way of interacting with people we don't know well, but it's fun, and mostly we're all here to support each other, and it works out well. At the same time, a single good injury can make one cautious about relying on another to watch out for one's own well being.

I wanted to introduce a thought here that I don't think I've seen brought up in this thread: malice vs. accident/ineptitude (or even vs. hazing/naughtiness, as in the case of the pranks). For me, the perceived motivation behind an incident makes an enormous difference.

If a friend loses their grip on the piece of furniture you are both moving, and as a result accidentally punches you in the nose, there's a much different feeling to that than if a stranger walks up and clobbers you out of the blue. Maybe the right words for kinds of trust don't quite exist. You would probably still "trust" your friend after such an incident, even if the injury from their punch were worse.

In the dojo, we have to be careful to alert people to our level of competence and fitness. Even so, friendly, well-intentioned partners may hurt us, simply because they are not skilled enough to control their technique, and not knowlegeable enough to understand their limitations. (I say "they" but I'm probably solidy in that group. I'm trying by best to not hurt anyone...) What we feel toward these people might not quite be covered by "mistrust." Maybe we need a new word. Something along the lines of cautious optimism?

I have dealt with the same issue with horses. My critters are all very friendly. Not a mean bone in any of them. But they might hurt you through some enthusiastically friendly gesture, or by accident in a moment of confusion. I trust them, but I do keep an eye out for my own safefy. It's an entirely different feeling being around a horse who you know will take a chunk out of you if you drop your guard. The former is (I hope) what we would mostly experience from fellow students, while the latter has no place in a dojo.

Anyway, Drew, I just figured I throw that into the pot for tomorrow.

Cheers,
Linda

David Henderson wrote: Hi Drew, martial arts training can also lead to an increased awareness of potential threat. Does that lead to increased distrust? cdh

This is an excellent point you bring up, David. I had never studied the martial arts. Then one night, a decade ago, after I had just broken up with the only girl with whom I've been in love, mainly because we had started some nasty fighting that hit me so deep inside I couldn't take it, my brother and I were walking Captain (you should be familiar with our late, gentle giant by now), and when I get this stream-of-consciousness, it can result in a run-on sentence, and my brother asked me if I had ever heard of Aikido. He's never done martial arts; he's more of a weight-trainer. I said, "[No, what's that]?" He said it was a martial art that his friend's dad has been doing for a long, long time, even with his own dojo in his backyard. So I asked him to tell me more about this Aikido. He said it's about using the attacker's own strength against him. I believe this now to be a cliched description of our art. At the time, that was really mysterious to me (and still is), and I thought that an extracurricular activity would help distract me from the painful ending of the intimate relationship. Then I said to him that I felt a martial art might make me suspicious of every person I saw, constantly and uncomfortably ready to use what I would be spending so much time learning. Basically, I was worried it might turn my neutral feelings toward strangers or loose acquaintances to the point of a mild, lingering paranoia.

After that winter break, I got back to FSU and read some articles/essays here on Aikiweb. This was the beginning of 1999. I printed them out and smiled from ear to ear as I read them in my apartment. With some nervous reserve, I stepped on the mat. My excellent group of sensei, combined with great people on the mat, made my transition, though still awkward, smoother than I thought it would be.

After some training, I noticed that my worry from guessing what others were thinking was usually unnecessary and inaccurate, so instead I remained alert toward their words and actions, the true revelations of thought, and blended with them. Evasion is always an option, sometimes the best one, but in the dojo there is little room for that. If someone's technique was too hard, I was ready for it with a quick reaction and tap/slap. I didn't know for a fact he would power-trip every time, but I do know that human beings are creatures of habit. Remembering what Lynn said, I can trust people to be who they are. Opposed to this is being an Aikidoka and therefore falsely assuming everyone loves you. So, whether Aikido acted as an impetus for my increased level of intuition, or if it could have happened with more intramural basketball to the same extent, I can't say. Maybe I approach confirmation bias when making a bold statement such as, "Aikido builds trust and intuition," or maybe there's some amount of truth to that. Do you all have any thoughts?

Drew

Drew Gardner wrote: This is a perfect example of intuition and level of trust. Since you are directly displaying anger toward me, for no apparent reason, I do not trust you much. "[Should you lose The Way, you will no doubt enter a 'dark path.' Give no reign to the spiritual horse.]"~O'Sensei

This kind of vomit-inducing condescension really surprised me so I looked around a bit.
From this thread of January 2007 ;
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11715
We'd all do well to heed Mr.Künzang's advice;

Chhi'mèd Künzang wrote: I think it would be a good idea for all participants in this thread to review the (recent AikiWeb) topic of Bipolar Disorder before getting too worked up about anything. It's always a good idea to avoid getting worked up if possible, and the aforementioned topic is a complex one. ...

Look, a smiley! :

Michael Douglas wrote: This kind of vomit-inducing condescension really surprised me so I looked around a bit. From this thread of January 2007 ; http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11715 We'd all do well to heed Mr.Künzang's advice; Look, a smiley! :

Hey! Condescension? I loved you in Wall Street! I think I'll call you Gecko from now on. Yes, I'll capitalize the "G" just for you. Is it fun to produce nothing and prey on those with a conscience?

By the way, 1 in 100 people have bipolar mood disorder, not excluding Abraham Lincoln, Ben Stiller, Carrie Fisher, Ernest Hemingway, probably O'Sensei, and oh so many more. Ironically, I have the same intelligence quotient as Lincoln - 150. Yeah, we're a great bunch who respond to ignorance such as the likes of yours with condescension to the point that you're a stupid animal while most people are human.

Puppy Love,
Drew

Wow. Just...wow.

I don't question your reported IQ of 150. If you say so, that's good enough. How in the world though, did they measure Lincoln's IQ since Binet didn't start his study on what became IQ testing until 1904?

Michael Hackett wrote: How in the world though, did they measure Lincoln's IQ since Binet didn't start his study on what became IQ testing until 1904?

By comparing hat size. Lincoln is far superior as this picture clearly shows:



http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Cox300.aspx

So superior in fact that he's got his henchmen reaching for their guns!
Or maybe someone's been spotted approaching with a styrofoam pool-noodle and a superiority complex...

My view of trust comes through the filter of having parents who were both filled to the brim with love for me, bent over backwards for me in so many ways I owe them everything (near enough), yet also battled with their own issues which at times created truly bad situations; of friends who helped me when it wasn't always in their best interest and then lying to me or otherwise betraying me at other times when it was. I trust that good people do bad things and that bad people do good things and that no matter how intuitive or knowledgeable I may be, I trust that I cannot trust I will always perceive accurately, and being that I have to take that into account in every situation I'm in, it makes for some distrustful thinking.
...Or, expect the unexpected...though you can rest assured the normally-expected will then take precedence, right?
I think Aikido can lead to a greater sense of trust and intuition because it is interaction-based. Through the daily movements of our training, we can learn to recognize things for what they are. It's a subtle art, and obviously just going through the motions is meaningless, but it can be improved by being open-minded...interestingly enough it seems in order to make accurate presumptions (my take on trust) I've had to learn to presume little or nothing.
...and those aren't henchmen reaching for guns, they're just some of the earliest cases of the Napoleon complex.

We continue through the Looking Glass.......

Michael Hackett wrote: We continue through the Looking Glass.......

Ah, Alice...

"Everyone in Wonderland is mad, otherwise they wouldn't be down here" -- The Cheshire Cat if memory serves...