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 > General

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!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-15-2011, 10:03 PM   #401
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Why do you keep addressing me?

If you want to get into an argument with me about textual analysis you are addressing an area of professional expertise that I have. I'm sorry you think I'm not making sense. But I am. I may be wrong in the end but I'm not unclear or unable to follow a written argument.

Various people have said they were describing what you do and why. Call it what you want. If what they had to say was of no value I'm not sure why they said it and why you havent asked them to stop. Of course, we get to the point were its impossible to discuss on a discussion list.

If they can't describe what you are doing accurately, and you won't describe what you are doing, then how can you make all the bold claims that you have made? I'm not asking you to respond. I just don't get it. I know you think these arguments have been settled in your favor but they haven't. People just don't engage with you or your supporters.

I don't want to engage with you about anything personal. Cant you just let that stuff go?

If you want to define what you are doing better or respond to the counter evidence then great. If not why bother to respond to a know nothing nobody like myself?

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Cower?
This is an implication on your part, presuming some negative posturing on my part.
Let me be clear. I stand in rooms and allow no one to call me a teacher. I deal with people straight in the eye and don't look down on anyone.
You're carrying around your own baggage. I don't need that tripe.

It was one of many mistakes on your part. How can someone who doesn't know me and never met me describe my art?
Ask people at the office if they think ANYONE speaking on their behalf is a figure of speech!
I think I'm done here.
See ya
Dan
 
Old 11-15-2011, 10:32 PM   #402
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Greg, what you quoted is very clear. It is part of what I used to make the list of things I'd try to learn about your approach and arguments. What was wrong with my list? Mr. Harden rejected it as completely wrong. Also, do you have permission to explain what the perspective is? Is this the same as what Mr. Harden would say?

At this point I would look at your evidence and respond to it. I've done that repeatedly. Then you could show how my arguments are wrong, present more evidence, or undermine my counter evidence. Or not. But that's how debate is supposed to go. I've seen no additional evidence. Mostly the effort to undermine my arguments took the form of personal attacks or saying that I had read, heard, or seen things incorrectly. I responded to those claims. I quoted various sources at length to show that I had not misread anything. There really was no response. At this point you could address why my counter was wrong or why I'm missing something so as to undermine my view. Or not. But that's how debates work.

I think we do have different understandings of what aiki is. I'm not sure where yours comes from. It doesn't seem to come from Takeda Sensei. It doesn't seem to jive with the bulk of what O Sensei said and what others were directly told by him.

It's very hard to understand. I see video of people doing the sort of grounding you describe (whatever the source). Is it not on display in the Daito-ryu anniversary footage? I've seen the same thing in modern aikido, so I don't see how it's supposedly missing. Assuming we are discussing the same ability, which I think we are, then the only disagreements are 1) whether it was missing in Aikido since O Sensei 2) whether this ability is the only true Aiki and 3) possibly the source of the ability and how to develop it. This ability as I see it is part of Aikido. Just part. Aiki and Aikido are multifaceted.

I carry a photo in my phone of O Sensei falling over from blending beyond his own balance in order to throw Uke. How can he be doing what is described if he is falling himself? Does this grounding Aiki not require that you be balanced? There's lots of this in the footage of him. I simply see with my own eyes O Sensei blending both in himself, meeting others half way, blending inside of other people, or not at times blending. I see him connecting or not connecting at times in the same varied way. I see a complex variety of ways of doing Aikido. They seem to primarily be related to leading, blending, joining, and unbalancing. The grounding immobilizing skill does not appear to be the majority of what he shows.

Quote:
Greg Steckel wrote: View Post
Ken,

The bottom line is that your definition of aiki is different than ours and when you read what we are saying, you view it as being said from the perspective of your definition - no one can communicate that way since other terms we use will not have the same relationship and meaning in our model that it would have in your model - so, no more need for further discussion - this is, of course, a logical observation and conclusion.

As far as insults are concerned, you came in here with the attitude, you pushed and we pushed back - if you are done with that, so are we; and I apologize for my part.

