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!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-27-2013, 01:50 PM   #26
Michael Douglas
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 404
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

YES! Good for you Philip, I totally agree.
Quote:
Philip Zeplin-Frederiksen wrote: View Post
People can't just make up new definitions for words, to make them mean what they want them to mean. And even if you COULD argue that "self-defense" might include things like verbal de-escalation, it is clearly not what was originally intended to be discussed in those, ehm, discussions.
And congratulations on a splendid surname.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 02:26 PM   #27
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,113
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Sure, I can see how it might be annoying to want to talk about martial effectiveness and have someone talk about what might seem ancillary (in my opinion, FWIW, de-escalation/etc. is most definitely an aspect of comprehensive self defense). On the other hand, it can be annoying when people are talking about the peaceful mind/etc. aspect only to have someone imply it's unrealistic and will fall apart at first sign of aggression. Sure, let's stay on topic.
Good luck with that.

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 05:15 PM   #28
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

nonviolent de-escalation can be a part of a comprehensive self defense program....in theory. How exactly do you train and measure it though?

How much control do you really have over another's actions and decisions?

adopting a non-violent posture, controlling space, not blocking your opponents exit, using non-violent hand gestures, language skills are fine.

They are not a substitute though for dealing with the physical aspects of aggression or violence.

I have found that working on the physical aspects and dimensions of things tend to inform the non-physical aspects and provide you with the space/time you need to make other choices that may lead to a non-violent de-escalation.

I think we have to be careful to not allow our desires or philosophies influence how we should train.

I don't believe their are ethical and non-ethical ways to approach martial training. It is simply "marital training". If we train properly, hopefully it will provide us a larger spectrum of choices we can make in a violent encounter. IMO, we shouldn't exclude certain aspects of training or adopt skewed methodologies because they seemingly present a "more ethical" solution or fit a particular "philosophical alignment". In other words we should train in what might be referred to as a "amoral" way.

Once we understand the use and applications of what we have learned, we can then apply whatever moral, ethical, or philosophical overlay on what we have learned to adopt, synthesize, or integrate these things into our decision cycles.

I think a program of study that adopts a pre-determined strategy such as non-violent de-escalation is doomed for failure when it meets another person who does not share the same belief system. This is usually the case in most situations that involve violence anyway!

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 07:52 AM   #29
lbb
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,817
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
nonviolent de-escalation can be a part of a comprehensive self defense program....in theory. How exactly do you train and measure it though?
With the caveat that I haven't done any such training myself, I'm reminded of my wilderness EMT training. Rather than simply showing us how to splint a fractured femur and have us practice, our instructors created deliberately stressful situations to make us deal with all the other things that could happen: panicking patients, interfering bystanders, rain, snow, hail. You're not fixing a broken car, you're dealing with other human beings and their reaction to the situation, and your ability to manage the human part of it will greatly influence the outcome of the "broken car" part of it. It was very hard training, but very effective, as I found when I had to use my training for real. How you measure it? I have no idea.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 08:05 AM   #30
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,811
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
I think a program of study that adopts a pre-determined strategy such as non-violent de-escalation is doomed for failure when it meets another person who does not share the same belief system. This is usually the case in most situations that involve violence anyway!
self-defense is a much large arena of training than most folks realized. most folks, that i know and some that i don't, tends to think self-defense involved some sort of martial arts training and/or firearm training. so many martial arts schools, that i saw, advertised self-defense training. not one that i saw mentioned anything about the psychological portion of self-defense. to deal with the shock of violent being cary out, to deal with pain and wounds, to deal with all the sight, sound and smell of violent, to deal with the aftermath, to deal with the much after aftermath. just because you are physically prepared, don't mean that you are mentally. i would say that before folks start talking about self-defense, they should spend sometimes at the hospital emergency. there is nothing like the sight, sound and smell of blood and violent to let you know how ready you are.

one of the question that my old karate teacher asked me when i asked him about using what we learned for self-defense: "how far are you willing to go?"
I am still searching for answer. someday i thought i had the answer, other day, not so much.

