Consider using your intention to improve the world of Feldenkrais. Things improve when you – at some point – direct your attention towards it, put your mind towards it, put a foot down, press Enter. Return. ^_^

In fact, I don’t think his ideas where influenced by Erickson. He simply recognized that Erickson’s ideas and life had some similarities to his own.

- Ryan

I’m not particularly convinced that Carl has fallen prey to scientism or an over reliance on science. My issue was simply how sloppy and incoherent his essay was. In the Feldenkrais community, we seem to give Felenkrais “trainers” and those who knew Moshe a free pass to put out all kinds of nonsense without any type of meaningful critique. I would like to help change that within the community.

I hope you are doing well out there.

- Ryan

I have spent a good part of the winter pondering Raymond Tallis’s “Aping Humanity: Neuromania, Darwinitis, and the Misrepresentation of Humanity.” Tallis is a British nueroscientist highly critical of the extravagant claims made by many in his own field. I am afraid that the glamours associated with neuroscience will be fuelling the Feldenkrais Guild Conference. Tallis is formidably literate in the history of Western philosopohy and science, and is an avowed atheist. Nonetheless he beautifully demonstrates that “A neural account of consciousness is a contradiction in terms.” So would too, by extension, be a neural account of awareness.

The FGNA may be capitualiting to scientism.

Sincerely,
Mark Nozon
Sometimes Feldenkrais Practitioner
Decatur, MI

- Ryan

There are billions of this misleaded souls,
strong and proud. Following them creates
disease and destruction, yet they are
highly popular and well respected. They
run nearly all public services, media,
educational institutions etc

Focusing on these people makes one feel
bad.

Contrariwise this kind of article makes
one feel good. This article reflects
love and diversity for life in general, for
respect of human nature, of which
learning is part of.

I just read Thomas Hanna this morning,
he gives me a warm, beautiful feeling
too.

Fortunately we can talk to the somatic
Idiots on this planet through our hands,
an through a series of lessons show them
that they, too, have a right to life on
This planet, and enjoy love, even when
there is no hardship.

At the outset let us agree that the great majority of humans are capable of learning throughout their lives. By learning I mean acquiring the means to adapt, to change, to improve their life process, the very quality of their lives.

Lets take a 2 simple schematic situations; 1. Two fraternal twin children born to the same socio, cultural, economic conditions enter kindergarten. Lets assume they were both exposed to the same environment within the same family into which they were born. One of them gravitates to physical activities be it dance, ball playing whatever, the other to words, or art. What attracts each of them to a different area of learning? One of them becomes a very able sports person, the other becomes an able writer or artist.

2. 2 children, similar backgrounds (as above) have undergone a battery of neuropsycholgical tests. One scored somewhat higher than the other who scored on an average level They both enter school and start learning the average curriculum at the same starting point. (it doesn’t have to be school, it can be any area of human activity..)
They both learn. One learns on the average 10 percent faster than the other. They both learn, however given the different rate of learning ability the gap of acquired learning between them widens progressively. By the time they both reach adulthood, the gap is such that one if ready to attend University, the other barely ready to attend college. (one plays a good game of tennis, the other a brilliant game of tennis..) The slower learner can continue learning for the rest of his/her life and will continuously improve. If the abler one stops learning, the slower one may eventually surpass the faster one, ( The Rabbit and the turtle…) but if the faster one maintains the learning process, the gap between them will only grow larger.

As an optimist and a humanitarian Moshe said or implied that everyone can be a genius, I never quite bought into that premise.
So what is a genius? A person who is brilliant describes a concept, an event or a process. I listen and understand portions of the description and know that while I probably wouldn’t have thought of these things on my own, I could understand and even do what is described providing I devote sufficient attention, time, energy to it. IMO A genius describes a concept and try as I might I cannot fully grasp the intricacies involved, and cannot visualize or create such a concept on my own – ever. To this day I find it difficult to understand string theory in concrete terms, or for that matter Einsteins’ general theory of relativity… in a way that I could explain them to my grandson in simple clear terms….Nor could I create Bethhoven’s 5th symphony, although I do enjoy listening to it so very much….
Robbie

http://iffresearchjournal.org/volume/4/ginsburg

And this comment” ” I read enough in physics to support my contention that physical nature is more complex than you think in your limited way.” is nothing more than mind-reading. You do not know what I think. For you to claim otherwise is a little sad.

I am in complete agreement with your comments on awareness, the limits of cause-effect thinking and epistemology. However, your article on a “New Epistemology” was not particularly convincing to me. I agree with the need but do not think you in any way pulled it off. If that constitutes an “attack” in your world, so be it. Perhaps if you have a message to get across to the larger community, you should take responsibility for that desire and write in a way that is rigorous and understandable.

- Ryan

pauldoron@googlemail.com

Kathy – I’m pretty sure that Roger and the conference committee will read this…let’s hope they are staying apprised of what is going on. Your question speaks to the larger issue of making sure that members communicate (and the “guild” finds out) what practitioners and the public want and need. Roger and the rest of the guild conference are passionate people and want the conferences to succeed – to do that they’ve got to get buy in from enough practitioners and give them what they want. And to do that…? I think they have to ask….

Elinor – I will likely submit a proposal for this conference. And I’m in the process of creating a group to develop another conference around sharing Moshe’s legacy. Off the top of my head, for this one, I’d say, “Neuroscience and Growing Your Practice: How The Research Can Help You To Reach More People and Become More Powerful as a Practitioner.”

I just made that up and have no idea if I can pull it off. But the research is there and someone can certainly do it.

- Ryan

- Ryan

A newly graduated lawyer and a senior citizen are sitting next to each other on a 6-hour flight.
The lawyer is thinking that seniors are so out of touch and/or senile, that he could get one over on any of them easily, and make the money to pay for his cocktails on the flight at least.

So, as the plane takes off, the lawyer asks if the senior would like to play a fun game. The senior is tired and just wants to take a nap, so he politely declines and tries to catch a few winks..

The lawyer persists, saying that the game is a lot of fun, and explains….

“I ask you a question, and if you don’t know the answer, you pay me only $5.00. Then you ask me one, and if I don’t know the answer, I will pay you $500.00,” he says.

This catches the senior’s attention and, figuring he’d play a bit just to pacify the lawyer so he could sleep the rest of the flight, he agrees to play the game.

The lawyer asks the first question.. “What’s the distance from the Earth to the Moon?”

The senior doesn’t say a word, just reaches into his pocket, pulls out a five-dollar bill, and hands it to the lawyer.

Now, it’s the senior’s turn. He asks the lawyer, “What goes up a hill with three legs, and comes down with four?”

The lawyer, befuddled and annoyed, asks for time to research it.

The senior citizen happily agrees and dozes off… while the lawyer uses his laptop to search all references he can find on the Net. He sends E-mails to all the smart friends he knows; all to no avail.

After an hour of searching, he finally gives up. He wakes the senior and hands him $500.00.

The senior pockets the $500.00 and goes right back to sleep. The lawyer is now upset though, and going nuts not knowing the answer.

He awakens the senior and asks, “Well, so what DOES go up a hill with three legs and comes down with four?”

The senior reaches into his pocket, hands the lawyer $5.00, and goes back to sleep.

“fascinating – too much too soon? Transformation isn’t for everyone, I guess. Incremental changes can be easier. I’ve noticed that fear is the emotion of change, and so massive change can produce overwhelming fear, which may be what triggered the aggression in the participants. ” The above is from a former medical doctor and current therapist and trainer of Ericksonian Hypnosis.

And from Irene Gutteridge, Feldenkrais Practitioner in Canada:

“As I may have written to you before, there are definite, in my opinion at least, holes in the way ATM is taught. THis especially when you take a bunch of people who are totally new to the work and essentially “rock their worlds and bodies and psyches” in a weekend workshop and have no space or time for emotional processing that parallels the huge changes in movement and motility etc. “

the iPhone was also there all along … but it took a very long cultural development before it could actually be produced, millions and millions of people involved in this process (starting from the invention of glass, to production of computer chips, supply of manufacturing machines, transportation etc etc etc). Same is for Feldenkrais, it was possible all along, but needed thousands of years of development of the societies before someone was able to verbalize it.

(this is an idea/extract from a speech about Feldenkrais I’m working on)

Now, couple of years into my private practice, I can see and understand and appreciate much more. Now I would really like to “hang out” with Mosh Feldenkrais (or someone equally cool), and study with him/her in a proper master-apprentice model, like the holy 13 did.

Ruthy like Mia, Yochanan, Eli Wadler, and Chava Shelhav, all of whom were trained by Moshe before the San Francisco training, felt that they had no choice but to teach as their experience demanded, as opposed to how the Feldenkrais bureaucracy demanded.

The TABs rationalized what they did as necessary to create a unified body of knowledge with standards of curiculum so that when people came to get a Feldenkrais ATM or FI, they would know that the person had graduated from an accredited training program. It sounds good, but I think that by creating unacceptable conditions for many of the most senior people in the method, this action badly stilted the growth of the work, both as a discipline and in its acceptance in the world.

Moshe often said that each person would develop their own handwriting in the work. Each of the trainings that he taught were radically different from each other. How was it representative of his work to codify rules as to how trainings must be taught to be accredited? Accredited by whom and for what? To protect the public? To protect Feldenkrais practitioners from competition of those who were minimally or poorly trained? Experience shows that anyone who does bad work will not succeed in building a practice, so what are they afraid of? I’m afraid that controlling the work will continue to result in this marvelous resource for humanity effectively remaining stillborn.

Thanks for sharing this Ryan!

- Ryan

Honestly I can’t see there being ANY OTHER WAY to proceed and keep evolving what Moshe “codified” over 30 years ago.

I’ve been encouraged by my main mentor to do EXACTLY what you mention above.

As Prisca noted, Moshe started with people who had had already a lot of ATM experience. For myself, I know of at least 1/2 dozen people – be it dedicated clients of mine, or other movement-mind-body-based colleagues who aren’t Feldies, but who would like to access and learn more about Moshe’s main principles of movement and higher learning for either their own personal development, or in order to enhance their own teachings in the movement disciplines.

We forget that what Moshe was teaching was there all along – it was just invisible (i think) to our very industrialized and dualistic way of treating and taking care of our bodies. This reminds me of Simon Sinek who codified what he calls “The Golden Circle” and is now teaching to org’s and making a fortune doing so!

(as I see it) Moshe codified and created an immense amount of content and resource to fully explore what is in each of us. After all we always use babies and young infants as a primary example of “good movement”, should this birthright be trademarked in the way it has been? Even though I’m a member of FGNA, I choose to not use the service marks in my marketing. (for me) the trademarks make “feldenkrais” look like a fad and a ‘prescriptive’ method, as opposed to a model of learning that can improve all aspects and qualities of a human being and how they interact with their world.

Good post Ryan. Irene.