Below is from a previous post that is a good summary of where we think aiki is - you have absolutely every right to disagree with that and say what ever you want about it - however, until you can duplicate anything in there, we are not interested in hearing your opinions anymore - please keep in mind that those you have challenged here have already been through your understanding of what aiki is and have found it lacking for their purposes - however, if it fits your purposes, have fun.

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-15-2011 at 10:45 PM.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:19 PM   #403
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

It is possible to draw out of Uke this over commitment. That ability is part of Aiki. It is part of what Dobson Sensei described in the video transcription I provided. The idea is for Uke to lose his balance. Connection by itself is not a goal that helps you survive. Why is your goal to connect and throw? I'd prefer he not touch me if I could choose. I'd prefer he trip as he charged and fall on his face.

So let's talk about "real attacks." To engage in a real attack that does damage it must have power. That means momentum. If Uke tries to creep up then I can run away. If he tries to close the distance without speed then he will enter my kicking range. He has to come in with force and speed to close the distance to reach me. If he's wise he'll come a bit from the side as well. There is always momentum in real attacks. It's physics. it's body mechanics. If he is already near me and attacks, then there is less to blend with, but it's still enough if the attack has power. Imagine a sneaky fast punch to the face from someone right next to you. First thing you must do is move your face. That's essential. You don't even have time to move anything else. Even in this situation his strike will unbalance him somewhat. Not enough to make him fall down. Enough to get the boulder moving down hill. Then you don't let him regain his balance. You can lead, blend, connect, not connect but rather strike him, or internally unbalance him. That's hardest to accomplish to be certain. Once you don't get hit you have multiple choices but little time before the next attack comes.

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote: View Post
Actually, my goal is to always engage/connect. I understand in randori sometimes it is not possible to do more than establish a fleeting energy connection in order to keep the randori flow going. I would consider a complete evasion to be a weakness in my technique. This should not be construed as a statement of my abilities but of my goals, what I think aikido can and should be.

If uke is thrown off balance by the force of his own strike, then I think it was an overcommitted attack.

Again, we can agree to disagree and probably will. In my conception, connection and kuzushi are the primary issues - things like timing and position and blending are some of the tools to accomplish them - and internal training is something I am trying to learn in the body in order to have a more stable structure and to be more effective at connection and kuzushi - those are my goals right now and may not be a reflection of anybody else's teachings or goals.

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-15-2011 at 11:23 PM.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:27 PM   #404
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 959
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Have you tried the experiment I suggested up-thread? How did it go?

Katherine
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:56 PM   #405
DodgingRain
 
DodgingRain's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 31
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

ueshiba apparently didnt bother to codify his system himself, and tried to relate his ideas of aiki budo through spiritual/religious talk that many did not understand. so aiki is an ambiguous all encompassing term that can be used to describe a myriad of different yet interrelated aspects of budo, that is open to interpretation because it was never clearly defined?
surprisingly, different groups of people are choosing to focus on and explore different certain aspects of what the term aiki means to them? depending on what their personal goals are for their aikido?
some are choosing to explore the spiritual/religious side of aiki, and it makes them happy.
some are choosing to explore the mental/intention/timing/blending aspect of aiki, and it makes them happy.
some are choosing to explore the more physical body training of aiki, and it makes them happy.

we are all so different.

who would ueshiba yell at for doing his aikido?

Last edited by DodgingRain : 11-16-2011 at 12:10 AM.
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:13 AM   #406
DodgingRain
 
DodgingRain's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 31
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

edit:
who would Ueshiba yell at for NOT doing his aikido?
 
Old 11-16-2011, 05:24 AM   #407
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Brett Zimmerman wrote: View Post
edit:
who would Ueshiba yell at for NOT doing his aikido?
I think this question, for the common good, should remain unanswered.