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 08:19 AM   #31
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,919
Spain
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Phi Truong wrote: View Post
i would say that before folks start talking about self-defense, they should spend sometimes at the hospital emergency. there is nothing like the sight, sound and smell of blood and violent to let you know how ready you are.
And to let them know how they are going to end if their non violent de-escalation skills fail and they lack physical skills AKA Plan-B.

Quote:
one of the question that my old karate teacher asked me when i asked him about using what we learned for self-defense: "how far are you willing to go?"
I am still searching for answer. someday i thought i had the answer, other day, not so much.
You'll know when you be there. IHTBF.

Last edited by Demetrio Cereijo : 10-28-2013 at 08:26 AM.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 09:18 AM   #32
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
You can't talk your way out of every single situation. I'm sure that training in verbal de-escalation would be (90% of the time) an utter waste of time in rape prevention, as an example.
My pet peeve. Don't claim things for which you have no proof.

"I have been training for five minutes! Everyone shut up and listen to me!" isn't going to sway anyone. A cursory look around would confirm decades of MA experience in the posters on this forum. Yes, there are plenty of discussions on semantics, and of course some antics. If you don't like them, either the threads or responses therein, don't read them. To you, they are not valuable. To someone else, they are invaluable.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 09:52 AM   #33
jonreading
 
jonreading's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido South (formerly Emory Aikikai)
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 894
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
Jon Reading brings up very good points as always and I, of course, agree with them concerning the perspective of assault. For me, it is primarily about the physical action that is necessary to be called a martial art.. Yes, psychological factors are involved and yes there is a psychological aspect to training and conflict...no doubt. But, if you strip away things down to the base elements, what controls the psychology are two things...the willingness and the ability to take physical action as necessary.

The psychological aspects or qualities are largely secondary or a by product of physicality. So, we must be willing and able to do something physical in whatever situation.

Going to the issue of the dynamic of a fight. I tend to focus on the model of OODA, observe orient, decide, and act. It is essentially a decision loop and if we understand it provides a frame work in which we can judge or assess what we do physically in a situation.

in most training is we perceive the conditions or the situation we are in when we train.. We have this idea, for example, that we are reaching for our car keys in a parked garage and we are grabbed from behind. Of we are confronted by a bully in a bar that won't allow us to back down from a fight.

Two good scenarios, but how well do we actually set the conditions up when we train? Do we assume a high degree of initial failure in our physicality? That is, does that person physically have the upper hand?

I think this is were we fail many times in our training as we assume we have more control than we do. i.e we are way, way behind in the decision loop, and we really do not have good initial actions or solutions to solve the problem physically. Barring that, we really cannot deal with the situation pschyologically nor can we really do much to "de-escalate" as we like to discuss in aikido so much.

so, we need to come up with ways to gain back that control physically. I think this is where our practices should spend 80 percent of our time. If we are doing this, then I think this is true self defense. We have lost control and we simply are working back to "stasis". This is my definition of Self Defense.

As Jon points out, once we go beyond that, well then we are entering into a phase of illegal assault. Yes, it is still assault while you are in a phase of gaining back control...the difference is I think you can call it justifiable assault.

We can even use pre-emptive assault as long as we can demonstrate that we felt that there was no other way to resolve the situation because of impending danger. That is, you "jump" the OODA loop or decision cycle and ACT before your opponent puts you behind.

However, I think there is much in the process that can be done pre-emptively that does not involve assault. for example, in the going to your car in the garage scenario.....don't go alone. Park in well lit area, if you see something strange, disrupt the cycle by going back inside the building.

Yes, these are all part of the cycle and continuum....but we don't practice these things in a dojo because common sense tells us they are not a part of the physical realm of martial practice.

So, it kind of bothers me when someone comes up with the solution set "I never got in a fight...as the ultimate self defense." and essentially uses that as an excuse to practice substandard things in a dojo where it should be primarily about the physical aspects of a fight.

If this is an area of concern for us, we should be practicing failure over and over. Understanding our physical limitations (and emotional), through being in positions that are very very bad. your own the ground, he is on your back, being choked, pinned against a wall...all those things and figure out ways to get out of them, turn the tables, and take back control.