My training will be according to the laws of the organic learning in opposition to the rules in an accademic learning. These laws of the organic learning can be summerized in one single word: S E L F – E X P E R I E N C E.
Every lesson in awareness through mevement taught by Moshe Feldenkrais was first experienced by himself many, many times before he gave it to the public. Feldenkrais was, so to say, his first pupil and evolved his method through his own self-education during the creation of his lessons and of his method as a whole.
Self-education through self-experience determinated the creation of the Feldenkrais method by Moshe Feldenkrais and was the way Feldenkrais wanted his teaching will assist the others to learn and understand his method.
In this training you will not be instructed, but you will have the opportunity to learn through self-experience, the same way a new-born learns his mother-tongue.
Through more than eight hundreds group-lessons in Awareness Through Movement of Moshe Feldenkrais and 10 sessions in Functional Integration given by myself to every participant during the Training you will get the necessary experience for the practice part in the last segment of the training which will be dedicated only to the practice of the trainees under my suppervision. In this last part of the training dedicated only to the practice of the Feldenkrais Method in its both forms, ATM and FI, you will have the opportunity to prove to yourself your own ability for a mature, competent and creativ application of the Feldenkrais Method suiting the necessities of the client you work with.
“Although nature commences with reason and ends in experience it is necessary for us to do the opposite, that is to commence with experience and from this to proceed to investigate the reason.”
“All our knowledge has its origins in our perceptions.”
“I have been impressed with the urgency of doing. Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Being willing is not enough; we must do.”
Leonardo da Vinci
___________________________________________________________

“Your participation in the course of Ruth Bar made it to an unforgettable event. You did a great impression on us all and opened new and important aspects of the method. We will be happy to attend your workshop in September.”
Natalia

“I have been in the sessions at kibbutz Izreel, and learned a lot both technically, emotionally and theoretically.”
Jonathan

http://alt.feldenkrais-training.de/index.php?language=2&topic=8&page=12

For more information, please, contact me at info@feldenkrais-training.de

“…it took me some years to understand how much we need each other to understand ourselves and the method… but at the time i was thinking of facing everything alone.. well that time was really really harder…”

I agree. Many of the people who became skilled quickly at this work had a strategy of working with others in a study group. That wasn’t quite possible for me in the beginning (I was too out of touch with myself). I think many of us start out there. And perhaps all of that time on the floor, sensing and moving can lead some of us to isolation?

- Ryan

Be well – Ryan

- Ryan

For example take a string of ATM’s:

say, 4-point, with spider walk, with flipping the heels to squat with a judo roll thrown in here and there, along with some basic rolling ATM’s, and speed it up a tad and you have a full on workout that is sensory based (granted you begin slow…and build) and gets every single orientation, body part and movement possibility jiving.[i did this this summer and it was brilliant!] you could call it dance, or CI, or fitness class, or simply human movement.

I’m finding that the “labelling” of our activities, Feldenkrais included, can become hazardous if we are not careful.

thanks for posting this Ryan. It’s about to become a post on the human groove tonight!

I’ve only done a little bit of contact improv. I enjoyed it. I think it’s wonderful and can be an amazing complement to the Feldenkrais Method. But like you, I don’t think it can directly teach us to move better or differently. Well, perhaps it can, but not with the specificity and power of Feldenkrais.

Thanks for joining the conversation! – Ryan

Robbie – Thanks. I too, found a disconnect between Paxton’s words and his nonverbal behavior. However, it’s only one snippet of his life and I don’t want to read too much into it. I could relate to him and other’s like him as people looking for more choices. Looking but perhaps not actualizing. Not having a way out.

My view on city life is that it has the possibility to save us. They are more energy efficient and can potentially have a lower footprint than living in the country. Actually, they already do, but the efficiencies can improve dramatically. I don’t think he was looking for a return to a previous was of life. But again, I don’t know much about the man.

cheers – Ryan

http://www.musclemanagement.com/berrymethod/

I will try and remember.

- Ryan

I like the scurvy piece too.

Irene.

The most priceless Moshe humour is in B&MB in chapter 17 on the upright two-person reflex sexual orgasm…Most of Moshe’s work has a big effect on the flexibility of the hips and pelvis, but the sexual benefits are not emphasized by Feldenkrais people.
Moshe says something to the effect that if one has a “female” (sic!) partner that is “affectionately disposed”!
It’s page 177-178. He even mentions that one would probably have 5000 coiti (coitus) acts in one’s life! These two pages are probably the most radical of Feldenkrais’ writings that have been ignored. Imagine a demo on the Oprah Show! How many people have even experienced or seen a mature complete reflex discharge of the sex act while standing! One needs to be erect ( sic!) in the standing position in order for the reflex to be triggered thru the feet and gravity components….
Not to mention the gross lack of apprenticeship offered to ourselves in education!

http://utahfeldenkrais.org/blog/podcasts/edward%20_yu_1.mp3

- Ryan

It is not just our responsibility to make clear what we do and why we do it, but also to defend it when it is questioned.

Some can’t do this.

Avoid

let me know if you can pull it up,
Stacy

Stacy – The link you sent me does not resolve. I looked it up and google and the link is correct. Perhaps the website is down?

- Ryan

They want to kill him even after his death by hiding what they can still hide from the public (David Berzin being one of the champions in hiding Feldenkras materials together with Anat Baniel, Jeremy Karzen and some other I will not mention here).
I am not the rabbit and the IFFFFFFFF are not the cat. And I will soon give my own PROFESSIONAL Trainings in the Feldenkrais Method for people who will not need to wait for a “competency” passport which they will get only if they will learn to be a “brave boy” and a “brave girl” and stay on their tail waiting for the piece of paper given by some selfmade and selfnamed Feldenkrais Police, trainings for those who are not ready to wait for 20 years to be labeled as “competent” in order to give trainings which will create another group of incompetent people for another 20 years.
Feldenkrais method has to be spread as free and authentically as Chi Gong, Tai Chi and many other far east systhems have spread in all their different forms have spread in the world.

I for one and moving on. I only have a few more posts and I am moving to a new website and way of disseminating the work where I can breathe more freely.

- Ryan

I’ve been quietly assessing the inner and outer workings of this amazing work for the past few years, and it is quite apparent, for me at least, that until some new blood and new ideas on how to better further and enhance, not only the training model, but Moshe’s teaching, will his work survive and rise to the next level.

I was trained incredibly soundly and had great resource and education going into the training, and have beefed up my knowledge in other areas post-training (especially marketing), and even with this, there are, again in my opinion, huge holes in the Moshe’s teaching. (There I said it!)

Hope everyone is doing well this summer! IRene.

Where is good old irony and funny talk? Wasn’t Moshe teaching his beloved students to rid themselves of feelings of inferiority? Didn’t David succeed in doing so?

Also revisit the talking .. some pracs quote Moshe often enough (always the same quotes though) for making their audience believe this actually must be Moshe in the room, or at least the best organic playback one can get …

I’m upset because Marty did obviously not know how important he was.

In 1933 we witnessed the books burning by the nazis, in 1956 the FDA burned the books of Wilhelm Reich, in 1958 Viktor Schauberger his works were confiscated by “US intelligence agents” and he was kept in custody, died few days later. In 1975 we witnessed how the Red Khmer killed most educated people in Cambodia. Just a few examples. Most people still live in a trauma after this kind of events.

But actually, now, we live in very interesting times: for the first time in history it seems that educated, highly evolved people are alive, and have a chance to survive and to propel humanity forwards, to make a big change: from uneducated and stupid to highly evolved and intelligent.

I don’t think Marty knew what he was up against. Thousands of years of history pressing against him. Not aware of this, it was just to tempting to give way to “psychological burdens”.

I hope his death is an alert signal for all living genius, for everyone reading this, for putting up against the forces of destruction and to say heil to life itself, to celebrate knowledge, wisdom and refinement of character. We need to survive!

http://catself.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/marty-remembered/

Thank you, Anita Schnee

“It is one thing to study war, and another to live the warrior’s life.” Telamon of Acadia, Mercenary, 5th Century B.C.

When I heard the news of Marty’s death, I grieved deeply the loss of this exceptional man, whom I had loved dearly, and who had been my life partner for 9 years.

My heart broke sensing what I felt might have been his final moments of anguish and fear, and with the realization that my last moments with him were to be those gray and painful ones that I had spent preparing to leave our temple home for the last time.

For the moment, I had forgotten the central point of his brilliant philosophy of life, and healing, and art.

As most of you know, in addition to being an artist, Marty was a teacher and practitioner of a unique hands-on healing method, as well as a philosophy of conscious experience.

His approach to healing the bodies, minds and spirits of others is perhaps best captured by a beautiful Galway Kinnell poem, which he kept framed in his treatment room. It is called “St. Francis and the Sow”:

The bud
stands for all things,
even those things that don’t flower,
for everything flowers, from within, of self-blessing;
though sometimes it is necessary
to reteach a thing its loveliness,
to put a hand on its brow
of the flower
and retell it in words and in touch
it is lovely
until it flowers again from within, of self-blessing;
as St. Francis
put his hand on the creased forehead
of the sow, and told her in words and in touch
blessings of earth on the sow, and the sow
began remembering all down her thick length,
from the earthen snout all the way
through the fodder and slops to the spiritual curl of
the tail,
from the hard spininess spiked out from the spine
down through the great broken heart
to the blue milken dreaminess spurting and shuddering
from the fourteen teats into the fourteen mouths sucking
and blowing beneath them:
the long, perfect loveliness of sow.

Marty saw everyone he touched as a beautiful and whole work of art – regardless of their medically-diagnosed conditions or personal sense of imperfection, and his lessons showed us new and more expansive ways of being, of experiencing our own wholeness.

To hear the words he told us, about us and to be held in his healing hands was to be ‘reminded’ of our own perfect loveliness, to feel our own ‘self-blessing’, perhaps for the first time.

But it was his private sense of irreversible imperfection and its attendant anguish that fueled his genius and every aspect of his life’s work.

At the age of 6, Marty was diagnosed with a spinal tumor and admitted to Massachusetts General Hospital for a series of radiation treatments that would disintegrate his vertebrae in the region of the lesion, and require him to be in a full-body cast for six months, and on crutches for another year.

His parents lived across the city from the hospital and didn’t have a car. They had four children, all told, with another small child at home to care for, and jobs to do . . . And so Marty was left alone, sometimes for days and nights at a time, in a dreary ward (which was characteristic of large municipal hospitals in the 1940s), with only rare visits from the professional-but-impersonal medical staff – left alone with his extreme physical pain, and his absolute immobility, and an excruciating sense of his own imperfection.

This nightmarish experience was the seed of the bud that blossomed fully into Marty’s extraordinary healing talent, a talent that touched the lives of heads of state and industry, celebrities and star athletes, homeless persons and immigrant children with equal tenderness and love.

The demons of his early experiences never left him; rather, they remained as his ever-present teachers, and his private struggle with them continued to fuel his powerful healing talents, his art, and his philosophy of life until he made the decision to end his own.

Now, as I remember Marty and his core teachings, I see clearly the whole masterwork of impressionistic art that was his life.

We can neither appreciate it, nor understand it by stepping in close and focusing on any one moment, dark or bright,

and it is not in anyway diminished because the last dab of paint applied to the canvas appears to us gray rather than robins-egg blue.

For us to see Marty’s last moment as a ‘senseless tragedy’,
or his life as ‘imperfect’ or ‘distorted’ because of it, would be to miss the genius of his central teaching and the exquisite beauty and absolute perfection of the whole being that was, and is, Marty Weiner.

I struggle with the term myself, but the culture seems to like it, and, I’ve found it harmless – if not meaningless.

I am fascinated by the fact that I still habitually push my tongue into my teeth and that I am rarely aware of doing so. It seems to me – I think – that it contributes to some stress and discomfort in my mouth. I may need to invent or adapt some ATM’s to deal with it….

cheers! – Ryan

Curious – Ryan

Awareness Through Movement can be considered choreographed movement when one is following the movements prescriptively and doing them by rote with little attention or awareness. I think many Feldenkrais practitioners have noted times in which they fell into a kind of automatic performance of a Feldenkrais session. As choreography they CAN be effective at times.