 
Old 11-16-2011, 08:04 AM   #408
Gary David
 
Gary David's Avatar
Location: Long Beach, CA
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 329
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
It's very hard to understand. I see video of people doing the sort of grounding you describe (whatever the source). Is it not on display in the Daito-ryu anniversary footage? I've seen the same thing in modern aikido, so I don't see how it's supposedly missing.
Mr. McGrew
Maybe part of the difficulty you are having here lies with what you can't see. The point of what is being provided by Dan Harden isn't "grounding" which is one of the by products, but in my view rather the tools for a rewiring of the body to provide whole body movement powered from a activated center through a fully connected body crossing and linking as a single unit. If you want your house to have better plumbing you re-plumb, better electrical you rewire.....the house doesn't look any different from the outside, but it functions more efficiently. To get a good aiki body you need to re-program your body using practices that Dan or others like him can provide. It is not likely that you will have a clear understanding of the possibilities unless you acturally take the time to seek this this out. Standard Aikido is not providing these tools and that is the rub here....you don't see and we do.

Have a great day....
Gary
 
Old 11-16-2011, 09:11 AM   #409
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,549
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Ken:

To stand behind Gary here and say "yeah", you're arguing that what you *think* people are doing is just this or that. I wouldn't argue that what you *think* they're doing isn't all that much different that what most try to do. Not at all. You're absolutely right. The problem is the disconnect between what *you think* people are doing and what they are in fact doing. And *EVERYONE* who has posted, most highly experienced/ranked aikidoka with decades of experience who have actually tried this stuff, are telling you that you're not correctly understanding or describing the phenomena. There have been attempts to explain but it is difficult at best to do in this medium. And yes, that is a serious problem that many are trying to address through attempting to come up with better models, better explanations, etc. Here and in other threads there have been quite a few very good descriptions.

So it's you saying "make me understand" to a whole lot of people who are saying "you don't understand". And since it appears most of us are incapable of making you understand (which requires both very good explanations, models, etc. and an audience willing to consider that their hard won knowledge may in fact not be totally correct and comprehensive) there is little point to continue in flogging with this dead horse.

So feel free to decide that you were right because you weren't moved by the explanation of others. But do consider that there are a large number of highly experienced people here posting on this, many with more experience than either of us, many with more direct experience with higher ranking folk closer to the "source" than either of us saying that it appears the problem is in your understanding of what *they're* doing.

Me, I have a solid science background. Rigorous, boring and very uptight. I would discuss these things on-line from time to time with people. I would often say "well, yeah, but isn't that what we already do?" quite a few times. Then I got more and more hands on with a variety of people. And I still say "Yeah, that's what we already do" sometimes, but it is rare and I also recognize that there is a substantive different in terms of degree when I say that. "Yeah, that's kind of what we already do but here's another view that may take it a whole lot further, expands on it, makes it more obvious, and may make things click a heck of a lot faster." is more what you'd hear me say today. And I came from a group that greatly emphasized the internal aspects of Aikido right from the get-go. So I see it as a fantastic clarification, new tools, new awareness, new focus. And on all those things Gary wrote about.

 
Old 11-16-2011, 09:13 AM   #410
Mary Eastland
 
Mary Eastland's Avatar
Dojo: Berkshire Hills Aikido
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Ken...this happens to anyone who thinks in a different way. It is not personal. I guess if people throw enough poo at anyone they quiet down. It seems to work on here. People just give up and move on.

 
Old 11-16-2011, 09:25 AM   #411
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Hi Gary,

I am in no way slow. I am not having trouble understanding what is being said. I understand that what is internal can be invisible. People know I'll spent some time training with and discussing these things with Ikeda Sensei.

You are now describing the aiki body conditioning. When I made my summation list Mr. Harden rejected it entirely. Part of what was in it is what you are saying and what Chris said. You have both said irt is not spiritually based. Therefore it is not Ki. Moreover, Chris doubts it was even spiritually based for O Sensei. Just body. Even so, how you use this body gives hints of what it is or isn't. It may not be what you think it is... Even if you can do it.