Of course, we can also practice the esoteric stuff too that I think is interesting and fun, challenging, stimulating and intellectual as a form of budo. There is also much to be gained there as well, however, primarily we should always remember that first and foremost it is about the physical, violent nature of imposing wills.
Man, this is so true. When asked, a large part of my conversation is devoted to increasing the decision loop cycles. I start with something like, "someone getting hands on you usually means you missed several opportunities to avoid letting someone put hands on." Then we turn to the decision loop (whatever the name the self-defense presentation puts on it). A lot of my attention is actually focused on the simple decisions that exponentially reduce the likelihood of danger. Parking in a well-light area is a great example of a decision that significantly reduces danger without any requiring extensive training.

I think we sometimes forget that Teddy's quote about carrying a big stick was a reference to our ability to enforce our decisions. I usually dismiss as illegitimate self-defense any solution that either excludes physical contact scenarios or over-focuses on physical contact scenarios, unless those programs explicitly say why they exclude that material.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 10:48 AM   #34
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,113
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Kevin wrote:
I think a program of study that adopts a pre-determined strategy such as non-violent de-escalation is doomed for failure when it meets another person who does not share the same belief system. This is usually the case in most situations that involve violence anyway!
My only point about comprehensive self defense is that I assume it should begin at prevention, which includes attempts to de-escalate where time allows. This says nothing to the primary(?) point of the thread though.
To my mind this thread was started more to be about the frustrations that can come from folks who would "transcend" (e.g. side-step) the topic of physical effectiveness with conversations about (pre-emptive) non-violent things like keeping calm, partly under the notion that you can get that kind of thing anywhere, and seemed to be suggesting in places that it probably doesn't have a place in self defense conversations.
I understand the frustration that comes from wanting to talk about one thing and having a bunch of non-answers (or what might even just seem like non-answers until later). I view it as part of the process though. The points about how to deal with stress/annoyances/whatever can be valuable ones. Stresses (mild annoyances or otherwise) and unfamiliar situations are crucial to creative growth, particularly in anything which can be described as generally chaotic...and discussions over the internet are certainly that. We can disengage and hope we don't have to deal with it or we can engage it and hope to create the change we want to see. The particulars of the situation will determine which choice is the more practical for us.
I agree with the idea that some folks will not allow themselves to de-escalate...some have made pre-determined assumptions and choices that are incredibly difficult (if not actually impossible) to change.

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 11:00 AM   #35
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,919
Spain
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Jon Reading wrote: View Post
A lot of my attention is actually focused on the simple decisions that exponentially reduce the likelihood of danger. Parking in a well-light area is a great example of a decision that significantly reduces danger without any requiring extensive training.
+1

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 11:08 AM   #36
James Sawers
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
James Sawers's Avatar
Dojo: Oak Park Aikikai, IL
Location: Chicago, IL
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 151
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

I remember a story about a father admonishing a person for teaching his son about knives and self-defense against knives, by saying that he didn't believe in knives. The teacher's response was "What happens when the boy meets another person who does not share that belief". The whole story was much better than this little quote might indicate, but I think the point is clear.........Pacifism has its place, but only if everyone agrees. It only takes one violent person to violate this paradigm, then what??
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 11:12 AM   #37
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,919
Spain
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
James Sawers wrote: View Post
Pacifism has its place, but only if everyone agrees. It only takes one violent person to violate this paradigm, then what??
The pacifist dies.

Anyway, even Gandhi was able to tell the difference between the political tool (pacifism/non violence) and self defense.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 11:38 AM   #38
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,951
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
The pacifist dies.

Anyway, even Gandhi was able to tell the difference between the political tool (pacifism/non violence) and self defense.
Yep.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 04:19 PM   #39
TokyoZeplin
Dojo: Seishinkan Dojo
Location: Copenhagen
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 111
Denmark
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Matthew Gano wrote: View Post
To my mind this thread was started more to be about the frustrations that can come from folks who would "transcend" (e.g. side-step) the topic of physical effectiveness with conversations about (pre-emptive) non-violent things like keeping calm, partly under the notion that you can get that kind of thing anywhere
That... pretty much sums up what I needed a dozen paragraphs to say!