But the potential magic and deep changes comes when one uses Feldenkrais as a tool to discover what one doesn’t know what doesn’t know. When you go slowly and attend to your own movement details and moving/thinking/feeling/experiencing you can discover where you are enacting something habitually and unnecessarily and then let it go. That learning cannot be choreographed as human beings are too complex and have too many degrees of freedom…

Just some quick thoughts.

- Ryan

I can’t disagree with you at all. Wouldn’t you say that there are degrees of choreography? In my experience, a marching band must adhere to a script but the various forms allow for strict attention to every movement (corps bands) or individualized flares of unique expression (swing bands).

I would categorize ATM as a “swing band” movement.

I work with a lot of athletes so integrating IDEOMOTION into there programs has been quite a challenge, but a great one. This is one of the gaps I’m trying to fill.

Keep up the great work.

Please look for more videos coming up. I’m working on at least 2 per week, sometimes 3.

Best,

Will

I appreciate this. More short videos are now on YouTube. Just search my name.

I have always struggled to begin a meaningful dialogue with the Feldenkrais community. Meeting Todd personally and my brief correspondence with you may change that. I also just heard from Francesco in Italy.

We have much to offer each other, and I knew that the momoent I heard Feldenkrais himself lecture and demonstrate in 1980. Just 31 years ago

I went to see Barrett talk in Vancouver a few weeks ago. He teaches ideomotion, which is a non voluntary movement produced by a dominant mental state. I wrote a few posts about it if anyone is interested.

http://toddhargrove.wordpress.com/category/ideomotion/

He is huge fan of Feldenkrais by the way, he mentioned it often during his seminar.

Actually, it is a pretty stupit idea that immobilizing the mouth at night during sleep time can curtail teeth grinding, admitably an serious problem, both physically and, you should excuse the expression, mentally. There are a lot of tough jaws in our society (and in others’?). From whence comes this twisted form of aggression, teeth grinding? Are we trying to chew ourselves to death?

Of course, if the dentists and the oral surgeons and the TMJ specialists are all there to close the proverbial barn door a little too late, well there’s a lot of gold in them thar nightgaurds. And if infection and disfigurement and unbearable pain follow hard upon, well it keeps the industry going and pains must needs pills.

It is the grinding must be caught at the pass. Of course some grinders don’t even know they are grinding. When I was studying Gindler and Stanislovski (the Method), avant de la deluge, we were interested in faces and visages, and we could spot hard jaws coming down de road.There’s the time for intervention.

For who would fardels bear? The whips and scorns of time? The proud man’s contumely? The law’s delay?

I don’t hear any sage Feldenkrais advise. Cats got your tongues? At least say # 23 or something. Is there some kind of boycott going on…the unkindest cut of all?

Tch, tch, tch…

John Quinn
GCFP, BFL(T). SOUNDER SLEEP, AEA, SAG, AFTRA, QDE (Qualified Designated Entity, Ret.)

Anyway, thanks for keeping me posted. Testimonials are great. I sometimes forget how powerful the work is until a client reminds me by sending an email saying that they aren’t getting surgery because Feldenkrais “cured” them.

cheers!!! – Ryan

Funny you should bring up this TMJ thang now. I had an steady ATM and FI client had to drop out this past summer due to her buying an house with her husband and two kids

This must have been stressful for her and demanding of more work in their business. About a month ago she called me after this long summer and winter absence, complaining that she was having ‘Jaw problems’.. and requested some new FIs from me.

In the first FI visit she ‘presented with an swollen left side of her face and jaw.

TMJ cases often happen to People who grind their teeth at night when sleeping, To counter- act the teeth grinding most dentists will immediately prescribe an TOOTHGAURD to be worm in the mouth when sleeping . The Dental patients are told not to sleep without it. After having worn said Tooothgaurd for some time she had developed some severe pain in some upper left teeth and said pain radiated to her left ear, and her left face was markedly swollen.

In the first meeting I did some general and pelvic FI work and then some very gentle face work ala Gindler, Feldenkrais, Berenger and myself.

A week later we met again. She said that she felt better after the FI including her face, but she said her her face developed an soreness, later. This was alarming to me.

After two more FIs weekly, with her face still being swollen and her tooth pain increasing so that she could hardly eat, I advised the client to see her general practitioner (MD) right away and ask him if there were some infection. Her dentist had såid he should see an TMJ specialist.:}}

A week later she sent me the following note:

Hi John-

Hope this finds you well.

I wanted to update you on how my jaw’s been feeling.

Last week I saw an Ear, Nose, Throat Dr who said my ears were clear–so he recommended seeing an oral surgeon.

I went to an oral surgeon, the head of oral surgery at (such and such big)sic
Hospital, who did some tests (palpating muscles around jaw etc) and diagnosed classic TMJ Disorder. Tendinitis of the jaw muscles.

I am supposed to wear my mouth guard at all times except eating (hard to do), eat only soft foods for 3 months, put warm compresses on my jaw 3x a day, and take an prescription strength Naproxen (Aleve), and a muscle relaxer at night. I have a follow up appointment a week from Friday. Not sure how long I can take the medication, but it does seem to help the pain.

{I had asked her to keep me informed re this Medical Oral Surgical treatment.}

This evening I received this note:…..

No worries, John. I’m going for a follow-up appt next Friday, so will let you know how it goes.

The medication is relieving some pain; I’m wearing the nightguard, and sleeping well as a result of taking the muscle relaxer.

Hope to see you over the summer.

{I guess some times we need an oral surgeon, as well as a hole in the head.}

Certainly the pain must be treated, before anything else can be done.

Perhaps when the pain goes away, better things can be done. I’m not stupid at face work neither. I have been doing it since the sixties (that’s the 1960′s), when I studied Gindler work. Maybe I’ll learn it to you sometime.

I downloaded your materials too. Thanks. This TMJ stuff is a horrible affliction.

I knew a lady once i the 911 trauma area, who used to wake up screaming from her Night Gaurd.

This is an factual, confidential, report.
best wishes,
John Quinn

(We would welcome further advise that FM practitioners and others might have re this matter and the TMJ syndrome.)

I like how MF is talking about acting appropriate in a given situation. Even with such abstract actions as thinking. Or actually explicitly with such abstract actions, and how they can convert into something concrete.

Are they therefore shaping and pushing our thoughts and opening us up to other ways of seeing the world?

But, somewhat off topic . . . something that comes to my mind is a wondering about language today. Not in the way of attempting to be very precise and describing with exactness, but with regard to the inexactness found in teenagers and young adults. The number of new words and part words and sounds and acronyms and substitutions for the actual word are astounding. Just sit around and listen to them for an hour. It’s amazing. We could lament that they don’t know proper English, or recognize the art of the communication that is going on between them. They are using feeling and tone and prosodic distinctions and pacing and pauses or no pauses all in such a seemless way without having to stop and explain it to the other person. It’s really like watching an improv take place. I wonder if it’s an audible representation of the very deep firing of their nervous systems. There are the vestiges of disinhibition in this rambling and it seems meaningless to most adults I know, but it is very meaningful to these teens. And, interestingly, they are shaping and pushing the language we use to describe our thoughts. Are they therefore shaping and pushing our thoughts and opening us up to other ways of seeing the word.

Fascinates me. Thanks for the quotes…..nice way to start the week!

Lisa

Thank you. I appreciate the companionship with you, in my own struggle to integrate this shocking loss.

In touch, Anita.

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ’0 which is not a hashcash value.

I donknow nuthing!

John Quinn

“Brad Beldner breaks out of this Felderbinden und reaches a wonderful creativity and excitement in this ‘experimental’ movie above. Note the beauty of his fast flowing FI
moves with clients. He doesn’t linger, tediously, parce que he has something of his own to say, to express. Some other small video Dance-Feldy operations never break out.. It’s just another boring Feldenkrais class.. sort of gussied up, but still imprizoned. Even a plain Feldenkrais movement is not supposed to be imprizoned.”

Thanks for posting. – Ryan

Yeah, sure, you can reprint it under your video.

John Quinn

Brad Beldner breaks out of this Felderbinden und reaches a wonderful creativity and excitement in this ‘experimental’ movie above. Note the beauty of his fast flowing FI
moves with clients. He doesn’t linger, tediously, parce que he has something of his own to say, to express. Some other small video Dance-Feldy operations never break out.. It’s just another boring Feldenkrais class.. sort of gussied up, but still imprizoned. Even a plain Feldenkrais movement is not supposed to be imprizoned.

I guess there if a difference between Feldenkrais and Art, but sometimes they connect.”There’s the thing by which we’ll catch the conscious of the King! ”

Beldner seems to have broken out of every prizon. It is nice to see this, on the rode out of town. I was an Actor, an Smacta, and this and that, a playwright, a Director, myself, in life, thus the Gindler and thus the Feldenkrais; but I broke out from time to time.

John Quinn

Learning, like in Feldenkrais, looks and feels very different from exploring dance moves, or expressive dancing … I mean once you know the difference .. between learning and reproducing … it’s like day and night …

Envoking Emotions: Ron Kurts-Hakomi Method founder, from a talk on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb5Anhyeqo).

Imitating means not knowing what one is doing, but doing what others are doing. This is the diametral opposite of what Feldenkrais intended with his method.

And now, we finished our discussion. I will no more react to any of your answers.

An addenda to my last comment: Take a look at Daniel Stern, The Present Moment in Psychotherapy and Daily Life, Norton, 2004 for other research alternatives and some description of intersubjectivity and attunement which are processes involved in the work with the participents of the project.
While intersubjectivity is not yet mainstream science yet there are a number of
people in cognitive science, phenomenolgy, psychology, and even movement research considering the validity of such concepts that stretch the traditions of hard science.
Reviewer 1 gives at least some clues as to what needs to be described for his consideration. It could have been possible to get participants to describe experiences. The other problen is replication. It is a hallmark for scientific studies. Problem is that as you point out you cannot replicate the intervention. But the practitioners can replicate how they go about making contact, how they touch, how they contact a person, how they move the person in relation to what they detect and feel. This is general in the FM even with the difficulties of autism, etc.
Reviewer 2 reveals his bias by using the word motoric, rarely used by Feldenkrais which he assumes is a separate entity in the nervous system. There are now some very high powered neuroscientists abandoning such assumptions and are beginning to consider that the NS is a huge interlocking network where there is constant activity and inter-relating processing.

A few years ago at a science – Feldenkrais symposium in Seattle Alan Fogel showed some videos made from your research project with adult people suffering with autism.
The videos were direct and dramatic evidence that the interventions by the Feldenkrais practitioners were successful in evoking improvement for the subjects in the study. The subjects, all of whom showed some degree of disturbance in their movement and ability to stay in contact with other people in the initial lessons made significant progress. Many improved their coordination in daily movement, improved their ability to make eye contact with the practitioners, and began to communicate verbally. What was the source of these changes? I doubted that the movements, improved as they were, were causally involved with the changes that were seen on the videos. One had to look further to detect what could be causally involved. What in fact was the importance of the use of the Feldenkrais Method in the study? There are very few interventions that could bring about the results that were shown. Watching the actions of the practitioners gives a clue. The lessons always involved a slow and careful approaching to the subjects by the practitioners while attending to the immediate reactions of the person involved. The possibility of touch was postponed often until the autistic subject could tolerate and accept the contact. Support and safety were primary concerns. There was no attempt to force the issue. When contact was made communication was possible. Then neurological change was possible. To explain all that would involve much more space here.
It is a shame that the reviewers of the research had some different ideas about what was involved and discounted the evidence of the videos, if indeed they had seen them, or if they had seen them, understood what they saw. Also the difficulty in trying to describe the Feldenkrais Method did not help the reviewers understand how the method made the difference.
It is here also where standard research falls down in documenting what it is that
makes for the effectiveness of the work. The data doesn’t reveal what happened except as some evidence of physical and testable psychological change. This is why
in my Epistemology for the Feldenkrais Method paper, I was attracted to Gendlin’s notion of the responsive order. If you go to Heinz von Foerster’s book, Understanding Systems: Coversations on Epistemology and Ethics, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2002, he explains some of the difficulties that lead to other models of research and scepticism about normal science in elucidating systems. I don’t know what happened beyond this and would hope some day the project would be revived again.