If water comes from your ceiling you know you have a leaking pipe, though you can't see it. If you watch the official Daito-ryu video when they stop the energy of the attacker after tenant and are facing the same direction as Uke they bend their knees and sink their weight into Uke's tail bone. Ikeda Sensei teaches this also. From this example you can see that it is not just in nages body. It is blending dependent. Nage is doing something not just being himself or herself. And even then this immobilization won't last forever as some have implied. You must throw before they recover. Or keep adjusting to their efforts to recover, another form of blending, to prevent them from doing so.

The drawing I described from harmony of nature is on page 82. At the bottom of the drawing is written "the harmony of opposites support the cycle of life". Harden said this is not the same thing that he claims to have found in the new translations of O Sensei. It may not be the same take on it as his, but Saotome Sensei was clearly describing his understanding of the same energy process.

You are saying that Aikido doesn't provide these tools. I am saying that it does. Maybe harden does also. I am also saying that these tools are not what you claim they are.

What you call automatic body responses that immobilize an attacker (by whatever mechanism you do not explain, how this mechanism could function) I call very subtle blending, grounding, misdirection, and manipulation of Uke's response systems so he's unbalanced, even without realizing it. Very hard to do in a real self defense situation. Very high level. Ikeda teaches this. You may say its not the same. I think it is the same thing that he teaches. I've asked him many questions about how it works.

Quote:
Gary Welborn wrote: View Post
Mr. McGrew
Maybe part of the difficulty you are having here lies with what you can't see. The point of what is being provided by Dan Harden isn't "grounding" which is one of the by products, but in my view rather the tools for a rewiring of the body to provide whole body movement powered from a activated center through a fully connected body crossing and linking as a single unit. If you want your house to have better plumbing you re-plumb, better electrical you rewire.....the house doesn't look any different from the outside, but it functions more efficiently. To get a good aiki body you need to re-program your body using practices that Dan or others like him can provide. It is not likely that you will have a clear understanding of the possibilities unless you acturally take the time to seek this this out. Standard Aikido is not providing these tools and that is the rub here....you don't see and we do.

Have a great day....
Gary
 
Old 11-16-2011, 09:49 AM   #412
MM
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,996
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Mary Eastland wrote: View Post
Ken...this happens to anyone who thinks in a different way. It is not personal. I guess if people throw enough poo at anyone they quiet down. It seems to work on here. People just give up and move on.
Am I reading this correctly? You think that Ellis Amdur, Keith Larman, Chris Li, George Ledyard, and Fred Little are throwing poo? I reread your post and thought I had to be taking it the wrong way. Those people have some very defining experiences in aikido. Of course, that doesn't even begin to add Janet Rosen, Chris Moses, Katherine Derbyshire, Hugh Beyer, Stephen Trinkle, Greg Steckel, Gary Welborn, Marc Abrams, Hunter Lonsberry, Phi Truong, Lee Salzman, Matthew Gano, Jason Casteel, me and Dan Harden. I thought to myself that I couldn't possibly have read your post right in that you seem to be saying that all the people I just listed above are throwing poo and that the one, single person arguing against is right. Is that what you're saying?

Confused,
Mark
 
Old 11-16-2011, 11:08 AM   #413
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Talking Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
Am I reading this correctly? You think that Ellis Amdur, Keith Larman, Chris Li, George Ledyard, and Fred Little are throwing poo? I reread your post and thought I had to be taking it the wrong way. Those people have some very defining experiences in aikido. Of course, that doesn't even begin to add Janet Rosen, Chris Moses, Katherine Derbyshire, Hugh Beyer, Stephen Trinkle, Greg Steckel, Gary Welborn, Marc Abrams, Hunter Lonsberry, Phi Truong, Lee Salzman, Matthew Gano, Jason Casteel, me and Dan Harden. I thought to myself that I couldn't possibly have read your post right in that you seem to be saying that all the people I just listed above are throwing poo and that the one, single person arguing against is right. Is that what you're saying?

Confused,
Mark
It's OK Mark, I'm TOTALLY a poo slinger! Is OKUDEN TNBBC super-secret technique!