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 04:53 PM   #40
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Mary Malmros wrote: View Post
With the caveat that I haven't done any such training myself, I'm reminded of my wilderness EMT training. Rather than simply showing us how to splint a fractured femur and have us practice, our instructors created deliberately stressful situations to make us deal with all the other things that could happen: panicking patients, interfering bystanders, rain, snow, hail. You're not fixing a broken car, you're dealing with other human beings and their reaction to the situation, and your ability to manage the human part of it will greatly influence the outcome of the "broken car" part of it. It was very hard training, but very effective, as I found when I had to use my training for real. How you measure it? I have no idea.
Mary, funny you mention WEMT. I am currently doing WEMT training right now!

Thanks for the example. Scenario based training is a very good thing to do, and done right I think you can add stress by hitting all modalities as you mention. Martial Training can be done in the same way. However, I think scenario training only really works well if you have narrowed your parameters and conditions to more specific things.

For example, WEMT is a subset of specificity of EMT. The protocols and scenarios are driven by the Wilderness environment. We can't cover every single conceivable event, but there are patterns and "high percentage" things that can be addressed.

And in the process, we don't simply ignore certain aspects of EMT training simply because we deem them less important or we have a bend in a certain direction...or we really don't like head injuries.

How do you measure it? I think once you have defined your desired endstates, protocols, flows or branches and sequels in the decision cycles that you what your students to complete it becomes rather easy to measure how they perform to those standards given the stressful conditions or "loads" you place them under.

But it all started with a class on how to treat fractures. Then you conducted performance measures in a classroom environment, and finally you performed them under stress in a scenario. You didn't necessarily get to choose what aspects of that you wanted to deal with.

And yes, as you point out, you have to deal with bystanders, upset family members, violent patience...and those critical human interaction skills are necessary to do the physical thing you are trained to do...which is treat your patient and get him to the next level of care. However, all those things are implicit task and were meaningless if you did not have the tacit skills of patient care to actually treat your patient.

I think martial arts is the same way, albeit the analogy maybe a little off...sure de-escalation is a part of it, but I believe that it needs to be backed up with the capacity to physically mitigate it. Otherwise, you really are not in charge of the outcome, just "getting lucky" really if your opponent chooses to not escalate. It is always his choice. Yes, you may influence it by not pissing him off, or maybe you are able to reason with him. But in my mind, capacity to do something about it is paramount. Anything other than that...how much control do you really have over what he does or doesn't do? who knows for sure!

Thanks for the example...It is a good one!

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 04:56 PM   #41
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Phi Truong wrote: View Post
self-defense is a much large arena of training than most folks realized. most folks, that i know and some that i don't, tends to think self-defense involved some sort of martial arts training and/or firearm training. so many martial arts schools, that i saw, advertised self-defense training. not one that i saw mentioned anything about the psychological portion of self-defense. to deal with the shock of violent being cary out, to deal with pain and wounds, to deal with all the sight, sound and smell of violent, to deal with the aftermath, to deal with the much after aftermath. just because you are physically prepared, don't mean that you are mentally. i would say that before folks start talking about self-defense, they should spend sometimes at the hospital emergency. there is nothing like the sight, sound and smell of blood and violent to let you know how ready you are.

one of the question that my old karate teacher asked me when i asked him about using what we learned for self-defense: "how far are you willing to go?"
I am still searching for answer. someday i thought i had the answer, other day, not so much.
Thanks Phi...which is why I am reluctant to teach weekend Women's self defense seminars. I don't feel qualified really to deal with the realities of psychological trauma that I think is necessary to come to grips with in order to paint a realistic expectation of what a 100lb women can reasonably influence against a young 220lb male.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 05:20 PM   #42
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Matthew Gano wrote: View Post
My only point about comprehensive self defense is that I assume it should begin at prevention, which includes attempts to de-escalate where time allows. This says nothing to the primary(?) point of the thread though.
To my mind this thread was started more to be about the frustrations that can come from folks who would "transcend" (e.g. side-step) the topic of physical effectiveness with conversations about (pre-emptive) non-violent things like keeping calm, partly under the notion that you can get that kind of thing anywhere, and seemed to be suggesting in places that it probably doesn't have a place in self defense conversations.
I understand the frustration that comes from wanting to talk about one thing and having a bunch of non-answers (or what might even just seem like non-answers until later). I view it as part of the process though. The points about how to deal with stress/annoyances/whatever can be valuable ones. Stresses (mild annoyances or otherwise) and unfamiliar situations are crucial to creative growth, particularly in anything which can be described as generally chaotic...and discussions over the internet are certainly that. We can disengage and hope we don't have to deal with it or we can engage it and hope to create the change we want to see. The particulars of the situation will determine which choice is the more practical for us.
I agree with the idea that some folks will not allow themselves to de-escalate...some have made pre-determined assumptions and choices that are incredibly difficult (if not actually impossible) to change.
Hey Matt,