Well, whether you’ve earned a Ph.D. or just a lot of knowledge, it makes no difference what you conceive if you cannot achieve your intentions by communicating it. For the purposes of pedagogy and research, communication through graphical representation is worthwhile, but of course it has limits, people who use it have to use it carefully and thoroughly.

If Labanotation of Feldenkrais encouraged imitation that is tested by how well the imitating trainee produces the same results as their model, great! However, I think it would instead let people avoid imitation, and just treat the dance steps as a recipe. If that produced the same results as careful imitation, great! If not, that shows the limits of following instructions without direct observation and imitation.

Would I rather:
1. follow a labanotation example.
2. imitate a trainer.
3. follow verbal instructions.
4. do 1,2,or 3 covertly or unconsciously.

I would want the opportunity to choose.

By the way, actual imitation is better achieved by someone like you, with years of experience of a skilled source (Mr. Feldenkrais), and more direct imitative knowledge of his behaviors. Following a labanotation transcript of a Feldenkrais movement is a different approach than imitation.

Your point about language is interesting, however, I don’t think the analogy is accurate. Potential Feldenkrais movements do not have the same generative ability as human language, I don’t think. In particular, non-redundant Feldenkrais movements that contribute to a successful outcome have a finite number of forms, I believe, but this would not become evident until necessary versus sufficient versus redundant movements to produce change were distinguished from each other. Cataloging successful Feldenkrais movements could start that analysis.

The value of notating Feldenkrais for research could come from original dance designs, original Feldenkrais movements, that produce positive change for (or in) clients. A thoroughly-employed notation system and a library of Feldenkrais method movements could speed that research. In fact, a properly programmed expert system could speed exploration of bodily movement possibilities with the added advantage that it would never fail to explore what it knew. Humans are good at that too, though, and have a better grasp of relevancy than many machines.

Consider the list of topics raised here:
* developing graphical representations (Of Feldenkrais moves)
* learning through imitation (by copying)
* learning through instruction (following graphical or verbal instruction)
* learning by introspection (by following instructions such as “sense, feel, and think”)
* researching through game representations (of Feldenkrais moves)

those are all separate topics, with their own implications.

Thank you, Mr. Doron, for sharing your thoughts. If you read this far, thank you for that also. This ends our conversation. Goodbye.

-Noah

can you learn a language only by imitating the movements of the lips of the others?
What do you need first, in order to learn to speak a languge, if not its perception?
And though which organs, through the eyes or through the ears?

Thisd is how the Feldenkrais Method is completely ruined today.

This cannot be any “model for trainingFeldenkrais” because it is just an encouraging for IMITATION!!!!!!!. human beings are more than imitating primates!!!!!!!!!!
Feldenkrais himself avoided his tainees to look at his FI’s just in order to learn to handle out of their OWN EXPERIENCE n the method, AND NOT!!!!!!!! by studying the follows of some kind of movements.
The movementso ne is doing during an FI is absolutely irrelevant. Relevant is that one senses, feels and thinks. The trainees have to make a complex experience with THEMSELVES in the Feldenkrais methode in order to be capable to practice it not as apes, but as mature, creative and responsible human beings.

“Living by imitation is the most poor way of living.” (Moshe Feldenkrais in one of his workshops which are no more available. . .)

The power of awareness to enact change is not domain specific – it’s not just about movement and self. We can add political awareness, guild awareness, awareness of where we have been and where we are going.

We can know where we stand in the physical sense, in the emotional sense, in the legal sense, the organizational sense…

and re-organize for greater efficiency in all areas.

Those days are coming. That’s my belief.

———————————————————————

Paul Doron

Let me clarify a statement I made “Having watched Mr. Feldenkrais work”, when I did, it was on tape, and my thought at the time was that he was receiving information through his senses, his hands, etc. That is why I mentioned seeing him work, it was not a claim to insider knowledge of the method or something pretentious or buffoonish of that nature.

Mr. Nagy is the person versed in Feldenkrais, my idea was speculative, and meant for him. Your opinion about trends that encourage codification, and in particular, your belief that somehow knowledge of another person’s changes is objectively possible through sensing internal changes, is just a belief.

internal experience of practitioner sensory experience of practitioner sensory experience of client internal experience of client

is how I see the internal of a client and practitioner. The codification idea I proposed (and it was just an idea), is based on my belief that causal relations created and noticeable in the sensory experience of the practitioner and of the client can be reduced to causal relations noticeable through visual observation (as a choreographer might see) without the benefit of physical contact with the client or practitioner, but reduced for a purpose, to provide a pedagogical model for training in Feldenkrais, or for another purpose, to research changes that Feldenkrais practice succeeds in making.

Whether my beliefs or proposals succeed or fail is not worth your time to argue. They certainly don’t fit into any trend in Feldenkrais that I know of, and I’m afraid I don’t know of many. I’m not a Feldenkrais practitioner.

Mr. Nagy is a sharp fellow with good intentions and a research bent, which is why I made my suggestions to him. He has not made a statement about whether they might be worthwhile, and so what. I’ll live without that reassurance.

I’m sure your approaches to research and pedagogy will fulfill your needs however you warrant they should, particularly given your presented background knowledge, it should be easy for you. But it might not be. Goodbye.

The Feldenkrais method is in the first place not mouvement, but self perception, sensing and imaging.-

Till another time
sincerely,
Paul

- Ryan

Anat did seem to get a good deal of what she wanted. She was able to conduct her trainings under the relaxed guidelines that she wanted and such. And – in my view – the guild left a big gaping hole regarding the service marks. If they did truly own them and could prove so, why settle at all?

I’m mainly asking rhetorical questions based on my layman’s reading of some of the court documents.

I think the guild will be stronger and better served when the marks are used more equitably (or modified) and when the primary focus in not legal restrictions but community – when we welcome all our “family” and yes, their “children” into the fold – even the black sheep. To that end I will do my best to know exactly what happened and publish it widely.

The power of awareness to enact change is not domain specific – it’s not just about movement and self. We can add political awareness, guild awareness, awareness of where we have been and where we are going.

We can know where we stand in the physical sense, in the emotional sense, in the legal sense, the organizational sense…

and re-organize for greater efficiency in all areas.

Those days are coming. That’s my belief.

Be well – Ryan

My comment about trainers not being certified is largely statistical – there are a few new ones – you, Aliza….and I presume a few others? But compared to the number of Assistant trainers and others who are qualified to train…the number is quite low?

That was my main point – new trainers, new training programs and a clear pathway to both would be quite a boon in my opinion.

Just a few quick thoughts. Would like to know how accurate my thoughts are in your view.

cheers! – Ryan

Moshe authorized Jerry Karzen & Anat to be trainers within a very short period post their training. His criteria, I presume, were based upon quality. He saw in each of them the ability to be trainers, (this is aside from whatever personal considerations he may have had in his relationships with both of them, respectively. Also, he had authorized Mia to run training programs earlier, but then again, he was the committee of one…
Robbie

Be well!

I have no idea if he practiced medicine. He’s not a Feldenkrais practitioner. Though, my comments aside, I am glad that he is promoting the work.

The big Santa Clause beard and picture doesn’t work for me….but perhaps a certain part of the population likes that type of think? It’s a badge of honor and acceptance? Who knows.

I hope you are doing well.

- Ryan

I know “Dr.” Weil finished medical school. And that he has a lot of opinions about the failings of medicine and a lot of opinions and suggestions about what he thinks is good and true and natural.

And I know he offers many opportunities for me, one of the masses of people he markets to, to improve my imperfections by subscribing to his offers and buying his product(s).

It could be a CD, a magazine, a spiritually-evolved form of ancient Hopi footwear, a $100 an ounce natural soap, or some other “must-have” to make me young, slim, natural, and to cure my yearning heart, Lupus, fibromyalgia, burning feet, dementia, or widely metastatic lung cancer.

But did he ever practice medicine?

And is he a Feldenkrais practitioner?

And two other questions I have. And I apologize in advance for being so direct, but I’ve always wondered and finally I have a chance to ask….

Why does he post his picture everywhere? and…

Shouldn’t he lose about 75 pounds?

I’d be more psychologically motivated to charge my credit card and
“buy” the soap if he looked healthier.

Have you considered creating a page that uses his last paragraph? I think it could be a powerful testimonial.

My last point still stands: Most powerful association will be the article on you: “Anita Noone Achieved What Medicine Could Not.” (Or something similar.

Be Well – Ryan

So you would have pairs of acts, defined as occurring over multiple time intervals, and in cases where the behavior is not as anticipated, you simply have a different dance.

The benefit to describing a healing modality using a notation system is the possibility of representing the dance as a game, one with a goal state, different moves by each player, and a final set of moves (e.g., the practitioner sitting quietly while the client rolls over on its belly) considered to be a “win”.

Arbitrary pairings of moves (possibly constrained by some quantity of time they should occur in), could provide multiple wins. Successful Feldenkrais operations could be described as certain kinds of dances (e.g., the patient begins with a standing stretch toward the ground, and ends with a standing stretch that includes the patients palms flat on the ground).

Just an idea, Dr. Nagy, if you want to pursue it further….

Keep in mind that Ed is just putting up a short clip to share some of his ideas and help get people interested in his work. He’s not putting up all of his ideas. For the purpose of promotion it has worked quite well – his various videos have several thousand views. Not mentioning Feldenkrais helps people to stay focused on the ideas and not get caught up in the “Felden-what???” phenomena. That seems like a wise idea to me.

I don’t think he is invalidating other ideas about exercise and physical education but giving people a new lens with which to view what they are doing…or conversely not doing.