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:02 PM   #414
Mark Gibbons
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 176
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
..... You have both said irt is not spiritually based. Therefore it is not Ki. .....
Therefore? Presumably you believe some authority that says ki is spiritual. I think many folks would disagree. I don't see this as a valid conclusion and the rest of your following comments fall apart.

Regards,
Mark
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:17 PM   #415
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Mark Gibbons wrote: View Post
Therefore? Presumably you believe some authority that says ki is spiritual. I think many folks would disagree. I don't see this as a valid conclusion and the rest of your following comments fall apart.

Regards,
Mark
I personally don't believe that there is a spiritual Ki. But to deny that O Sensei believed there was a spiritual Ki is to disrespect him. The post by Greg that I was responding to said that Aiki is all about the body, all about retuning the body, not even about something you do with the body. That's the point I was addressing, as you full well know. Please don't try to fight over small points. The point that Greg was making is that it is all in the body, and automatic. I challenged that based on visual evidence.

I spoke to two scientists last night about these issues. The idea that Aiki training is changing the body is testable and almost certainly false. Changing the neural pathways maybe. We learn to use the body differently. We don't change the function of the body parts. Even though it may feel like you do at higher levels.
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:27 PM   #416
Jeremy Hulley
Dojo: Seattle School of Aikido Shinto Ryu/Seattle Icho Ryu
Location: Seattle
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 135
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
The idea that Aiki training is changing the body is testable and almost certainly false. Changing the neural pathways maybe. We learn to use the body differently. We don't change the function of the body parts. Even though it may feel like you do at higher levels.
Does'nt all training change the body? I'm not quite sure what point you are making.

Jeremy Hulley
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
Tuesday Night Bad Budo Club
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:28 PM   #417
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Keith, I have no problem with the suggestion that Hansen helps you to understand a certain skill better or even brings something new into your Aikido. As you full well know he and those around him make all kinds of claims about what they are doing, how what they are doing is completely missing in Aikido (though they conveniently walk that tone back at times), and about why what they are doing allegedly works... whatever it is they are doing. Why not describe it in detail?

Another claim that has been made is that they must be right because O Sensei told someone at some point that the secret to Aikido is yin and yang (which I could accept with a different definition of Yin and Yang). For the record, O Sensei told Saotome Sensei that the secret to Aikido is Ikyo (p. 29-31, Principles of Aikido). There is an element of joining in the Ikkyo that Saotome Sensei describes, but this does not support the definition of Aiki that Hansen and others present. As Saotome Sensei writes:

"The most important element of ikkyo is the spirit. No weapon or technical expertise will make ikkyo work if your confidence and courage do not inform them. You must enter and take over your enemy's spirit with the fearlessness embodied by the principle of irimi. Yet your fearlessness must be tempered by the principle of ai nuke. You must pass beyond the desire to defeat your opponent and reach toward the goal of ending the conflict before it starts."

It is my argument that domination, the will to revenge that Saotome Sensei says undermines the proper attitude of ikkyo, can be soft or hard. Therefore I strive for non-resistance. I let them undue themselves.

For the record, I don't think there is A secret to Aikido. I think that misses the point. I also know that O Sensei encouraged different students of his to explore different sides of Aikido and Aiki. He told them what they needed to hear, not some absolute one secret to Aiki or Aikido. Aiki is many things. Saotome Sensei describes it as being like light split by a prism. All the colors are in light. But light is one thing.

Quote:
Keith Larman wrote: View Post
Ken:

To stand behind Gary here and say "yeah", you're arguing that what you *think* people are doing is just this or that. I wouldn't argue that what you *think* they're doing isn't all that much different that what most try to do. Not at all. You're absolutely right. The problem is the disconnect between what *you think* people are doing and what they are in fact doing. And *EVERYONE* who has posted, most highly experienced/ranked aikidoka with decades of experience who have actually tried this stuff, are telling you that you're not correctly understanding or describing the phenomena. There have been attempts to explain but it is difficult at best to do in this medium. And yes, that is a serious problem that many are trying to address through attempting to come up with better models, better explanations, etc. Here and in other threads there have been quite a few very good descriptions.

