Gokui, Principles and the OODA

Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)

These three concepts of karate and martial arts regardless of the why of the discipline are all mutually beneficial not only in relation to one another but to the relationship and connectivity of their individual parts. Everything is about “one” and everything is about “Duality of Yin-Yang.” Even these three, when combined and connected holistically, are about the one and the duality of yin-yang. Yin-yang drives them all and they all are derived from the mutual benefit of each one, the yin to yang and yang to yin.

The OODA is thought of in a linear mechanical way, this has been discussed before, and many assume a one-dimensional understanding where one “Observes” then when necessary “Orients” on the observed thing or situation or phenomena. Then once we orient we then have to make some sort of decisions such as, “Shall I cross the street or shall I remain here?” When the decision is made then we act, we stay or cross. This is how I once thought the OODA worked and that processing the loop faster would give me the advantage but in truth it is a lot more complex than that linear mechanical one-dimensional definition. 

Principles are the same way, when we thing of yin-yang we assume it means hard-soft (as to karate and martial arts applications) and that goes for other aspects of principles. We tend to take them one at a time, learn about them then apply that linear one-dimensional understanding to our practice and training. It is only when we truly look at the sub-principle of yin-yang that we begin to understand that it and other principles don’t stand alone and are not learned or applied atomistically, separately, but as a whole one principled based application toward the discipline regardless of the why of our practice and training. There is, like the OODA to be further explained later, an ebb and flow and morphed mixing of the two to get a balanced one whole product or action.

We can say the same to the gokui, the ken-po goku-i, that is a terse Zen-koan like tome that is also thought of and understood from a single one-dimensional atomistic linear mechanical meaning. When they read about seeing all sides they assume that means the eyes through direct visual signals sent to the brain provide us something to observe and orient on that could be either good or bad further influencing the decision processes. Seldom does the person or system go past the linear single dimension concept toward a more robust one holistic wholehearted continued concept and meaning beyond that singular belief. It is one reason I re-wrote the gokui into a continuous single sentence that can be analyzed into distinct and separate concepts where the individual then synthesizes back into a more robust and complete, unique, understanding that teaches us more about ourselves and our study of karate and martial arts. 

In the OODA the OO, observe and orient, are independent and distinct concepts and processes yet to work both mutually support the other in order to achieve the results intended. Humans observe everything in their environment then compare that to the perceived understanding of that environment, outer world, into an inner world. What is assumed is that the individual observing actually knows and understands what it is they see, hear, touch and so on because of their perceive inner world. They fail to understand that to orient to the observed phenomena they must first know of it and understand it completely and utterly. You must orient on what that is, what it is you must know, what you need to know and what you need to know that you don’t know. 

Orient on that first, encode that to the perceived inner world of your mind and then use that to compare when you observe the outer world so that you can make a decision that you will act upon. Still a simplistic explanation but shows how we circle around the entire loop rather than one, the next, the next then the act or actions. Orient also effects our decision processes because to find an appropriate actions you need to decide on one and that comes from experiences as perceived by our observation of things and how we orient on those things making decisions along the way as to what is appropriate to what event and what is not. You have to observe that you need to know something, you have to orient on that, then you have to decide to study and understand what it is you need to know then you have to decide on how that gets encoded in procedural zombie sub-routine/functions memory and that also takes your orientation and decision so that when you act, in training and practice, you make the right decisions according to your observation and orientation during the training and practice processes, actions and decisions along with analysis and synthesis processing in an appropriate way as another decisive actions on your part. 

Using the OODA processes is how you first learn of the principles, then you analyze them as individual distinct things until you understand and begin to orient them with one another to make for one holistic whole that changes rapidly in the moment and situation so that you end up absorbing and encoding the entire principles so that progressive training will allow you to draw on them in the decision and action process of the loop.

Then there is the gokui, did you know that the gokui also makes references to the Chinese ancient classic, The Art of War of Sun Tzu? It is not just the first two lines that are more spiritual or mystical as to the sun and moon or the heave and earth, that also connect to the ancient book the I Ching, but to the way and means of battle in the art of war. It comes to mind once this is accepted that the simplicity of the gokui acts as a key to open the door to what you can achieve for yourself and in your use of the disciplines as related to the art of war. 

Balance and unbalance being like a weight is not just about physically unbalancing an adversary but also is derived from Sun Tzu’s teaching that a battle best won is the one not entered into, i.e., unbalance your adversary in mind and spirit and you can avoid doing battle, or fighting. 

Sun Tzu speaks to energy, the ordinary and extraordinary forces used in battle, speaking to how they “end and recommence; cyclical, as are the movements of the sun and moon. They dies away and are reborn; recurrent, as are the passing seasons. As the sun and moon cycle through the heavens that surround us cause the Earth and man to experience the passing of seasons and those seasons matter in the strategy of the art of war. 

The OODA, the Fundamental Principles and the Ken-po Goku-i are all like the teachings of Sun Tzu in his chapter on Energy, i.e., “The primary colors are only five in number but their combinations are so infinite that one cannot visualize them all.” His teachings are inter-connected and mutually beneficial and our other concepts of karate and martial arts also connect; if you open your mind, your body and your spirit to change, chaos, and an opening of the box you can see what cannot be seen, you can hear what cannot be heard and you can touch that which seems untouchable. 