That’s my two cents. I’m speaking for myself, not Edward or anyone else.

cheers – Ryan

I have no need to contact you anonymously. I don’t find a link
to join a discussion and since you decided to dimiss me
without contacting me to get my reaction to your screed you
obviously don’t want answers to your questions. Frankly the
epistimolgy piece was not intended either for the public at
large, nor was directed at scientists. It was part of an
invited discussion at the 2008 guild conference between Jim Stevens,
Ralph Straugh, and myself. Jim is head of the FGNA
research committee who is a ‘realist’ and Ph.D. PT was defending
his notion that we can only use what he called gold standard
research methods. Ralph took the position of postmodernism,
and I opposed both with my polemic against statistical research
in areas where I believe it is inappropriate. I assumed I was
talking to practitioners who understood through their training
what precision means in making contact in FI. It was a major
theme of Moshe in teaching us FI as a human and humane
practice. I have nothing to do with the publication of my
piece on FeldSci, the editors decided to publish it after it
was published in the IFF Research Journal and if they took it out
I had no knowledge of that. There are many other incorrect
statemets about myself in your piece. As for Paul Doron, he has always
assumed that he is the only person in the world to understand MF.
MF, was the only person in his life who helped him with his
diffiulties from birth injury and thus I forgive him his worship
of MF and denunciations of everyone he decides is a heretic.
He is beyond dialog. As for you it would have been nice to dialog with me before
you mis-characterized me in your blog. We have more in common
than you think other than you wish to limit the designation ‘scientific’
and I wish to expand it to use of first person material. Gendlin intrigued
me with his notion of the responsive order for such investigations. I am in no
position at my age to get involved in research. I was trying to intrigue someone else
to figure out how to use the responsive order to develop a first person approach.
I have just finished a book with my wife Lucia Schuette-Ginsburg called The Intelligence of Moving Bodies which is a much more complete statement of where I stand – will be obtainable from Feldenkrais Resources.
Francisco Varela invited me to contribute my article to The View from Within and was exactly on the track of bringing first person experience in neuroscience. Moshe like my writing so much he asked me to edit the Master Moves for him, which I did. Last and not least my knowledge of traditional scientific methods was honed in getting a Ph.D. in inorganic-physical chemistry.
This reply is sitting in my computer until I find a contact possibility.

Carl Ginsburg csginsburg@hotmail.com

cheers! – Ryan

You have put some things in language that will make it easier for me to talk about what the Feldenkrais Method is!

You also said that you trained with him awhile, if his focus was rolf and that is what was being taught to you, what spurned the desire to go for GCFP? How has that now comp-limented your practice? Do you have a focus on the Rolf side or the Feldenkrais side and why? I think many of the readers here would be most curious of a well thought out answer.

I myself am particularly interested. I don’t do any type of soft tissue manipulation save it be through energy or Feldenkrais FI principles. I have become most intrigued by what I have read on Dub and his Zentherapy class and will be attending in person a 2 hr info seminar this weekend with the author of this article: http://www.massagetherapy.com/articles/index.php/article_id/327/Zen-Bodytherapy

Wherever this comes from it summerize a huge problem in “teaching” a method like FI in feldenkrais (and others of course). Leigh says it is vital energy but it might as well been a know how of the principles of FI and how to apply them. “Knowing” them is more than duplication. …

now there is two copies there!!
since I started this post!

Leigh is the only person in the world to be trained and certified to teach by both Ida Rolf and Moshe Feldenkrais. After an initially rocky start with both Rolf and Feldenkrais, Leigh trained with them for 12 and 10 years respectively. He helped establish the Rolf Institute and the Feldenkrais Guild in America. He has also studied with Dr. Raymond Nimmo, Lauren Berry and Milton Trager. Out of this experience, “Dubbing” was created.
http://www.massagetherapy.com/articles/index.php/article_id/327/Zen-Bodytherapy

Audrey Nakamura was Dub’s partner, he died a few years ago, haven’t spoken to her in quite a while but she’d be the one to turn to regarding any formal statements, last I heard she was to be running the show after Dub died. The first time I met Dub and asked his opinion about taking the Feldenkrais training that I was just getting interested in, his exact words: “Moshe’s probably rolling in his grave, those fuckers take four years to cover what he could do in four weeks, and they don’t do it as well.” I don’t have as harsh an opinion, but have found everything seems to become watered down the further from the originator it gets, some people just seem to add a bigger bucketful along the way. Dub was a remarkable man, that’s for sure.

Your welcome bud

- Ryan Nagy

I’ll skip any detailed commentary for now other than to say that I have always been confused by many modern incarnations of Moshe’s work which seem to view the work as a method to train people to do the work. It seems like an incredible waste. Teaching someone to liberate themselves and become free is much different than teaching someone to become a practitioner or to give table sessions and awareness through movement.

Ryan,

You have o consider that the modern feldenkraiz movement was started by a bunch of liberated ‘ people who were looking for, aside from a good bowel movement upon and the complete dehumanization of ‘other ‘ lower humans…were looking for a quick easy racket to make a easy living so they wouldn’t have to woik and sicken and die to survive like the other poor fools on the planet… Now we have coming up the second generation of said liberated founders of this great racket who also want the quick easy buck and they will literally kill to get it.

That is why we have a population of pracs who can’t complete an whole sentence withouten it containing five or more genuflections to the great almighty founder. These are the testimonial people.. the followers… They know a good racket when they find one.

I always had the strange idea that the Feldenkrais was to make people more human and free, not to produce a bunch of followers.

There is an old saying: “if you meet your Teacher in the road…kill him./

Occasionally even on de Feldy-Forum (our ‘commumnity’ Yuk yuk!) we will, quite by chance, have someone who will express some clear human and humane ideas without mentioning Feldenkrais even once! That is a free person. But that person who is free will soon feel the wrath of the dolts for not genuflecting every three beats at least to the furher who never wanted to be the Furher! How dare that person, that vile misfit who fails to testify to US and to HIM. The wrath of der dolts will be upon you!

Out job is to be human, to have a clear existence not to be Feldenkrais or cheap imitations thereof.. However the pracs are just slaves to this cheap sixties’, or is it seventies’, racket.

I really don’t think then even he wanted is to make of him some goddamn cheap struting furher. Sig Feldi!

Listen again:

“If you are a skater and you know this [Moshe's work] you will be a better skater. If you are a runner, you will be a better runner. If you are a writer, you will be a better writer because you get a new entire being. Why? Because you harmonize yourself. You eliminate those things which destroy your vitality and attention.”

John Quinn

First, thank you for posting the lecture from Moshe which accompanyed his whiplash demo at CERN. There seems to be a sizeable gap between the end of part 3 and the short talk on touch. Do you have any knowledge on how much of the talk is missing or where it could be accessed?

Thanks,
Rob

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLj9tsoxRkM
Please, replace the real paart three.

Best wisches
Paul

And here again part THREE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLj9tsoxRkM

Although google places is not available (yet) in Israel
A

I just want to add one small comment. You wrote that:

“same ardor Rob asserts that “every sentence (of Feldenkrais)could be torn apart and ridiculed”

Rob is not saying the criticism of Moshe would be valid or sensible. Only that a person with a certain world view could make them and believe them. People believe all kinds of crazy things, even scientists. At times, I was amazed at some of the complete nonsense (literally non sense, no basis in physical reality) that some of my former colleagues at the University of Utah believed and even got published!

Be well! – Ryan

cheers! – Ryan

That’s pretty funny! Thanks – Ryan

Great that you’ve benefited from the Feldenkrais work. Without burdening myself with excessive research I would expect it to be legal saying “…. workshop, inspired by the work of Moshe Feldenkrais.” Perhaps I am naive; lawyers might compare it to saying “facilitative setting of broken bones, inspired by modern medical practices.”

(btw I actually studied with a healer in Japan who taught principles and techniques for setting commonly broken bones — collar-bone, finger, wrist.)

Have fun,

My perspective is somewhat different from both of you.

My understanding of ‘learning to learn’ is that the learning process is not linear.

It also means that we must learn to learn outside of rigid institutional contexts.

And it also means that we build social capital by participating in the wider community, build social capital …

… take workshops, give workshops, don’t charge hundreds of dollars and bully people with trademarks.

This is facilitated by an eclectic approach … inter-penetration and inter-pollination

Learn some modern dance, some CI, some capoeira, some tango, some language, … something … establish yourself as the local FM person.

Topheavy institutional structures and trademarks constitute psychological blockages, promote in-talk, and don’t help creativity or connectedness.

Need small movements in a variety of directions.

Tom

People aren’t going to listen to you simply because you create a Facebook page or post a comment on a blog. Anyone can do that. It’s not noteworthy. On the other hand if you went to Haiti and began giving FI and filmed your lessons and put them online you would be – by definition – someone that people would take note of and listen to. You would earn the right to be heard and the suggestions that you have would carry more weight….

Let our method become transparent and the world will gather to the brightness of the knowledge of a wellness revolution.

Moshe Feldenkrais grasped the hand of many of the current trainers on his deathbed and said “It is my dream that ATM lessons will be broadcast via satellite twice daily around the world. Promise me you will do all you can to make this happen.”

If Moshe lived in todays world what would he advocate? I believe that he would want a website like youtube where people could see any lesson they want and comment how it helped them like people do in a training. I believe he would want for people to be able to search for relief of common ailments in localized areas of the bodyby the amount of thumbs up “heythis helped me.”

People there are so many ways this work can spread awareness and help people. The more people that understand the work and are benefited by it the more will be lining up at your professional practice, or your training.

Historically mentorship has always produced the highest degree of competency. So empowering people to learn at home how to take care of their loved ones via web trainings and coming to a expert practitioner for mentored FI’s will empower more people to help themselves and help others and build professional practices (both yours and the people you help). If you want to turn the current medical model upside down (come to me (AMA) I am the expert and for your insurance you will be treated. No you can’t see a Feldenkrais Practitioner they are not covered under your plan because the Physical therapy association has too much power we are what you need anyway)

You will need to create a massive awareness campaign so that the people know where to turn to experience benefits and therefor request that their insurance plan cover a true benefit of seeing a Practitioner that is proven competent. IE some GCFP

If a website was created that showed the real video profiles of clients with certain conditions and some of their FI that created a certain benefit and that was combined with the open source ATM project that could be user commented and this website had a way to learn to connect to others via FI online training We could truly empower people to turn the whole physical therapy system right side up.

I GET SICK TO MY STOMACH when I see people that have had every AMA recommendation and physical therapy practice fail them and have lived in pain for years! Do you? Are you tired of seeing these people get better so fast with you and saying “I wish I woulda known about this 10 years ago I might have had a life!” Would you rather a future where they come to you first and get better and live a full rewarding life?

Then lets work together to educate the public.
In todays everything is free on the internet pay it forward world we can spread our work like wildfire. Don’t be afraid that you can’t make a living doing that. You will be in the spotlight and have more referrals than you can handle!

I’m sure some at the top of the information totem pole and are making 20,000 for four years of education would be concerned that all this would threaten their buisness model.

Well I say if there are chiropractic colleges springing up everywhere with thousands of students, and the medical schools are full and turning away people, why can’t you attract a huge following of people that would love to learn to help people the way Moshe Feldenkrais taught us to? Why? Because your system of information dissemination is holding you back. Educate the public, begin real school recruitment tactics and see our method flourish!

How many out there are leading a training that has no more than 60 people? How many complete their training? How many go on to practice professionally? How many succeed and are practicing professionally 5 years later?

So far it would seem “The recruitment efforts have centered around middle aged people who have had an injury and benefited from Feldenkrais lessons”
Many of those people are on “their” journey for self healing.

We need recruitment efforts for School age individuals that have
A: the desire to help people
B: the desire to develop a vocation
C: the time to study full time
D: the money to attend a training or show an aptitude for mentorship that can have them as an employee in your practice. What your practice isn’t that full? Make it! Pay it forward and you will be blessed in ways too numerable to mention!

This is a formula to fill trainings. I share because I care this work needs to go forward!

- Ryan Nagy

Thanks for the comments and ideas. It is so NICE to hear some new opinions that are not-informed by a Feldenkrais training and guild membership. I wonder what would happen if some practitioners realized how predictable their response are and how much they are learned within training programs. Monkey see, monkey do.

I’m of the opinion that in the internet age the main variable is attention and with that attention having a compelling narrative to share with people and also having the required permission to contact them. This little blog has about 400 people subscribed and they get regular updates. If you can create a group like that (blog, email etc) around a specific topic (tango, contact improv, free feldenkrais etc) and give people useful information, your own method and business or movement can come out of that.