Just my take and thoughts on this so please take them for what they are worth. In my mind and thinking....I don't believe SD training should start with prevention, I think that should actually be the conclusion not the beginning. I think we first need to face the cold hard facts about the realities of violence and to reach a intimate understanding that someone that is hell bent on hurting you might just do that and what are you going to do about that if he is. The answer may be "holy shit! I'm a 100lbs soaking wet and it is not going to end well for me if someone attacks me in a dark alley! Let me look at what I need to do to not get in that situation!"

I'd rather have a person reach that understanding than go through a self defense warm and fuzzy seminar that talks about prevention and the groin grab and heal stomp and go home feeling good about themselves all empowered like.

It doesn't really equip them to deal with the realities of violence.

The problem with starting with prevention and de-escalation methods is that many will stop right there. If you are feeling good about your increased skills in de-escalation or prevention...then why go further in your training? heck we've mitigated the risk this far, so how much do we really need to go down the dirty nasty path that is not pretty or makes me feel like a failure as we go there?

The reality I think is that this training doesn't really provide us the ability to handle the stress that will come with a violent encounter. We can't really maintain calm under pressure if we have not experienced real pressure. I think it better to start with a physical framework, and then the other stuff such as verbal de-escalation etc can build on that...not the other way around.

On the concept of choice and de-escalation. I tend to go on the basic philosophy that I can affect what actions I take, however, I cannot choose another's actions.

Over simplistic, yes, as certainly we have influence on others actions, but ultimately they make their own choices, we don't get to choose for them. I think we need to remember this, especially when dealing with a particular violent situation. I have gotten myself into a few bad situations when I was emotionally invested in a desired outcome and their was a mismatch in desired end states of the other person so to speak. In those situations I went into the situation with a predetermined assumptions and a strong desire to end the situation in a particular manner...no matter what. I have found it better simply to have very few expectations concerning endstate and understand my own limitations and "redllines" and by "fantastically surprised" if it went well.

Thanks Matt!

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 05:30 PM   #43
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
The pacifist dies.

Anyway, even Gandhi was able to tell the difference between the political tool (pacifism/non violence) and self defense.
I'm a pacifist! lol! well I like to think of myself as one! I will always choose, and work hard to choose a non-violent way to resolve things. The key word is "my choice".

It is a fine line though. If the other guy chooses something other than that, that is his choice.

I am not afraid though to take an action that is appropriate to his choice. It could involve a physical choice on my part.

Does pacifism require that we take no action to defend ourselves? Or does it simply require "appropriate and measured response"?

Ghandi's strategy most certainly was one of absolute non-violence. However, I am not sure this is always the case and the sole deciding factor on pacifism.

You could argue that by facing violence directly that Ghandi invoked or prevoked a violent response that could have otherwise been avoided by avoidance. He still participated in the process, knowingly provoked, and influenced the situation for a desired political endstate.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 06:43 PM   #44
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,919
Spain
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
I'm a pacifist! lol! well I like to think of myself as one! I will always choose, and work hard to choose a non-violent way to resolve things. The key word is "my choice".
.
Well, you're probably a pacifist in the sense budoka like Yukiyoshi Takamura understood the term.
A pacifist is not really a pacifist if he is unable to make a choice between violence and non-violence. A true pacifist is able to kill or maim in the blink of an eye, but at the moment of impending destruction of the enemy he chooses non-violence. He chooses peace. He must be able to make a choice. He must have the genuine ability to destroy his enemy and then choose not to. I have heard this excuse made. "I choose to be a pacifist before learning techniques so I do not need to learn the power of destruction." This shows no comprehension of the mind of the true warrior. This is just a rationalization to cover the fear of injury or hard training. The true warrior who chooses to be a pacifist is willing to stand and die for his principles. People claiming to be pacifists who rationalize to avoid hard training or injury will flee instead of standing and dying for principle. They are just cowards. Only a warrior who has tempered his spirit in conflict and who has confronted himself and his greatest fears can in my opinion make the choice to be a true pacifist.
Regarding Gandhi, I'd suggest to read The Doctrine Of The Sword