So it's you saying "make me understand" to a whole lot of people who are saying "you don't understand". And since it appears most of us are incapable of making you understand (which requires both very good explanations, models, etc. and an audience willing to consider that their hard won knowledge may in fact not be totally correct and comprehensive) there is little point to continue in flogging with this dead horse.

So feel free to decide that you were right because you weren't moved by the explanation of others. But do consider that there are a large number of highly experienced people here posting on this, many with more experience than either of us, many with more direct experience with higher ranking folk closer to the "source" than either of us saying that it appears the problem is in your understanding of what *they're* doing.

Me, I have a solid science background. Rigorous, boring and very uptight. I would discuss these things on-line from time to time with people. I would often say "well, yeah, but isn't that what we already do?" quite a few times. Then I got more and more hands on with a variety of people. And I still say "Yeah, that's what we already do" sometimes, but it is rare and I also recognize that there is a substantive different in terms of degree when I say that. "Yeah, that's kind of what we already do but here's another view that may take it a whole lot further, expands on it, makes it more obvious, and may make things click a heck of a lot faster." is more what you'd hear me say today. And I came from a group that greatly emphasized the internal aspects of Aikido right from the get-go. So I see it as a fantastic clarification, new tools, new awareness, new focus. And on all those things Gary wrote about.
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:32 PM   #418
vjw
Dojo: Rochester Phoenix
Location: Rochester, NY
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 83
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post

The idea that Aiki training is changing the body is testable and almost certainly false. .
So you are saying it is maybe true. What tests did your scientists suggest?
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:32 PM   #419
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 959
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
That's the point I was addressing, as you full well know. Please don't try to fight over small points.
It seems to me that almost the entire thread has been a fight over small points. Certainly the many sub-threads about definitions and what particular individuals actually said or meant have that flavor.

Quote:
I spoke to two scientists last night about these issues. The idea that Aiki training is changing the body is testable and almost certainly false. Changing the neural pathways maybe. We learn to use the body differently. We don't change the function of the body parts. Even though it may feel like you do at higher levels.
Neural pathways are part of the body, are they not?

Changing the body through exercise is not a particularly radical notion. People develop increased speed, strength, and flexibility ALL THE TIME, through a wide variety of disciplines. Every sport on the planet depends on a particular set of teachable physical skills. Whether that is what IS proponents "really" mean is, again, a debate over small points.

Katherine
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:37 PM   #420
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Jeremy Hulley wrote: View Post
Does'nt all training change the body? I'm not quite sure what point you are making.
Jeremy, I am responding to Gary, Greg, and Harden and what they describe as body conditioning. Don't draw me into this. You'll need to ask them to clarify, not I. They are clearly describing something biological.

So no, training doesn't change the body in the way they seem to be suggesting. Different types of physical activity shape existing tissues Etc. in particular ways within the limits of their genetic potential. But they don't make them into something new. They argue for an automatic process by which the body does the work for you and it takes no effort.

I have never said that Harden can't do whatever it is he does. I am saying that I'm skeptical that it works for the reasons that he thinks it does. I am certain that O Sensei would not have agreed with him, though Harden may be right, he can't find the support in O Sensei that he thinks he finds for the reasons I have gone over repeatedly. I just don't see the evidence to support the claims that he makes outweighing the mountain of counter evidence. Also, my own eyes. Internal unbalancing can be amazing. But it is not magic. I believe they mistake subtle blending Etc. for what they describe as body conditioning. Even if they can do it well. It's not really automatic in the way they mean. The body may do things for you out of habit. But that's not the same conception of automatic that they seem to describe.

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-16-2011 at 12:41 PM.
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:44 PM   #421
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 959
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
So no, training doesn't change the body in the way they seem to be suggesting. Different types of physical activity shape existing tissues Etc. in particular ways within the limits of their genetic potential. But they don't make them into something new.
Here we go again... I don't recall any claim that IS training "makes the body into something new."