The stronger the bond and the more useful your information and approach, the less you need a certification or professional backing.

Just my quick 2 cents. – Ryan Nagy

Not sure what you mean by “you’ll enjoy this” unless you were being ironic … grist to my mill … “failure to learn … to learn?” here comes the topheavy institutional apparatus of the Feldenkrais industry to your aid after you’ve thrown 20 grand and four years into this.

I welcome your encouragement and agree that I probably need to get creative with some names.

But, in response to your other suggestion, my impression is that Feldenkrais practice is self-consciously moving into the existing rigid vocational structures and categories, and shows little interest in being a progressive and critical practice.

Compare: Steve Paxton made the conscious decision to not copyright contact improvisation and leave it open-ended, which he reiterates enough times just so people don’t forget.

Thus, there are constant moves by faculty trained career dancers/artists to turn it into an elite quasi-professional discipline, as I discuss in my blog post:

http://criticalsomaesthetics.com/2010/11/30/further-thoughts-alternative-qualities-and-dimensions-in-contact-improvisation/

But the fact that he made that decision in an explicit way has, arguably, contributed to its survival and development

Although there has been a down period and some angst, it seems that it’s experiencing a revival and is now in the process of positive growth and transformation through inter-penetration with a variety of modalities.

By moving into the monolithic profession system Feldenkrais is going along with career artists and moving into a sort of ‘workplace therapy’ business.

It’s interesting that artists are having a lot of trouble rationalising their work, that is, specifying what exactly is the social value of their work in the era of postmodernism.

See eg. the following therapeutic approach to art:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://culturalcreativeindustries.ie/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/jeffrey-gormly-editor%40choreograph.net-response-to-green-paper.pdf

It seems that therapy, psychological trauma, RSI, etc. can be utilised to rationalise and gain social acceptance for a practice, whereas ‘pure pleasure’ instantly relegates something either to the consumer market or elite art.

That’s why I propose the discipline of somaesthetics, or body aesthetics, as the unrationalised pursuit of sensual pleasure.

I mean, I don’t mind if you need to get people into it by way of RSI but in the end it’s about body aesthetics. I’m a somaestheticist!

If you enjoyed that I’m sure you’ll enjoy this: http://feldenkrais-method.org/files/IFFCompetencyProfile.pdf

To hopefully help you here is an idea or two to answer your question.

“My options are either have a flyer on hand for the nearest Feldenkrais teacher on hand, or get certified and run Feldenkrais Tango. What if there is no teacher, or as is the case for me either I can’t endorse them or they don’t run classes in English?”

For your students create a flier for your own awareness class if you feel comfortable teaching.

Call it “Connecting Skeletons” the art of joy in your comfortable connecting to another.

Or collaberate with a Feldenkrais Practitioner on your clients needs and create a workshop together, split the profits. Ask for him to devise ideas to help your clients.
When I worked at a dance studio we had visiting private lesson teachers that we the primary private teachers upsold our clientelle to. You could build up how amazing this guy is and refer clients to him and ask that the practitioner mentor you on the benefits he is giving your clients so that you can better help your own clients. I would try to keep this on a strictly in house basis. You run a professional somatic school and are hiring an outside expert to service your clients in house and mentor you on how to better teach the benefits he feels his expertise lends to your training of your art.

If you teach yourself I would teach them a few excercises in each common position of contact improv using hip, ankle steering, head steering learned in the lowest possible stress environment. Gradually turn up the stress environment till they are comfortable in a normal ci session.

You have a fabulous market people that are out of their element, know it and want to improve it! I sold $140 an hour all day long for 40 minute private ballroom dance lessons at Arthur Murray Dance Academy. I know that people when they come to dance want to have someone take them by the hand review why their here, what they want to get out of it, and create a plan to get them to their goal.

Hope this helps.

I think that dancers are in a specific situation with respect to the idea of ‘monolithic profession’.

- It is standard to have some sort of ‘technique’ that influences the teacher or that the particular class/course is built around, whether it’s Body-Mind Centering, Laban, or Feldenkrais.

- Dancers tend to have a very eclectic approach to their training because, well, they’re creatives, they need to learn a variety of things, and are typically freelancers which means that they don’t have a business with an established clientele.

- More and more people with no dance background are attracted to things like Contact Improv (and of course tango is big business now), which officially anyone can do, but in reality you’re dealing with large numbers of people with no other prior practice, and low body awareness. My options are either have a flyer on hand for the nearest Feldenkrais teacher on hand, or get certified and run Feldenkrais Tango. What if there is no teacher, or as is the case for me either I can’t endorse them or they don’t run classes in English?

This brings up the issue of the ‘established monolithic profession’ that seems to be the agenda behind certification and copywriting.

I came across an interesting document (I copied it but can’t locate it on the net now), which is the “Vocational Profile” by Barbara Pieper and Sylvia Weise written in Germany in 1996:

“Publication of a vocational profile in the officially required form constitutes a step towards institutionalization of the Feldenkrais Method in Germany. Nevertheless continuing freedom from all regulations would be closer to Moshe Feldenkrais’s way of thinking. We therefore understand and share some of the misgivings of our colleagues who were against a vocational profile.”

“While writing this text we experienced ambivalence over a number of issues:
…
- How can we present a vocation that both requires freedom for independent creative activity and at the same time seeks institutional integration wihtin society?

- A professional profile defines the respective activity more or less statically. Feldenkrais work, however, by its very nature aims at ongoing development. How can these requirements be combined?

- How can learning a method be vocationally defined if its essential aspects cannot be confined to current professional categories? For example, there is a clear-cut distinction in Germany between professions concerned with teaching (Education) and those concerned with healing (Health).

We see a way out of this dilemma in current social developments. In Germany education, occupation, and labour market trends are increasingly drifting apart. Jobs are less and less what they used to be. They no longer constitute fixed reference points securing work, income, and social status. Nowadays people’s lives tend to be characterized by a series of jobs, short-term participation in different projects, partial exploitation of qualifications, phases of unemployment, etc. Education and training, however, continue to be oriented towards vocational profiles, regardless of whether such jobs are still in demand on the labour market. Occupations continue to serve as ‘entrance tickets’ to gainful employment, but they are less important for individual biographies. At the same time changes are also occurring both within various occupations and in their relations with each other (Beckenbach and Treeck, 1994)

In this situation we are employing the form of the professional profile in order to enable the Feldenkrais Method to gain social acceptance. We are aware of using a structural pattern that is on its way out yet continues to be socially valid. In other words: We are using a ‘currency’ which is still in circulation while at the same time preparing for a possible change (Note: it is also conceivable that the FM will gain social and governmental recognition wihtin a more widely defined, broader vocational field as out colleague Micheal Schrunder advocates). We therefore consider the present version of this vocational profile to be the starting point, a contribution intended to encourage people to participate in discussion and further development of Feldenkrais work in Germany”

Two points of interest in this:

- Both, the realities of the labour market and change in work preferences, the need and desire for flexibility, put into question the idea that the concept of a monolithic profession with a burdensome and fixed training, criteria, objectives, etc.

- The problem is one of legitimacy and acceptance of the practice by rendering it a ‘profession’ in the above sense, and of gaining ‘entrance tickets’.

But, notice some of the following that I have observed:

- faculty trained dancers earn money teaching yoga: the structure they learn at school is no good on the current ‘eclectic’ dance market but great for yoga

- faculty trained tango dancers (there is a Tango University!) directing movies: their high level dance ability makes them impatient with the typical dance neophyte with two left feet

- IT people teaching tango: I’m sure there’s an explanation, something to do with ‘dance neophyte’

Here’s my proposal for certification: if you can get students, you can teach.

Tom

Imagine the ghetto in some 3rd world country that sent a few select people to a neighboring village that has the internet and they studied online how to help the people. Imagine the benefits they can go back and share?

Where are you building your treasure? Is it just within a stones throw? Are you willing to reach out and bless humanity?

For those of you that have not experienced or read about Cranio-Sacral therapy know that a confident CST like a Feldenkrais practitioner can do things that conventional modalities could never come close too. Because of how wonderful it is there is a compassionate individual that has created http://www.open-source-cranio.com/ to teach people at home or in 3rd world countries how to use a healing art that can be done without technology and is Evolutionary in it’s science and benefits. This is a work in progress and I believe soon there will be a wonderful compassionate GCFP or another that will teach our way online.

There is a Capoiera app for I-phone http://www.beautifulcapoeira.com/
what about a Feldenkrais app that you can search for excercises for relief of common ailments? Then the people will know who to turn to for advanced relief.

As long as the GCFP seeks to hide under a rock Moshe’s FI teachings from Fathers that want to know ow to help their hurt child we will need to call the work something else because of their service trademarks. That is a pity because it won’t bring buisness their way as effectively as would be nice to help them to help people.

My question to the people is: What shall we call this work of bringing the knowledge of how to heal to the people?

Rather than go to the ER using FI techniques I Instead played advanced little piggies rolling and connecting her fingers to her wrist spreading awareness through the wrist to the elbow. After 30 minutes the swelling was gone coloration normal, pain gone and she declared “I’m healed” and ran off and played! All parents love their children some more than others and would love to prepare themselves to be able to heal them in the home. Most of these people would never attend a full training, though they might in their searching for truth online of how to heal their loved one come across a Feldenkrais website that gives them some relief and then they come see an “expert Feldenkrais therapist” and pay you and get turned onto it and study more at home. They send the facebook group to friends and they start practicing at home and seeking out mentorship from you. The work will spread and change lives.

I have found that Feldenkrais FI techniques to a fresh injury in many cases rewinds the injury making it almost as if it didn’t happen. I think that most people get injuries and would like to know how to do that. Shall we persist in perpetuating a training system that has produced 3000 something people worldwide currently in how many years when there are over 170,000 physical therapists in the USA alone that can’t do what we do? I say empower the people! Let there be a learning resource online for all aspects of Feldenkrais work not just open source atm, but also FI techniques to unite families, heal in the home, take care of your aging loved one, unite teams in revolutionary evolutionary new partner training. If we collectively decide we love people it is time to stop limiting our practice to “come to me and for your money I will help heal you” is that the legacy you want to be remembered for? With the availibility of the internet we have the oppurtunity to help fascilitate a change in the way people connect to themselves, their families and the world. Think of this a website that has you teaching others how to connect to each other to create positive benefits think of you being remembered forever for your contribution to mankind.

What if you were not rich? You are rich to have been able to pay for Feldenkrais lessons or a full blown training and now teach. Well at least compared to the rest of the world you are rich. What if that ache or pain that drove you to learn of Feldenkrais was still there because you could not afford a feldenkrais lesson?
Imagine over the years the toll it has taken on your body the degeneration, the compensating patterns, the pain, can you feel it? Go deeper and really feel how that has limited your life.

Now I speak to you who are hurting I’m sorry you are in pain that sucks! Hey there is a way that you can get rid of probably alot of that pain your experiancing through studying the works of Moshe Feldenkrais.

Your response “oh that would be nice I heard about that 10 years ago from a friend that got better through it he is flourishing! Unfortunatly I can’t afford lessons. I go to physical therapy because insurance pays for it but I just feel worse afterwards!

There is hope my friend! There is a website to learn Feldenkrais at home and you and a loved one can learn to take care of each other.

Oh well me and my wife live alone and we don’t get along well enough to cooperate on something like that her gently touch me hah!

Thats the beauty of it it’s life changing on every level and it will probably breathe new life into your marriage.

