qualitative and philosophical enquiry of aikido participants from different levels, conceptualization

155 Pages·2010·1.06 MB·English

QUALITATIVE AND PHILOSOPHICAL ENQUIRY OF AIKIDO PARTICIPANTS FROM
DIFFERENT LEVELS, CONCEPTUALIZATION OF AIKIDO AS DIFFERENT FROM
OTHER SPORTS: MIND AND BODY PERSPECTIVES

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
OF
MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

BY

BARIŞ ŞENTUNA

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR
THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN
PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORTS

FEBRUARY 2010
Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences

Prof. Dr. Sencer AYATA
Director

I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Settar KOÇAK
Head of Department

This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is
fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ercan KİRAZ Prof. Dr. Feza KORKUSUZ
Co-Supervisor Supervisor

Examining Committee Members

Prof. Dr. Stephen Voss (BOĞAZİÇİ, PHIL)
Prof. Dr. Feza Korkusuz (METU, PES)
Prof. Dr. Mike McNamee (SWANSEA, AE)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Settar Koçak (METU, PES)
Assist.Prof.Dr. Saadettin Kirazcı (METU,PES )
I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and 
presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, 
as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material 
and results that are not original to this work. 

            Name, Last name : Barış, Şentuna 
Signature              : 

iii
ABSTRACT

QUALITATIVE AND PHILOSOPHICAL ENQUIRY OF AIKIDO
PARTICIPANTS FROM DIFFERENT LEVELS, CONCEPTUALIZATION OF
AIKIDO AS DIFFERENT FROM OTHER SPORTS: MIND AND BODY
PERSPECTIVES

Şentuna, Barış
Ph.D., Department of Physical Education and Sports
Supervisor : Prof. Dr. Feza Korkusuz
Co-Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ercan Kiraz

February 2010, 142 pages

This thesis is made of two main parts. First main part of the thesis is based on the
qualitative enquiry of twenty-three Aikido participants from different levels -
beginner, intermediate, advanced- from three different dojos. Open ended
questions regarding the difference of Aikido from other sports is asked to the
participants. Their written responses were coded using qualitative methods. Based
on coding of documents: labels, categories and themes have been generated.
Second main part of this thesis is based on the discussion of those findings. The
discussion between different levels, the comparison with other findings in Aikido
Literature was done. Lastly and largely the position of findings and possible
arguments it can generate in the Philosophy of Sports Literature are discussed.

Keywords: Aikido, Philosophy of Sports, Qualitative Study, Martial Arts

iv
ÖZ

FARKLI SEVİYELERDEN AİKİDO KATILIMCILARININ, AİKİDOYU
DİĞER SPORLARDAN FARKLI OLARAK KAVRAMSALLAŞTIRMASI
ÜZERİNE NİTEL VE FELSEFİ BİR ARAŞTIRMA:AKIL VE BEDEN BAKIŞ
AÇILARINDAN

Şentuna, Barış
Doktora, Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bölümü
Tez Yöneticisi: Prof. Dr. Feza Korkusuz
Ortak Tez Yôneticisi: Doç. Dr. Ercan Kiraz

Şubat 2010, 142 sayfa

Bu çalışma iki ana bölümden oluşmaktadır. Birinci ana bölümde üç ayrı dojo’dan,
farklı seviyelerden –başlangıç, orta-seviye, ileri seviye- yirmiüç Aikido
katılımcısı üzerinde nitel bir araştırma yürütlmüştür. Katılımcılara Aikido’yu
diğer sporlardan ayıran yönler, açık uçlu sorular şeklinde sorulmuştur.
Katılımcıların yazılı cevapları nitel araştırma yöntemleri kullanılarak
kodlanmıştır. Kodlamalara dayanarak: etiketleme, kategorileme ve temalaştırma
yapılmıştır. Bu tezin ikinci bölümü bu bulguların üzeinde tartışmayı içermektedir.
Farklı seviye Aikido katılımcıları arasındaki farklılıklar, diğer Aikido
literatüründeki bulgular ile karşılaştırma yapılmıştır. En son ve en geniş olarak,
bulguların Spor Felsefesi literatüründe ortaya çıkarabileceği durumlar ve
argümanlar tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Aikido, Spor Felsefesi, Nitel Çalışma, Savaş Sanatları.

v
-To warriors I know-

- My father I have lost -and whose loss is still a loss- to cancer showed me
the way to be a warrior without having the education of it. His glorious
humour with his cancer. Even the day before he passed away his honour
and saying “go away, I am fine” to me and Hüseyin.

- To heroes; mil. captain Sinan Eroğlu and mil. captain Hasan Hatıl from
Special Forces whom had passed to easy side –we have lost-. To their
families and children, to their names never be forgotten, and whose
legends will remain always unwritten. But must be remembered.