It is very difficult for someone to defend a position that they don't actually hold.

As someone who claims professional expertise in textual analysis, I'm sure you are very familiar with the various types of logical fallacies. I provide the following link for other readers who may need to refresh their memories: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Katherine
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:47 PM   #422
Jeremy Hulley
Dojo: Seattle School of Aikido Shinto Ryu/Seattle Icho Ryu
Location: Seattle
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 135
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

I have a good sense of what they mean. I've been on the mat with Dan, Ark, Keith, Gary and lots of other people.

Can you do a front roll, or kotegaeshi hard fall? I would imagine that after time in those things become pretty automatic.

After enough time building in different ways to move, to respond to pressure, to walk and remain grounded...six direction training becomes automatic as well.

Jeremy Hulley
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
Tuesday Night Bad Budo Club
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:48 PM   #423
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
It seems to me that almost the entire thread has been a fight over small points. Certainly the many sub-threads about definitions and what particular individuals actually said or meant have that flavor.

Neural pathways are part of the body, are they not?

Changing the body through exercise is not a particularly radical notion. People develop increased speed, strength, and flexibility ALL THE TIME, through a wide variety of disciplines. Every sport on the planet depends on a particular set of teachable physical skills. Whether that is what IS proponents "really" mean is, again, a debate over small points.

Katherine
I really don't want to engage with you. This again does not feel like an honest question but rather an attempt to try to make me look wrong.

This has not been a fight over small points. It is a fight over big claims, like no Aikido direct student of O Sensei has Aiki, which became ok they don't have Aiki quite as good as Harden, which became Harden is just better at explaining it. My memory is longer than that. I know you are speaking to people who just joined the thread and won't read back. People have repeatedly said that he things I point to as the heart of Aikido are not the substance of Aikido's Aiki. This is not a small disagreement.

Harden intentionally makes claims that cut at the heart of mainstream, what you all call "modern" Aikido. He even has posted a multi-phase process for changing Aikido into what he thinks was superior about Daito-ryu. It is no small thing.
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:51 PM   #424
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Jeremy Hulley wrote: View Post
I have a good sense of what they mean. I've been on the mat with Dan, Ark, Keith, Gary and lots of other people.

Can you do a front roll, or kotegaeshi hard fall? I would imagine that after time in those things become pretty automatic.

After enough time building in different ways to move, to respond to pressure, to walk and remain grounded...six direction training becomes automatic as well.
You and Katherine are at it again. Lets' let Gary and Greg respond, as they are responding with more substance and honesty at this time than you and Katherine seem to be. As an inferior budo man who has nothing of value to contribute you people seem rather bothered by my analysis and the fact that I don't run away. I should be like a fly to you, better to ignore. Just don't address me.

Don't ask me to try to infer what you mean by body conditioning, six direction training, Etc. and then fault me for not inferring right. By the way a careful reading of my posts shows that I use qualifying language when I am inferring and not certain; that is words like "seems." I'm not going to fall into that trap again. Why don't you provide your explanations and definitions and evidence to which the rest of us can respond, which is what I asked for days ago, but was told why should we bother. Harden recently asked who I was that he should explain what he is doing to me on a forum.

Here's a suggestion. If you don't want to back up bold claims that cut to the heart of Aikido on an Aikido related forum, then don't make them on the forum, repeatedly.

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-16-2011 at 12:56 PM.
 
Old 11-16-2011, 12:57 PM   #425
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Ken,

As an academic, what do you think about Yuasa Yasuo's work?

 

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 18 Peter Goldsbury Columns 187 09-08-2011 02:41 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 17 Peter Goldsbury Columns 41 06-03-2010 09:46 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 14 Peter Goldsbury Columns 38 07-31-2009 11:19 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 10 Peter Goldsbury Columns 200 02-04-2009 06:45 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:19 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