No, you cannot. That you think it is possible does much to support the low opinion of you that has so oft been expressed in these forums.
Mixed Martial Arts Sparring
- Thread starter Zenjael
- Start date
No, you cannot. That you think it is possible does much to support the low opinion of you that has so oft been expressed in these forums.
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
You can't learn an art in days. And you seem to have missed completely what Aikido is about, by the way. There's a reason that O Sensei's original dojo was called the Jigoku Dojo (Hell Dojo), you know...
Thinking that a martial artist should be able to defend themselves without resorting to injuring their attacker/opponent is just movie-fantasy thinking. One of the most basic ideals in the development of martial systems around the world are centered on inflicting a great deal of injury with as little effort and risk as possible. To think that training in methods of causing injury leads you to not actually cause injury is ridiculous.
Idealism may have killed many, but blind ignorance I'm sure would cause more pain and injury.
OH MY GOD FIRESTEIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is the most idiotic & careless statement I've seen in recent history, even from you. You can learn to cut somebody's head open in about 30 seconds with a power saw. It damn sure doesn't make you a brain surgeon.
If you were mugged, you honestly wouldn't give a crap about anything except suriving. Especially if the mugger was on PCP as you posted elsewhere. All the rest of those "ideas" of yours are about as good as a squirt gun at a forest fire.
Dunno... keep it up. We may yet hear about it.
Morehei Ueshiba, the creator of Aikido said that .. "to injure an opponent is to injure yourself. To control agression without inficting injury is the art of peace". This is how I (and many others from a similar traditional Aikikai background) aim to practice Aikido. So you are in many ways correct in your assertion.
You are also correct insofar as Aikido can provide you with an array of tools to end an altercation *without* inflicting serious injury. And yes that same array of tools can be utilised to inflict permanent damage. It is only through the discernment of the practitioner that the distinction is made. That discernment can be informed by idealism. I believe however though that hard-held idealism can often cause a deal of intransigence and dogma in the heart and actions of the holder. I think the discernment of which way to use one's Aikido: hard or soft, should be informed by the dynamics of the situation that calls for its use.
I will only say from my own experience that the philosophical desire not to intentionally damage an opponent and that primal instinct to defend one's own safety or the safety of another in one's care at any cost, are two concepts that may be at odds in reality.
Purely my opinion. Ask away if I can provide any other information.
I wish you well
I disagree. You can absolutely learn an art in a few days. In specific: fingerpainting.
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk
No, you cannot learn an art in a few days. You can learn some movements. I can even use operant conditioning, and almost literally pound them into you in such a way that you'll respond with them. But you won't know the ART. You'll have a few tricks.
Nor do you know as much as you think you do about aikido.
Aiki Lee
Master of Arts
The ability to neutralize a threat without causing significant harm is determine only in part by the skill of the defender. The rest is determined by the commitment to causing harm found in the mind fo the attacker. If someone wants to cause you significant harm, chances are you have to put him down hard or just get the hell out of there and hope he doesn't catch you.
Cyriacus
Senior Master
Ok, I do have one question.
He advocated that injuring Your Opponent is injuring Yourself, and not inflicting Injury is the intent.
Then proceeds to invent a System where You systematically break bones and take people down.
Is it not possible that its more that back then, not injuring someone more meant not maiming them, were now it means... Well, not injuring them?
Or...
frank raud
Master of Arts
Back then? You do realize that Ushieba died in 1969?
Cyriacus
Senior Master
I didnt, actually.
Im not an Aikidoka, and I havent exactly studied the Systems History to any real extent. My question still stands, though. With that alteration.
frank raud
Master of Arts
Pt II of Combat Ki kicking
Last edited by a moderator:
frank raud
Master of Arts
What I would be curious about is when Ushieba originally said or wrote that quote. Aikido went through an evolution from a hard style of jiu jutsu, when it was referred to as Aikibudo to a kinder gentler art as Ushieba got older.
No, you can't! At a mcdojo perhaps, but come on man....
You know, we have rules on this forum against trolling. Are you trolling here?
This why there are different styles of Aikido. The ones from before WWII have more destructive intent and atemi showing the influence of Ueshiba's Daito Ryu background. After the war he was far more spiritual and the quote you ask about was his later philosophy. This plays out through the organisation Aikikai which is the 'softer' aikido passed down through his family.
oaktree
Master of Arts
Hi Frank
I really do not know how "Peaceful" Ueshiba was. He was in the military skilled with the Bayonet fought on the frontline and was promoted for bravery. So it is likely he killed people but I don't think anyone really knows if he did. Here is an article discussing similar things about Ueshiba and peace:
http://blog.aikidojournal.com/2011/...r-injure-or-kill-anyone-here-is-what-we-know/
I really do not know how "Peaceful" Ueshiba was. He was in the military skilled with the Bayonet fought on the frontline and was promoted for bravery. So it is likely he killed people but I don't think anyone really knows if he did. Here is an article discussing similar things about Ueshiba and peace:
http://blog.aikidojournal.com/2011/...r-injure-or-kill-anyone-here-is-what-we-know/
The best way to create a pacifist is to expose someone to real violence.
I believe, in another thread, it was held that a person training 5-6 hours is rare. Let's say the ideal is then 2-3. Days, to me, refers to around 3-5, in their entirety, which converts out being between 72 and 120 hours. If you take the ideal training time of 2-3 hours a day, you end up with roughly 2 hours of training, everyday for between a month or two. There are people who attend schools on these boards who only spend a month of time per weapon before transitioning to the next. IF you can't learn a system with 2-3 hours of diligent practice every day, for a month, than you just have a poor teacher at that point. I have had a teacher who received his 1st dan after only 3 months of dilligent study. The same man took over 40 years to receive his 6th dan, in the same system. It comes ultimately to how committed one is, and what the requirements are... to consider having degree in skill, are subjective. Hence why differ from style to style.
