Making Sense of Violence - From Martial Journal

I find a lot modern martial artists lack exactly what the author seems to be engaging in: introspection.

He might well have saved those women going to hospital on that night.
 
I feel bad for the guy. But based on what he wrote, I'm not sure he actually learned anything from the experience, if his takeaway is that he didn't change anything about how he trains, but "views the techniques through a different lens".
 
"I have come to realize this: aikido doesn’t do itself. Merely participating in ‘The Art of Peace’ or other martial arts does not guarantee one will make it through life unscathed. It is not a talisman to ensure that nice people with good intentions will be spared from violence. It is a path, and it doesn’t walk itself."

I think that bit is insightful. Doing a martial art doesn't let the martial art "activate" the way we want it to in shower thoughts.

Random attacks like these are best treated as perfect opportunities to run away imo
 
I feel bad for the guy. But based on what he wrote, I'm not sure he actually learned anything from the experience, if his takeaway is that he didn't change anything about how he trains, but "views the techniques through a different lens".
What could he have learnt?
 
What could he have learnt?
That he's not learning what he thinks he's learning, and he's not developing the skills he thinks he's developing. In that article he dances around the edges of the issues. He was completely unprepared to react in any way, and he seems to acknowledge that. But he doesn't seem to recognize that this was completely predictable based on how he was training. And he doesn't acknowledge that changing nothing will lead to similar results in the future.

This isn't a knock on him or Aikido. It's simply like being surprised you can't surf after spending years learning to water ski.
 
I feel bad for the guy. But based on what he wrote, I'm not sure he actually learned anything from the experience, if his takeaway is that he didn't change anything about how he trains, but "views the techniques through a different lens".
This is what I wonder as well. I read into it that he took his training more seriously but didn't get into focusing on the function of the techniques. The article makes me think that he first looked at Aikido as an ART, so everything he did was far from function. This is what makes me think this way:

"Let’s be generous. Maybe my response—more accurately, my non-response—was smart. He was bigger and stronger than me, and he had a friend with him who might have joined in if I had tried something. It may be true that I could have ended up much worse off, but being helplessly punched in the face does not fit with my concept of martial arts or with the person I want to be."

"Each time I execute a technique, I take notes on what works, how my partner responds, and how I could improve. When appropriate, I ask for a stronger attack and see, as honestly as I can, how effectively I can apply the technique."

This stood out to me as someone who sees Martial Arts as an Art.

The reason I don't think he understood is because of this
" I continue to practice cooperatively, falling down when I am thrown and expecting the same from my partners."

System A vs System A issue. If he was serious about his training, he would find a System A vs System B opportunity where System B fights like the guy that bashed him up.
 
That he's not learning what he thinks he's learning, and he's not developing the skills he thinks he's developing. In that article he dances around the edges of the issues. He was completely unprepared to react in any way, and he seems to acknowledge that. But he doesn't seem to recognize that this was completely predictable based on how he was training. And he doesn't acknowledge that changing nothing will lead to similar results in the future.

This isn't a knock on him or Aikido. It's simply like being surprised you can't surf after spending years learning to water ski.
I agree with this as well. The issue isn't Aikido. It's the approach to his training that is the problem. Similar to how some think that ONLY DOING FORM = I KNOW HOW TO USE KUNG FU.
 
I have come to realize this: aikido doesn’t do itself. Merely participating in ‘The Art of Peace’ or other martial arts does not guarantee one will make it through life unscathed.
I always wonder if "The Art of Peace" was more about finding peace in oneself and not "Peace " as in non-violence.
 
I agree with this as well. The issue isn't Aikido. It's the approach to his training that is the problem. Similar to how some think that ONLY DOING FORM = I KNOW HOW TO USE KUNG FU.
Just to be clear, it may be both. Bad content can make sound training look bad. And bad training can make solid content look bad. We don't have enough information to diagnose the full picture. We agree that his approach to training is a problem, but addressing that may expose other issues, too.
 
I always wonder if "The Art of Peace" was more about finding peace in oneself and not "Peace " as in non-violence.
The "art of peace" is a mistranslation used in a couple of the first aikido books in English, which stuck. Aikido is "the way of fitting forces together", which some understand as meaning "the way of balancing opposing forces within you" (and I agree).
 
Few have reached the mastery of fighting to where a quick sucker punch out of context with the environment can be blocked or even evaded. By "out of context" I mean a situation where you would not anticipate such an attack. Despite one's skill in situational awareness, a surprise attack can catch the best of us off guard, and if that attack is pressed with a fierce barrage of multiple strikes, it's hard to recover enough to counterattack.

It was not the shortcomings of aikido that directly led the guy in the article to get hit, but his lack of combat common sense (which may be attributed to his aikido experience?) by being in range of someone he knew was hostile! Control of distance and a level of anticipation are important when faced with a possible attacker.

As to the OP title, violence can make sense if being used to further one's goal and is specific and controlled. But then there is also the mindless, senseless violence of a psychopath or heavily impaired individual. One may argue that in their depraved mind their actions make sense. Maybe, but regardless of their motivation, we need to respond to their action from a self-defense viewpoint. For us trained guys, we are able to respond most all of the time, but we're only human and there is a rare situation where we just don't get the chance.
 
Just to be clear, it may be both. Bad content can make sound training look bad. And bad training can make solid content look bad. We don't have enough information to diagnose the full picture. We agree that his approach to training is a problem, but addressing that may expose other issues, too.
Oh, it's guaranteed that it will expose other issues. But that's a good thing because at least the limitations and capabilities become easier.

I looked at some of his videos and from the school. Based on what I saw, I don't have high hopes for what I saw in terms of fighting. The videos just didn't give off that energy of that's what they were focusing on.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top