Well I’ll give it a try.

Now imagine on this website you learn to not force, to be inquisitive and explorative celebrating enjoying learning and reducing alot of your pain your marriage learns cooperation and connection in a way never before known. Now you are doing things with your Grandkids you haven’t done in 30 years and guess what one fell on the playground and you healed him! You are so excited about your progress that you befriend a Feldenkrais practitioner through the community awareness link on the site and begin to go visit for advanced relief of your aches and pains. You found a way to afford lessons because you saw the value. You tell all your friends how wonderful Feldenkrais is and they study too.

This is the story of an alternate reality that you could have faced and many in the future will face. my question remains what will you be remembered for?

PAY IT FORWARD!!! Get in touch with me and lets do this!

Have the best year ever in 2011 Ryan!!

http://www.feldenkrais.com/profession/us_service_mark_guidelines/

For now, the phrases that you wrote would be violating the service mark:

Feldenkrais for Contact Improvisation” or “Contact Improvisation with Feldenkrais” is the same as “Feldenkrais”.

Though practically speaking will the Feldenkrais Guild or anyone else come after you for using it on a brochure? I doubt it. But it’s always a possibility. It depends on what your tolerance for risk is….

cheers! – Ryan

Sounds as if you can sell Coke just so long as you don’t call it Coke but ‘Based on Coke”.

The phrase you provided is good but can be cumbersome if you’re trying to put that into your title or there isn’t much space, eg., on a calendar.

I can call it something like ‘Awareness for CI”, but I’m still curious whether “Feldenkrais for Contact Improvisation” or “Contact Improvisation with Feldenkrais” is the same as “Feldenkrais”.

The dance teacher who introduced me to FM wrote something similar to your suggestion into her description, but I recall that she used his surname without his first name, so I just wonder what the exact rule is, or whether there is an exact rule.

-t

You can teach any lesson that you want and that you can get your hands on. Legally you can’t call it “Feldenkrais” nor “The Feldenkrais Method.” The easiest thing to say is that your session or work is “Based on the Work of Moshe Feldenkrais.” You are entitled to write and say that.

- Ryan

To put it specifically, I teach dance improvisation, and I want to teach specific classes that use Feldenkrais for improvisation.

Now, I do Feldenkrais, and I do dance. I’m not qualified to teach Feld. But I think my Feldenkrais is still better than some ‘qualified’ teachers that I’ve seen out there.

Anyway, I don’t know what it is that I don’t know, but I basically am not going to spend the effort and money to find out what it is that I don’t know, esp. since these trainings seem so opaque in terms of their content and are so inflexible in terms of qualification (it’s a 1 or a 0 with not between stages).

So my understanding is that I cannot use the name “Feldenkrais”.

I mean, I can start tango classes and call them “Argentine tango”, or contact improv classes and call them “Contact Improvisation”, but apparently this is not so for Feldenkrais.

And also, I cannot use that on any material that I might put out.

I MUST be certified even if I’ve got years of dance teaching experience, ATM lessons, and read just about every book there is on the subject to call that lesson “Feldenkrais exercises for Contact Improvisation” and either teach it or sell it on the internet.

Is that right?

cheers!! – Ryan

…nice holidays for all

I discuss this at length on my blog which I know is rife with academic verbiage something I hope to deal with over time.

It’s one the theoretical issues that Feldenkrais is trying to deal wit vis-a-vis psychoanalysis because he draws heavily on that but his psychology is more ‘motor psychology’ of the pragmatists (John Dewey) and his teacher F. M. Alexander. Interestingly, he really gets stuck on this point.

Levine is a body psychotherapists and seems to be in the lineage from Reich, perhaps via Lowen.

I don’t know how literally Lowen and Levine take the energy metaphor. If I recall, Reich later reworked it in terms of ‘vibration’ as a kind of universal force that he could utilise to make rain etc.

In my own case, I’m not totally convinced that you can simply dispense with it in favour of muscular tension the way that Feldenkrais does.

First, Feldenkrais follows Alexander in viewing sexual dysfunction in terms of poor learning, lack of expertise, anxiety and impotence. For Reich the ‘body armour’ was muscular tension that ‘locks in’ the emotional ‘energy’, and so getting rid of the muscular tension/body armour aims at rebalancing the energy.

In dealing with sex Feldenkrais takes the F.M. Alexander’s route and sees better body coordination, including in sex, as a way of dealing with anxiety. Problem is: what is ‘anxiety’? Well, it’s basically the fear of falling down. Everything is ‘reduced’ to poor co-ordination and inappropriate response that then locks-in muscular tension and leads to impotence and regressive behaviour. In Reichian body psychotherapy on the other hand ‘energy’ is a way of talking about emotions as being causally distinct from muscular tension. Otherwise there is no ‘causal relation’ which needs ontologically distinct processes. You use body tension to repress strong emotion. But body tension and strong emotion are separate processes.

Second, experientially speaking I think that the energy metaphor works better in cases of certain therapeutic or aesthetic experiences. You experience that there is dammed up energy (as Reich would put it); or that energy flows through your body; or that it is released or balanced or whatever. So in sex this will manifest in the quality of the orgasm and how ‘energetically balanced’ you feel. Also, in doing certain kinds of exercises like certain yoga postures or Katsugen Undo you feel an emotional release which has the vibration effect that he’s talking about in this video.

Also, libidinal energy functions in psychoanalysis to explain aesthetic experience. I discuss movement practices like Contact Improvisation and Tango which experientially for me are more ‘energetic’ practices and involve sensual and/or sexual pleasure. It is hard for me to apply Feldenkrais concepts of expertise, although they are definitely helpful: eg., you want good coordination when doing tango, and CI is in a sense just Feldenkrais with a partner. But the partner does make a difference to the ‘energetics’ of it.

Finally, I know that Thomas Hanna in one of his papers expresses opposition to Reichian Therapy, and sees somatics as preferable. But this is a different issue. ‘Energy’ seems to be more of a theoretical issue than anything else. If we speak of ‘vibration’ its perhaps makes more sense. The question is whether, when talking perhaps metaphorically about energy or vibration, you’re dealing with a separate set of emotional, aesthetic and sexual phenomena, with emotion and pleasure.

So I’m not sure that I agree with Feldenkrais and Hanna and would see somatics and bioenergetics as complementary.

- Ryan

(I’ve given a brief explain of SE and energy, and then some personal tales of why I decided to add SE to my bag of tricks)…Long comment but for those interested in how to work with trauma in your practice, keep reading)

I’ve just completed my SE training, even has the pleasure of working one-on-one with Peter Levine this past October. The man, like Moshe was, is a genius of the human system and how to navigate it so it can heal and restore itself.

The “energy” question is hard to answer, but you are not correct in what you write about compulsive inhibitions that doesn’t allow proper functioning. A little history…

Peter’s original work, his thesis (which you can download here http://www.somaticexperiencing.com/) is about accumulated stress in the body and the consequences on the nervous system, therefore whole body functioning.

What he came across while seeing people as a grad student, doing ‘mind-body’ relaxation exercises before they even has a name, is that Humans, just like animals in the wild need to ‘discharge’ and resolve movement patterns that were suppressed and not acted out after traumatic events. i.e., if a deer is hit by a car, and is knocked out, but not dead, when its body is back online, just before it gets up, it will ‘shake’, tremble and discharge “energy” that was trapped in the body from the insult/injury. This release of energy is necessary for the body to return back to normal nervous system functioning – animals in the wild do this, the recover, they are not traumatized, the don’t develop PTSD, they either live, or they die from injuries.

Humans need to go thru this process when injured, attacked etc., but their higher brain centres and social ‘decency’ screws up these motor acts and discharge needs – our emergency response measures and comforting that often happens after injury, or the ‘oh I am OK’, get up and bounce back before the severity of the injury is processed – have thwarted our bodies, natural animalistic needs for self-negotiation and completion of traumatic events, which then leads to ALL sorts of nervous system dysregulation, and from what Dr. Levine and his colleagues are seeing, many of the psychosomatic and syndromal, autoimmune disorders, not to mention PTSD that are so prevalent in our culture. Even the simple lack of properly orientating back to the environment after trauma – a key element in his work – is very rarely encouraged in many settings that deal with trauma. As Feldenkrais practitioners this basic piece of orienting back to the here and now and to the environment, I think, is a key piece that we don’t press upon enough in our classes and FI’s. I actually firmly believe that if we brought a person to orientation multiple times during a lesson the lesson would ‘stick’ better and the effects better received. (just a hunch on my part)

One thing that is interesting is that animals, when held in zoos, do get traumatized. Humans are kind of in this predicament – we aren’t in our natural environments anymore, we can’t emit bodily processes that are natural (passing gas, belching, sneezing) without needing to be excused or hiding ourselves. Our natural rhythm is messed up with our work schedules, our needs for rest and exercise are rarely met, the list goes on.

From a blending of Feldenkrais perspective, I decided to take the training when I realized that a big piece was missing in working with people, especially people with multiple injuries, and especially those who have suffered from sexual abuse. Just having them lie down on a table, or floor, and have their fronts exposed to a ‘stranger’, no matter how caring and empathetic I am, still caused them to freeze up and in many ways dissociate from their body. I only realize this now, after doing the training and learning about the nervous system and trauma. Now, when I practice I quickly assess, based on observation, affect and history how to best start, we may not lie down for 4 sessions, we may work in standing (because you can’t dissociate to the same extent when your anti-gravity muscles are needing to keep you up), many things have changed in my practice and the results are glaringly different from a positive and successful perspective.

I firmly believe that not understanding some of the principles and theories that Dr.Levine has brought to the study of trauma and working with trauma is doing a disservice to our clients. We end up being the chiro or Physio that keeps manipulation the same joints without really understanding the root cause. I know we go much deeper into looking at the whole body, but the nervous system and how it responds to present day ‘stimuli’ as a result of past trauma is a necessary to understand – afterall, we say we work with people’s nervous systems but how many of us actually truly understand how the nervous system works.

Dr. Levine just published a book of his 40 years of work called “In an unspoken voice” I highly recommend all Feldies pick it up. If anything it is worth it for the run down of the nervous system, the branches of the vagus nerve and their importance, and then the case studies. One case study in particular, which deals with frozen shoulder is a MUST read for Feldenkrais practitioners and any health care provider who is stumped with really complicated injuries that don’t seem to respond to anything…..

Irene.
I wrote a blog post on the viscera and SE on my old blog here http://pure-feldenkrais-whistler.blogspot.com/2010/10/kids-will-go-bananas-when-adults-fake.html

I’ll be writing more about the nervous system, SE and Feldenkrais at my new blog, http://www.thehumangroove.com. (subscribe if you want to get updates!)

But I have picked up from Walking the Tiger – but it really annoys that in that and other such books when their path to solution is another god damned exercise. Give us a break! The overwhelming sadness of s/p trauma victims,such as incessent childhood beatings and molestation by one or more parents, that life has become an living hell, and I agree that their problem is that they cannot get aggression out. They become frightened creatures. they cannot lay claim to anything in life.

So Levine’s ‘energy’ is really aggression, or aggression constipated.
But I find Levine’s clenched hand swqueezing actually old hat and passe, He would do well to sudy the better fdenkrais solutions. AYs or ATMs.. Maybe Mr Levine’s pain books make more sense.

I think that these ‘helpers’ help others so that they themselves might be helped by someone or some others, some day. Of course that day when they are helped, might never come. It takes some subtlety to get help from others and to realize that one might actually be loved someday, by others. Stranger things have happenned.This might involve an transformation of energy into love?.As one moves through life there are people we might love. even if we never see them again.

