4 ms·

"Nage" is technique, and the person who applies a technique against an attacker is "tori". If the author can't get this right, I would suspect their understandi

"Nage" is technique, and the person who applies a technique against an attacker is "tori". If the author can't get this right, I would suspect their understanding of the martial art is somewhat shallow.

annnnd 11y ago
Wait, you shouldn't tell him this, he should have learned that all by himself! I don't agree with the author's view at all. If anything, it angers me when I trust a mentor to guide me and he lets me waste a week before I figure out by myself that the path was wrong from the start. Why do I need him then? There are many ways one can learn. One is by trying, one is by listening to others. The latter is usually much cheaper in terms of time and resources. The major problem is that we sometimes can't find a suitable person to give us advice in a form we can hear. And now there is someone who preaches that one shouldn't help even when he knows how? Great. </rant>
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Exploration, trial and error, deep diving into a problem are all better ways to learn than listening. Perhaps a combination of the two is best.
- moron4hire 11y ago
  Well, you don't need a mentor.
- maffydub 11y ago
  I think the key word you use here is "guide" - I completely agree that a mentor shouldn't _guide_ you down the wrong path. ...but maybe the mentor wasn't _guiding_ you, but enabling you (by answering your questions) to follow a path _you_chose_ and that turned out to be wrong. This is important because if you always see yourself as following the mentor's path, you'll never take ownership and become a leader yourself. As an experienced developer and personnel manager, I find it particularly frustrating when someone comes to me and says "you told me to do it this way, and now it doesn't work - fix it" because it shows that they're not taking any ownership. Instead, I try to ask questions and make observations about their proposed approach to guide them to what I think is the best solution but, ultimately, they may choose an alternative route... and this might fail. At that point, they normally come back with "I've hit this problem, and it's mine to overcome, but can you help?" ...and I do, gladly. ;)
  - god_bless_texas 11y ago
    I agree with you. One of my largest pet peeves is when a new technical person comes and asks me how to do something without even googling it first. I don't mind guiding, I don't even mind giving hints and verbal cues to get you to the starting blocks. But if you're asking me to tell you how to do something without even developing questions to ask me, I'm annoyed. I don't want to sound like a grumpy old man, but some of the new generation of thinkers seem to lack some intellectual curiosity that those of us without the internet had to endure in our early career stages. Next, I'd like to introduce you to the 20 year old ruby developer who will set me straight in the follow up reply to my comment:
    - jschwartzi 11y ago
      In the same vein, I get annoyed when older engineers expect me to ask how to implement something. You don't learn anything if you don't spend some time groping blindly in the dark.
  - annnnd 11y ago
    In the end it is about knowledge sharing. You either tell someone that he might be headed in the wrong direction (he doesn't need to listen to you though) or you don't. If you tell him, he has more information on which he can base his decision. If you don't, you deprive him of the chance. I agree however that the decision is up to each individual. There is also another view - I think it is good to let developers influence the decisions about technology used, but only up to a point. In the end it will be leader's problem if technology that some novice developer wanted to use fails to deliver (as it so happens). EDIT: I do agree with you that developers need to own up to their challenges though. :)
caw 11y ago
> When you are the “Uke” you are taught not to give feedback to your partner. Maybe in aikido, as I've never done it, but in the martial art I practiced for a while uke was feedback. The attacker sets the tempo for the technique, reacts to the tori's strikes, and while they're not supposed to apply the movement for them - they can lead the tori in the correct movement and suggest openings by being strong in some areas and weak in others. While sharpening a movement, after both sides have some level of skill, they can provide feedback as to weak points in the technique - "I can stand up here, you don't have enough pressure or you haven't moved me off balance enough". None of this feedback has to be verbal, but you can learn the techniques on both sides. Similarly, while people should learn from small failures, you don't want a catastrophic failure where you go and break uke's arm because someone didn't tell you that you were doing the wrong technique.
- kemiller2002 11y ago
  When you are the “Uke” you are taught not to give feedback to your partner. This is wrong. Both sides constantly learn from each other. Even the true Shihan learn from their senior students. Don't get me wrong the students are never like "hey sensei you should try this" but they do adjust and refine their skills just like everyone else (if you watch the right videos you can see it if you know what to look for). The biggest problem I have with the article is this, he states, "he knows his employee will fail." That's not the Aikido way really. His approach should be something more like "I will let him try, so that we may both learn from this experience." Even the masters admit they don't know everything and that they can be surprised by the most novice of people at times. This is demonstrated through many of the samurai's approach to fighting (they avoid it when possible, because they know they might lose). In my opinion this is a much better approach to management also. I know how to accomplish things, but I may not know the best way (or even the right way at times), and I won't know any more until I learn from someone else, even someone junior to me.
7402 11y ago
When I trained in aikido, "nage" was the thrower/defender. See, for example, http://aikido-west.org/handbook/uke_nage.html http://aikido-west.org/handbook/uke_nage.html

annnnd 11y ago

Wait, you shouldn't tell him this, he should have learned that all by himself! I don't agree with the author's view at all. If anything, it angers me when I trust a mentor to guide me and he lets me waste a week before I figure out by myself that the path was wrong from the start. Why do I need him then? There are many ways one can learn. One is by trying, one is by listening to others. The latter is usually much cheaper in terms of time and resources. The major problem is that we sometimes can't find a suitable person to give us advice in a form we can hear. And now there is someone who preaches that one shouldn't help even when he knows how? Great. </rant>

