Prof. Horst Tiwald is an Austrian born in Krems an der Donau. In 1964 he gained his doctorate at the University of Vienna with a dissertation on Zen-Buddhism and physical education in his chosen subjects of philosophy combined with psychology, ethnology, educational theory and physical education. In 1973 he joined the Institute of Physical Education at the University of Hamburg as a university professor for General Sport Theory specialising in "social philosophy and psychology", where he headed the research department for "Transcultural body dynamics". In the summer semester of 2003 Prof. Dr. Horst Tiwald ended his official teaching activities, having taught, learned, inspired and kept much in motion in the Sports Science department of the University of Hamburg – and always himself as well.

I obtained the above information from the celebratory script with which his former students Dieter Gudel, Rainer Landmann and Oliver Prüfer honoured their professor. I envy them, as I myself never had the privilege of learning "as a student" from this brilliant philosopher, psychologist, sports scientist and pragmatist in general. I was already a professor emeritus myself when I became aware of him at 2 am on 22.12.2011, which was when I came across his eye-opening book Psycho-training in combat and Budo sports (1981) and other publications. I found that this covered so many topics, and was surprised that it has gone substantially unnoticed, unrecognised or even unappreciated within the German-speaking martial arts community. I found it "enlightening", and also uncanny owing to many views which overlap with my own sources and propositions. Although (or perhaps because?) he no longer actively practices any martial arts style, and has never followed the dogmas of their respective gurus, Horst Tiwald understands the "principles behind the martial arts" better than holders of the highest Dan grades and Asian masters.

Since Christmas 2011 we have had an extremely productive and for me highly rewarding "correspondence relationship", and meanwhile exchanged 969 pages of emails.

Recently Prof. Tiwald agreed to hold a lecture as part of our foreign course of study for Bachelor/Master degrees. This is expected to take place in Heidelberg or Kiel in early 2013, and non-students are also admitted.

Your SiFu/SiGung
Keith R. Kernspecht

GUEST EDITORIAL by Prof. em. Dr. phil. Horst Tiwald

On the "Linkage" Model of Keith R. Kernspecht – Part 1

Keith R. Kernspecht uses the term "linkage" to describe flexible use of the entire body to give way and absorb an opponent's attack, at the same time evading it and specifically modulating and regulating it.

To understand this idea of a "linkage", it may be helpful to call Chinese thoughts on "strategy" to mind.
This is because Far-Eastern martial arts are often associated with Chinese thinking, and especially with ancient writings on "strategy".

These writings are often concerned with the following:

• not necessarily seeking to achieve one's aim directly, expending energy
• but rather indirectly, with an energy-saving non-linear approach.

A frontal collision with the opponent is avoided in favour of an attempt to disintegrate the opponent by yielding and using indirect actions, robbing him of his defensive capability. This strategy also makes it possible to discern the opponent's intentions by the use of indirect measures.
In this way it is possible to anticipate and forestall the opponent, depriving him of his ability to react.
In the final analysis the idea is to defeat the opponent without actually attacking oneself.
There are two basic ideas behind this concept:

1. That there are several ways to achieve a goal, in line with the thoughts of Viktor von Weizsäcker (1), who saw it as an "achievement" to be able to reach one's goal by several routes.
2. That the use of indirect measures also enables the opponent to be anticipated, i.e. that with respect to one's own movements there is a unity between perception and movement in the sense that one's own movements not only initiate actions, but also form the basis of perception.

Let me cite a Chinese text in this connection:

"When (something) that has changed and taken on some form
responds to something that has likewise adopted some form,
the result is a frontal/direct relationship.
But if (something) which has not adopted any form itself controls
something which has taken on a form,
this is an indirect relationship.“ (2)

A third factor also comes into play here, namely the difference between "moving" and "movement":

• a "movement" attempts to realise a skill or capability in the form of its execution
• while "moving" is at one with functioning within one's surroundings, and only initiates the formal sequence of an organised movement.

There are actually two further ideas involved here:

1. "Becoming one with" the problem currently posed in the immediate environment, to which moving is to be the response, i.e. the matter of the "attentiveness" that extends into the surroundings beyond the body.
2. The "function" (3), i.e. the "field of possible responses" within which a specific response (moving) is realised depending on the "argument" from the surroundings which is allowed (or avoided). In this context I use the term "function" as defined by Gottlob Frege, for whom a "function" is "unexploited scope for action" which awaits or prepares for the "argument from the surroundings". This is where the "function as scope for action" meets the "achievement" idea of Victor von Weizsäcker.

More in Part 2 of the guest editorial by Prof. em. Dr. phil. Horst Tiwald.

References:

(1) See Horst Tiwald: "Bewegen zum Selbst" (German language), downloadable from the internet at
     www.horst-tiwald.de under "Downloads" in the directory "Buchmanuskripte"
(2) Sun Bin, bingfa, Chapter "Qizheng" (see Sunzi on the art of war, Sun Bin on the art of war, translated
     by Zhong Yingjie, Peking 1994)
(3) See Horst Tiwald: "Über die Funktion und die Bewegungsaufgabe", downloadable from the internet at
    www.horst-tiwald.de in the directory "Texte zur Theorie des Mudo"