Over the decades of training and teaching I have generally held that constant change is important and have tried to avoid the traps of sentimentality and routine. As I am codifying these experiences into something concrete and reliably transmissible, students ask for simplification. I try, but really, I feel that simplifiction is the most compelling trap of all. I'll do it, but will also show how seeking simplification when embracing complexity and uncertainty might be better.
At the risk of being pedantic here's a bit from Wikipedia on Deconstruction:
Deconstruction is an approach to understanding the relationship between text and meaning. It was originated by the philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930–2004), who defined the term variously throughout his career. In its simplest form it can be regarded as a criticism of Platonism and the idea of true forms, or essences, which take precedence over appearances. Deconstruction instead places the emphasis on appearance, or suggests, at least, that essence is to be found in appearance. Derrida would say that the difference is "undecidable", in that it cannot be discerned in everyday experiences.
Deconstruction argues that language, especially ideal concepts such as truth and justice, is irreducibly complex, unstable, or impossible to determine. Many debates in continental philosophy surrounding ontology, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, hermeneutics, and philosophy of language refer to Derrida's beliefs. Since the 1980s, these beliefs have inspired a range of theoretical enterprises in the humanities, including the disciplinesof law,:3–76 anthropology, historiography, linguistics, sociolinguistics, psychoanalysis, LGBT studies, and feminism. Deconstruction also inspired deconstructivism in architecture and remains important within art, music, and literary criticism."
Moving Meditation - How and Why
My interest in the text and meaning and Derrida's approach concerns 'movement and meaning'. If mind and body are assumed oppositional and binary, such relations are good for Deconstuctive inquiry. Since neuroscience has clearly shown that mind and body are one, it might be interesting to see where such inquiry might lead. New understanding is likely to arise.
Movement and meaning, yes, but what kind of meaning? When investigating posture and power, identity is involved. As posture and power changes, so does identity. Deep concrete change is incremental, ongoing and difficult to monitor.
With my mind-body training discrete movements are treated as text in that they are meant to convey specific linguistic-like messages. These messages are meant to reinforce a specific dialog between mind and body as part of an intentional process that results in better overall integration throughout the sensorum. These discrete movements I call 'Movement Primitives'. My 5 Movement Primitives work with the 5 Mental Models to provide clear milestones along the path from Standing to Emptiness.
Intentional learning supports the core of this teaching method.
- Bending and Torsion - https://www.bu.edu/moss/mechanics-of-materials-bending-normal-stress/
- Movement Types - https://open.oregonstate.education/aandp/chapter/9-5-types-of-body-movements/
- Derrida overview - https://criticallegalthinking.com/2016/05/27/jacques-derrida-deconstruction/
- Some more on Derrida - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/
<fin for now>