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
Exploration, trial and error, deep diving into a problem are all better ways to learn than listening. Perhaps a combination of the two is best.
moron4hire 11y ago
Well, you don't need a mentor.
maffydub 11y ago
I think the key word you use here is "guide" - I completely agree that a mentor shouldn't _guide_ you down the wrong path. ...but maybe the mentor wasn't _guiding_ you, but enabling you (by answering your questions) to follow a path _you_chose_ and that turned out to be wrong. This is important because if you always see yourself as following the mentor's path, you'll never take ownership and become a leader yourself. As an experienced developer and personnel manager, I find it particularly frustrating when someone comes to me and says "you told me to do it this way, and now it doesn't work - fix it" because it shows that they're not taking any ownership. Instead, I try to ask questions and make observations about their proposed approach to guide them to what I think is the best solution but, ultimately, they may choose an alternative route... and this might fail. At that point, they normally come back with "I've hit this problem, and it's mine to overcome, but can you help?" ...and I do, gladly. ;)
- god_bless_texas 11y ago
  I agree with you. One of my largest pet peeves is when a new technical person comes and asks me how to do something without even googling it first. I don't mind guiding, I don't even mind giving hints and verbal cues to get you to the starting blocks. But if you're asking me to tell you how to do something without even developing questions to ask me, I'm annoyed. I don't want to sound like a grumpy old man, but some of the new generation of thinkers seem to lack some intellectual curiosity that those of us without the internet had to endure in our early career stages. Next, I'd like to introduce you to the 20 year old ruby developer who will set me straight in the follow up reply to my comment:
  - jschwartzi 11y ago
    In the same vein, I get annoyed when older engineers expect me to ask how to implement something. You don't learn anything if you don't spend some time groping blindly in the dark.
- annnnd 11y ago
  In the end it is about knowledge sharing. You either tell someone that he might be headed in the wrong direction (he doesn't need to listen to you though) or you don't. If you tell him, he has more information on which he can base his decision. If you don't, you deprive him of the chance. I agree however that the decision is up to each individual. There is also another view - I think it is good to let developers influence the decisions about technology used, but only up to a point. In the end it will be leader's problem if technology that some novice developer wanted to use fails to deliver (as it so happens). EDIT: I do agree with you that developers need to own up to their challenges though. :)

caw 11y ago

> When you are the “Uke” you are taught not to give feedback to your partner. Maybe in aikido, as I've never done it, but in the martial art I practiced for a while uke was feedback. The attacker sets the tempo for the technique, reacts to the tori's strikes, and while they're not supposed to apply the movement for them - they can lead the tori in the correct movement and suggest openings by being strong in some areas and weak in others. While sharpening a movement, after both sides have some level of skill, they can provide feedback as to weak points in the technique - "I can stand up here, you don't have enough pressure or you haven't moved me off balance enough". None of this feedback has to be verbal, but you can learn the techniques on both sides. Similarly, while people should learn from small failures, you don't want a catastrophic failure where you go and break uke's arm because someone didn't tell you that you were doing the wrong technique.

kemiller2002 11y ago
When you are the “Uke” you are taught not to give feedback to your partner. This is wrong. Both sides constantly learn from each other. Even the true Shihan learn from their senior students. Don't get me wrong the students are never like "hey sensei you should try this" but they do adjust and refine their skills just like everyone else (if you watch the right videos you can see it if you know what to look for). The biggest problem I have with the article is this, he states, "he knows his employee will fail." That's not the Aikido way really. His approach should be something more like "I will let him try, so that we may both learn from this experience." Even the masters admit they don't know everything and that they can be surprised by the most novice of people at times. This is demonstrated through many of the samurai's approach to fighting (they avoid it when possible, because they know they might lose). In my opinion this is a much better approach to management also. I know how to accomplish things, but I may not know the best way (or even the right way at times), and I won't know any more until I learn from someone else, even someone junior to me.

7402 11y ago

When I trained in aikido, "nage" was the thrower/defender. See, for example, http://aikido-west.org/handbook/uke_nage.html http://aikido-west.org/handbook/uke_nage.html