- Lastly to whom I call Sensei.

vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I first of all would like to thank to my main advisor Prof. Dr. Feza Korkusuz. For
his wide open generosity and directing such an interdisciplinary thesis. For his
support all the time wanting the impossible from me as, it can be done when I
realize. His being a Sen (to live) Sei (to show) to me.
Secondly I would like to thank to my co-advisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ercan Kiraz
who had taught me qualitative study in his style and forced me to such a thesis. I
also would like to thank to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Settar Koçak whom I have taken most
of my Ph.D. classes and learned great deal on sports and his support was all the
time intensive.
Thirdly I would like to thank to Mike Sensei. Prof. Dr. Mike McNamee, who was
in the jury from Wales, but also acted as an advisor to my thesis as well. His
friendship, help, support is very important to me, in this area of philosophy of
sports, he is the one.
Fourthly I would like to thank to Stephen Sensei. Prof. Dr. Stephen Voss from
Bogazici University, whom I have known since 1996 and helped me in all my
hard times, taught me great deal of philosophy and I am still learning from him.
I also would like to thank Assist. Prof. Dr. Saadettin Kirazcı, Prof. Dr. Nevin
Ergan from Hacettepe Sociology Department for her positive attitude and to
Assist. Prof. Dr. Murat G. Kırdar –aikido student- who helped me on the revision
of English.
vii
My great thanks goes to my Aikido students from all levels, especially children of
age 7-14. The enthusiasm in their eyes, their egoless self, their energy, kept me
going on.
One must also thank to all girlfriends of three have been changed through writing
this thesis. Not mentioning their names but I would like to tell my apologies and
disturbance that can be caused in the writing of this thesis.
I also would like to thank to my friends, where the concept friend is much more
like a family. To Capt. Hüseyin Özdemir and Ali Öztürk, Çakıl Güç, Orhan
Curaoğlu –still writing Ph.D. thesis-, Assist. Prof. Dr. Ünal Karlı –finished before
us-, Ersin Doğan and Sibel Doğan, UBG and Arda Arpacı for their support all the
time.
And to all members of my family each one who have supported me in all of this
hard process. Lastly to my dear mother –when we lost our father while writing
the thesis to cancer- for her support, wisdom, meals, patience and so on and on...

viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PLAGIARISM.......................................................................................................iii

ABSTRACT...........................................................................................................iv

ÖZ...........................................................................................................................v

DEDICATION.......................................................................................................vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.....................................................................................vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................ix

CHAPTER

1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................1

1.1Rationale...............................................................................................5

1.2-Research Questions..............................................................................6

1.3-Aims of Study......................................................................................6

1.4-Limitations...........................................................................................7

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE......................................................................8

2.1. Qualitative Studies…………………………………...…………….9

2.1.1. Where it all started “Psychotherapy” – Epistein (1985).…9

2.1.2 -Faggianelli (1995) Second study on Therapists who are
Aikido Practitioners…………………………..………………..10

2.1.3- Transpersonal Psychology………………………………11

2.1.3.1. Scott (1988)…………………………………….11

2.1.3.2- Mclean (1989)………………………………….12

2.1.3.3- Newton (1996)…………...…………………….12

2.1.3.4- Heery (2003)……… .……………...…………..13

ix
2.1.3.5-Critique of transpersonal Psychology and Aikido
Friedman..………………………………………………14

2.1.4.-Zen and Therapy – Rush (1999)……..…………………..14

2.1.5.Ingalls & Ritscher……..………………………………….15

2.1.6. Qualitative Articles on Education ……………………….17

2.1-7- First roots in sociology – Donohue………………….…..18

2.1-8-Cross-Cultural – Dykhuizen……………………………..19

2.1.9-The Sociosomatics of Connection - Rothman ……………20

2.1.10-Conflict Resolution and Levine ……………………...….21

2.2 - Mind and Body Aspects of Aikido Practitioners and
Mind and Body in general…..……………………………………..22

2.3- Philosophy of Aikido………………………………………………22

3.METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................23

3.1-Research Question and Sub Questions...............................................23

3.2. - Population and Settings...................................................................23

3.3- Data Collection and Analysis............................................................25

3.4- Generating Main Themes................................................................28

3.5- Inter Coder Reliability......................................................................28

3.6- Categories and Labels.......................................................................29

3.6.1-Philosophy…………………………………………….….29

3.6.1.1- Inner Development ………………………..…...29

3.6.1.2.-Overcoming Ego - Having Philosophy
Applicability to Life…………………………….…..…...29

3.6.2- Properties of Aikido………………………………...……30

3.6.2.1 – Harmony…………………………………...….30

3.6.2.2 – Not Using Force…………………………....….30

x