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 07:22 PM   #45
Bill Danosky
 
Bill Danosky's Avatar
Dojo: BN Yoshinkan
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 433
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
Well, you're probably a pacifist in the sense budoka like Yukiyoshi Takamura understood the term.
A pacifist is not really a pacifist if he is unable to make a choice between violence and non-violence. A true pacifist is able to kill or maim in the blink of an eye, but at the moment of impending destruction of the enemy he chooses non-violence. He chooses peace. He must be able to make a choice. He must have the genuine ability to destroy his enemy and then choose not to. I have heard this excuse made. "I choose to be a pacifist before learning techniques so I do not need to learn the power of destruction." This shows no comprehension of the mind of the true warrior. This is just a rationalization to cover the fear of injury or hard training. The true warrior who chooses to be a pacifist is willing to stand and die for his principles. People claiming to be pacifists who rationalize to avoid hard training or injury will flee instead of standing and dying for principle. They are just cowards. Only a warrior who has tempered his spirit in conflict and who has confronted himself and his greatest fears can in my opinion make the choice to be a true pacifist.
Regarding Gandhi, I'd suggest to read The Doctrine Of The Sword
Thanks! I was just looking for that quote for another thread.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2013, 04:41 PM   #46
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Thanks Demetrio!

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2013, 09:36 AM   #47
ryback
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 198
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

I agree completely with the above comments about what a "pacifist" really is, although I'm not actually very fond of the "isms" of this world.
The only thing that doesn't sit well in me about this thread is the predetermined idea that if one answers that he chooses not to fight is a way to avoid telling that aikido doesn't work.
Aikido is a martial art and, as such, it works fine in self defense situations. But since self defense means to save yourself from another person's violence, isn't it the best way to actually not be there?
In aikido we don't block a punch,we step slightly out of the attack line and control the strike. So when the punch reaches it's target, we are not...there.
In the same mentality, one should avoid fighting as best as possible, and engage only if he has no other choice.
Avoiding fighting when possible and using aikido effectively when you can't avoid it , is indeed the ultimate self defense...
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2013, 10:34 AM   #48
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,811
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Yannis Mousoulis wrote: View Post
In aikido we don't block a punch,we step slightly out of the attack line and control the strike. So when the punch reaches it's target, we are not...there.
In the same mentality, one should avoid fighting as best as possible, and engage only if he has no other choice.
.
a bit off topic, but why do we need to get out of the way of the attack? in order to reach me, your body has to be in a certain location and range. what if my fist, foot, and/or weapon occupied that space first?

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2013, 10:38 AM   #49
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,919
Spain
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Yannis Mousoulis wrote: View Post
In aikido we don't block a punch,we step slightly out of the attack line and control the strike. So when the punch reaches it's target, we are not...there.
This is in your aikido.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2013, 11:31 AM   #50
Bill Danosky
 
Bill Danosky's Avatar
Dojo: BN Yoshinkan
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 433
United_States
Offline
Re: My forum pet peeve: "I never got in a fight - the ultimate self-defense!"

Quote:
Yannis Mousoulis wrote: View Post
In aikido we don't block a punch,we step slightly out of the attack line and control the strike. So when the punch reaches it's target, we are not...there.
And what do you do about the second, third, fourth, etc. punches? I have heard there are circumstances where attackers just throw as many punches as they can.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

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



Reply


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
New Forum "Internal Training in Aikido" akiy Internal Training in Aikido 0 01-13-2013 12:21 PM
083) Aikido- Taking The Fight Out Of The Fight: July 2011 Marc Abrams External Aikido Blog Posts 3 07-06-2011 10:57 AM
Article: On the Interdependent Nature of Tactics and Strategies by "The Grindstone" AikiWeb System AikiWeb System 50 04-19-2007 01:59 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:20 AM.



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