These are the concepts of the Gokui, the Fundamental Principles and the OODA and yet, they are not the end all of what is out there. You just have to let them in. 

Bibliography (Click the link)

Editorial - Opinionated Opinions - Lecturing - Teaching - Mentoring

Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)

There will be days like this and there will always be days like this but truthfully that means there will always be days like this that teach and where I learn. When I editorialize, where I provide opinionated opinions, theories, ideas, etc., where I lecture as a teacher, instructor and mentor, when I lean toward a teaching form my editorialization, opinions, lectures and lessons I am mentoring but with one caveat, a need to learn, a need to understand and a need to find out more so I can editorialize, express opinionated opinions, lecture, teach and mentor. Does that make even a bit of sense?

Editorials: an article written by or on behalf of an editor that gives an opinion on a topical issue. A part of a newspaper or magazine that are not advertising. The question is in our modern tech world, are blogs and other venues of electronic publication qualified to present editorials on issues, topics or in my case disciplines such as karate, martial systems and self-defense? Or are editorials a purview of only newspapers, news television, or magazine publications? There are political editorials, there are business editorials and there are debate type editorials but what are they really? Are editorials actually just opinions form authors/writers who have some expertise on the subject of editorials because I do have some expertise on the subjects I write about in my blogs? An editorial, in general, is an opinion piece written by that often expresses an opinion of a publisher and yet it can be any other written document that reflects an opinion of a periodical but can it also reflect the opinion of an author who writes on a subject they have extensive knowledge of? My blogs are of a single topic and theme with text expressed as my opinion and is often in a lecture format, is that an editorial piece?

Opinionated Opinions: first, an opinion is a view or judgement formed about something, like karate and martial arts and self-defense and philosophies of the three, etc., not necessarily based on fact or knowledge (my opinions and editorial articles tend to come from facts researched and knowledge gained from studies, practices and experiences). As to opinionated, that is a view of a person or material presented perceived as conceitedly assertive and dogmatic in one’s opinions. My question is who gets to decide what is opinionated and what is not for an opinion may be perceived as derived from that persons perception of their inner world and beliefs and may not actually be a correct perception of that opinions. There can be and seems to be a very fine line between an opinion presented in an editorial article, article or blog entry  based on an individual perception of conceited assertive dogmatic opinion. Can it be a misinterpretation of an confident presentation vs. an actually opinionated piece and how do you tell the difference? Opinion to opinionated seems to be defined by terms such as dogmatic, fixed views, dictatorial, pompous, self-important and arrogance but how can that be detected in a written piece without knowledge of the author/writer, a perception through sensory data input like body language, voice inflection or attitude? The written word is only a very small part of that communications leading a belief that when one feels a persons written word without a knowledge and understanding of the authors personality, etc., is a judgement as to the persons own personality in expressing and receiving opinions. If the author of an opinion piece, an editorial or lecture type written article, how do you determine if it is truly opinionated as to conceit and dogmatic especially if that person is presented with refuted information and/or opinions that stimulate change in the authors view, opinion and understanding and does one determine opinionated views of the author before or after making such determinations, I wonder? 

Lecturing: is a delivery of an educational lecture to a class or other audience that would include readers of a blog, of a Facebook entry, of a twitter submission or a forum site, etc. It is often used to present materials in a educational arena such as an institution of higher learning, a University lecture. Lecturing, dependent on the perceptions of an internal nature of the recipient, might be also a view of a serious talk or of reprovingly nature to someone but that too is about the recipient rather than sender although one would hope the sender or lecturer would do so after a connection is made such as an empathy connection, etc. It is a difference of a scolding, chiding, admonish like deliver that in all honestly cannot be conveyed or determined by just the written word especially understanding just how difficult it is to convey such views without first knowing the person more intimately and being in physical presence while lecturing to perceive their body language, etc., as the necessary additional sensory data output needed to make such a determination. 

Teaching: is an informal method of lecturing and discussing or a series of lecture on a subject of public interest or of personal interest to say, students in a lecture hall or participants of a tech social connection forum like a blog, a wiki or a FaceBook social site. Sensei teach and to teach such a complex and difficult subject of a skill based knowledge of karate, martial disciplines and especially self-defense you have to participate in prolonged periods of “Lectures,” speeches, and editorialized written materials, etc. conducted often without interruption by members of an organization like school faculty or invited guest speakers at other education institutions or when used as a technique in  a social protest, etc.

Mentoring: is about one who comes before or one who has a knowledge of a subject and/or skill who advises or trains someone in that subject, skill and/or discipline. A mentor promotes, advocates and is a resource for mentoring but is not all knowing of the subject or skill but rather a knowledgable person who has a good understanding of the discipline, skill and knowledge, etc.

In my blogs, in my writings and in my books I am a person lecturing and teaching on a subject and skill that is about karate, martial disciplines, self-defense and a philosophy on all of that so I mentor and I teach and I lecture and I am of a certain opinion but I am open to change when properly presented and later validated by my own efforts in research, etc.

Isn’t that they way it is? Does it mean that it is opinionated and does it mean that the lecturing is negative or is it just the excuse some give to justify remaining steadfast, dogmatic, in their status quo belief system? 

Bibliography (Click the link)