To me when I say days of practice... I mean it. But it's next to impossible to do, so I just condense. If, last week, I spent 4 hours a day, everyday training, than I would say I trained for approximately a day's worth of time last week. That is what I meant, and no, I am not trolling, and never intend to.
I have believed that the black belt is just the beginning, that if there's a mountain to climb, you've finally stopped walking toward the mountain, and are starting to walk up it. To me, the only thing a black belt tells me is that the person has arrived mentally to a point where they are ready to seriously begin training and learning. Having a black belt isn't the starting point, but it is for beginning to have true insight into an art. There is no end point, or goal, save for perhaps reaching the next step on that mountain. I'd like to think so long as one focuses on putting one foot in front of the other, and keeping the overall path in mind, we will always reach its top.
But even reaching the top is its own starting point, and every mountain scaled, will have its descent. I like thinking of those who earned a black belt, and through practice, made full circle and turned their belts white. I can't tell a person's skill from the gibberish and collection of symbols on their belts; bars and letters in foreign languages most don't speak. I can though from how they move, their eyes, and if they are in a gi, how worn it is, but well retained and kept.
But even this comes back to a question of what it means to 'learn'. All I'm talking about is memorization of theory and technique, not it's application or execution, and depth of skill as I think is the standard many of you are using.
To me that is perfecting an art, not learning it.
To me when I say days of practice... I mean it. But it's next to impossible to do, so I just condense. If, last week, I spent 4 hours a day, everyday training, than I would say I trained for approximately a day's worth of time last week. That is what I meant, and no, I am not trolling, and never intend to.
I have believed that the black belt is just the beginning, that if there's a mountain to climb, you've finally stopped walking toward the mountain, and are starting to walk up it. To me, the only thing a black belt tells me is that the person has arrived mentally to a point where they are ready to seriously begin training and learning. Having a black belt isn't the starting point, but it is for beginning to have true insight into an art. There is no end point, or goal, save for perhaps reaching the next step on that mountain. I'd like to think so long as one focuses on putting one foot in front of the other, and keeping the overall path in mind, we will always reach its top.
But even reaching the top is its own starting point, and every mountain scaled, will have its descent. I like thinking of those who earned a black belt, and through practice, made full circle and turned their belts white. I can't tell a person's skill from the gibberish and collection of symbols on their belts; bars and letters in foreign languages most don't speak. I can though from how they move, their eyes, and if they are in a gi, how worn it is, but well retained and kept.
But even this comes back to a question of what it means to 'learn'. All I'm talking about is memorization of theory and technique, not it's application or execution, and depth of skill as I think is the standard many of you are using.
To me that is perfecting an art, not learning it.
Lets clarify something, since it was me that made that post in the other thread. The average adult, who works a 40 or more hour week, has a family, kids, basically a life outside of the dojo, will probably do the majority of their training when they're in the dojo. Anyone who has a BB after 3 mos of training is a joke and I'd say it right to that persons face! Only a mcdojo gives out a BB in 3mos. I can see just by your post here Alex, that your experience is limited. Limited because the mcdojos seem to be all you know. If you get to a real school, you'd see that it takes years, not months, to earn a BB. 2-3hrs daily for a month?? LMFAO...dude, please, stop trolling here. Physically impossible to learn every aspect of the art.
Umm.....what??
Yes, its the end of 1 journey and the beginning of another. But the journey is a long one....not something that can be reached in months.
Yeah, I've seen some people claiming BB level too. And ya know what? They sucked! I think there was a clip in this thread somewhere........
People can memorize and claim to learn alot. Put those same people under pressure, and watch them crumble. Its one thing to say, "Yes, I've memorized this tech." but do they really know the ins and outs of it? Can they explain it? Can they teach it? Can they make it work under pressure? Can they adapt it when something goes wrong?
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Firstly, I have no idea of what you're talking about with your maths there, you seem to jump all around the place with no context to the numbers you're using... try as I might, I can't make 2-3 hours a day, for 3-5 days equal 120 hours... at most (5 days of 3 hours each), it's coming out as 15 hours.... hmm.
Next, speaking as someone who changes the weapon focus each month, I'd point out that it's a rotational basis, not just constantly changing weapons. Then, I'd further state that, choosing a weapon, such as sword (one of our most commonly trained weapons), it takes an incredibly long time to "learn" it properly. My guys are under no illusions that, having had some small experience with sword, they then have "learnt" it.
You have a teacher who got their 1st Dan in three months? And you think that, if a martial art isn't learned within a month of diligent practice, it's a bad teacher? Really? Gotta tell you, you'd be lucky to cover all the material we have in our system, let alone really learn it, within 10 years. I'm not touching the Shodan in three month thing...
Honestly, Alex, I just don't think you get what is meant by "learning" a martial art when we say it. You seem to think it's just remembering physical moves... but even then, there's no way. With the timeframe you're looking at, all you'd be able to do, really, is a substandard approximation of them. One of the systems I am involved in has a total of 24 physical techniques for sword (12 long sword, 7 short sword, and 5 two sword)... with one of the guys tonight, I was still correcting the very first technique after a year and a half of his training it. He knows what the technique is, but he hasn't learned it yet. There's a very big distinction.
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
-
éåæ ZhĆ²ngxÄ«n center of gravity
- Latest: Wing Woo Gar
-