{Writing is really hard.}

Guten nacht already.
John Quinn

http://openatm.org

All of the zest,

Deborah Elizabeth Lotus
Certified Bones for Life Teacher/Trainer(MA & Mexico)

cheers – Ryan

(Itsvan – I will definitely link back to you.)

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP (208.74.66.43) doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP (74.112.128.10) and so is spam.

“We go to the father of souls, but it is necessary to pass by the Dragon!”
St Cyril of Jerusalem..JQ

I do get tired of the constant genuflecting to the great Feldenkrais. Thought thus becomes not thought but testament, which makes me cringe in my soul… and after alles den bullshite one doesn’t believe anything any more, in the temple with the money changers.

Of course on the other hand maybe you are all sincere and just and self sacrificing. and that that two legged freak called mamunkind, that moves and functions, really is both the beginning and the end.

Are you setting me up for the firing squad, Paul? Are you and Dreucker going to come around and re-educate us?

Actually, in re-reading Karl’s article which I cited above in the thread from “The view from within” Cognition journal, re his theory about the primacy of movement.. he begins to make sense. This again makes us two-legged freaks important. Who would have thunk it?

Where I come from we takes every side to an argument, which is where I’ll take my stand at the moment.

Somewhere along the way Love enters in. It would certainly have to, in a world like this.

More, anon,
John Quinn

See: The View from Within, edited by the late Francisco Varela in collaboration with Jonathan Shear, was published in 1999 and has proved a major stimulus to the scientific investigation of first-person methodologies in psychology and philosophy of mind.

Ten years on, Claire Petitmengin has organized a collection of essays that examine and refine the research program on first-person methods defined in The View from Within, with contributions based on empirical research. She has kept close to the spirit of the earlier book, in which Varela encouraged a precise description of the very process of becoming aware of one’s experience and describing it, by gathering the contributions of researchers who not only propose first-person descriptions, but who also try to describe the process of description itself, in order to make the description reproducible — a necessary condition for any scientific undertaking.

Search inside View from Within
First-person Approaches to the Study of Consciousness
(Paperback – 1 Sep 1999)

Edited By Francisco J Varela and Jonathan Shear
ISBN 9780907845256
Imprint Academic

ON pp 79 through 91 , There is an Article by Carl Ginsburg, entitled “Body-image. Movement and Consciousness: Examples from a Somatic Practise in The Feldenkrais Method.”

It seems to me that Carl attributes lot of power to the Feldenkrais Method including its’ FIs and its’ ATMs, However, he never explains what it is. It would take another kind of Artist to do that, and therein, this artist, might not even mention Feldenkrais, because power has to be found in life, not in Feldenkrais , which in the last analysis is but a thing.

in in the “Titles” search box, type: “The View from Within” wherein you’ll find Carl’s article listed. They charge $14.00 for it. I just happen to have an hard copy of the “View from Within.”

PS: In another article in this journal lies my favorite quote, by Gregory Dixon (“A Hermeneutic Objection: Language and the Inner View. “, page 265…………………
“Existence then, is for us a suspension over the abyss.”

John Quinn

Thanks Ryan

The “unavoidable role of subjective human judgements…” is right up my alley..

Actually , I had dipped into Ralph’s article before and liked it, but then lost track of it. Now, thus found, I must peruse it more closely. Maybe it was Ralph’s article I was referring to. Can’t remember : Maybe Carl just posted something about Fuzzy Logic… perhaps not a big article. Or maybe this has been one of them infinitely rare times when I have made a mistake, or mixed something up. Stranger things have happened…

I’ve ratcheted up Ralph’s article, the links to which you kindly sent, to 200% zoom, mit an blue background. It’s only 121 pages (: easier on the augen.

All this bears some slow study, even to just figuring who said whut…:}}

Happy Danken day…
John Quinn

Very quickly:

Todd – I like your comment about cognitive dissonance. It seems to be a common phenomena in the world – Feldenkrais, Science and everywhere. One of the reasons I left my PhD studies is that my research was not actually scientific. I was dealing with people who wanted to make up psychological variables – “latent variables” and “innate cognitive structures” and such that could somehow be measured – even though they were completely imaginary. Weird stuff. But somatic practitioners going off in the same direction doesn’t make thing any better. If anything, we have to hold ourselves to a higher standard.

Rob and Richard – I think the need to put the observer/knower back into the “equation” (so to speak) is critical. Carl quoted Heinz Von Forrester, Maturana, Varela and others who are, in my view, very important and detailed thinkers. But I didn’t see him tie those ideas into what he was saying and suggesting. His paper seemed rather bizarre. And I’m certainly not again postmodernism. There are some great ideas here and there. But postmodern thinkers can easily fall into the same trap that scientist do which is assuming the universality of their own beliefs. That was my main point in critiquing Carl’ use of Gendlin. And criticism of science and certain scientific methodologies and beliefs is critical. We have SO many wonderful ways of destroying ourselves and our world thanks to the idiotic use of science.

Though I’m not willing to throw it out.

Rob – As far as someone using a similar way of critiquing Moshe’s work, I can only agree. I think all that it takes is to have a different worldview, strongly held, and be able to write about it. Which to an extent we all have. However with Ginsburg it is infinitely easier. He essentially painted a big red bulls eye on his ass. Making statements that can easily be refuted such as evidence based medicine being universally applied…? That kills his credibility. Doctors, nurses, surgeons, PTs…what providers have to deal with the implications of evidence based medicine? I don’t know. But I can only imagine how they would react to someone writing something so patently untrue about its universal use. Would Moshe have done something like that? Perhaps in training situation to help wake someone up. Otherwise, the man did his homework. Carl does it an article that’s supposed to be about science…?

It’s embarrassing.

And even more embarrassing – it was published by a group who wants to encourage scientific research? I assume the people in FeldSci have heard of something called peer review?

Much more I could write, but it’s a work day for me.

Paul – Thanks for your comments! You are indeed correct about Moshe’s writing. I have much of it in digital form. The actual word epistemology is only used once from what I can see. Though it seems to me the word can point to experience and may not need to be said to be used.

good luck all – Ryan

(Maybe if FeldSci gets another $50,000 in donations they can post more articles by Carl.)

http://www.thetao.info/english/page5.htm
Tao Te King – chapter 5

Talk is tiring

Heaven and Earth don’t play favourites
They treat everything with equal detachment.
Sages don’t play favourites
They treat good people and bad with equal detachment.

Heaven and earth are like a set of bellows.
Although empty, they are endlessly productive.
The more you work them, the more they produce.
The mouth, on the other hand, becomes exhausted if you talk too much.
Better to keep your thoughts inside you.

Feldenkrais was in his essence besides a hassidic jew also a taoist. Every time I wished to express something verbally after his FI’s for me he told me rightly exactely the last uttrance of the fifth chapter from Tao te King:
Better to keep your thoughts inside you.
Science cannot cope with the Feldenkrais method, the same it cannot cope with nature, but Moshe Feldenkrais used science as no other in order to create something practical usefull, which is also justified by science and understandable from a scientific point of view.
If one beleives that the understanding of the Feldenkrais Method is only the privilege of a group of people which only they can “reach the stage where they understand what Moshe meant by the words he wrote” and “forget how his writing reads to a scientist or intelligent layman” and also is convinced that “every sentence (of Moshe) could be torn apart and ridiculed” he is very, very bad informed concerning both, the Feldenkrais Method and any kind of science.
Paul Doron

http://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/2008/P5282.pdf

I couldn’t find one written by Carl.

cheers – Ryan

That article were the only breath of fresh air amidst the rape we were all enduring by the infamous lawsuit of that day (which you should go back and study. because you don’t know who or whom the players were and you’re backing the wrong horses.)
Carl and I were totally on different sides in that horror, but I loved his article on fuzzy logic, anyway.

I find that in all this argument that you all take one another’s sides sometimes without your even knowing it, which means that we are all batting our heads against the walls.

Karl did write an article in one of the Cognition journals as if an ATM lesson as the end of light, as if all were “explained in a mediocre ATM lesson.
Still, I loved his old Fuzzy logic article.As for Karl’s current article herein, I risk the firing squad to say that I like it? I must to study all this… calmly

Personally, I think the scientific method is a lot of horseshit and for us to try to placate alles dem “measurers’ is just suicide.

It is like American Theatrical directors used to destroy Pinter on Broadway by trying to make him “understandable” to the innnerlechual wankers. But Pinter is not meant to be understood by normal or current logic. So here in good ol’ USA they destroy Pinter, as the Medical profession will destroy Feldenkrais, probably with our help and collusion, for success-es’ sake.

I’m reading a novel about Hernietta Lacks’ immortal cervical Cancer cells. Now them Johns Hopkin’s Doctors did something to earn their keep. As for the latter day measure-ers who want to know how far you can jump up after an FM lesson, they should all go hang themselves.

However this debate is all a-jumble and is way over my head….but don’t bet on it.

I think we should cut out alles den paragraphs from this thread and just, whomever wrote them, and just re-jumble them together again into one big article. They will thus make more sense.. Or maybe each writer should go through 10 or 12 re-writes to get more clarity and consistency to them.

Danks,
John Quinn

You misunderstand both what I wrote and the nature and purpose of epistemology. I was not saying that a scientist or “intelligent” layman could prove that what Moshe wrote was ridiculous, my meaning was that they could make it appear ridiculous through logical meaningless palaver. I was saying that when we understand what Moshe wrote, we forget how it appears to those who have not learned the meaning of his words through their own personal experience.

Epistemology is the study of knowledge: What is true and how do we know it to be so. Other than your statements as to how ignorant I and others like me are, what you wrote are statements toward an epistemology of the Feldenkrais method – all knowledge coming through experience as opposed to logic. There is nothing that suggests that epistemology needs to consist of cerebration divorced from experience. If in fact Moshe never used the word epistemology, so what. He never used the word neuroplasticity either.

Other than your limited view of epistemology I agree with most of what you wrote. If you are looking for a straw man to argue with, you will have to look elsewhere.

Rob

Please, count this word (epistemology) how many times it apears in all the writings of Moshe.
The result will be = 0!!!

Epistemologicaly considered one cannot aproach any aspect of the Feldenkrais Method, be this in practice or in theory. It is just opposed to the core of the Feldenklrais Method becouse this method DOESN’T WORK THROUGH WORDS AND INTELECT, but first through the sensory receptors, through the senses.
“… But thought that is not connected to feelling at all is not connected to reality. Cerebration itself is uncommitted or neutral, and can deal equally well with contradictory statements. . . .
. . . . Cerebration not connected with reality does not constitute thought, any more than random muscular contractions constitute action or movement.” (Moshe Feldenkrais, Awareness Through Movement, Reversible and irreversible phenomena)
Rob, concerning your statements in point 2 I have some important changes to make, and these are as follows:
“Not that it is important, but anyone excreting “cerebration not connected with reality” could do to the writings of Feldenkrais, what you did to the musings of Carl. When we reach the stage where we understand what Moshe meant by the words he wrote we forget how his writing reads to a “cerebrating” scientist or intelligent(???) layman. Trust me, every sentence could be torn apart and ridiculed.”
Your asserions here prove your profound ignorance of the Feldenkrais method.
First, this method worked very effectively as long it was practiced by Moshe Feldenkrais just in cases where “epistemologic cerebration” of the other “specialistds” couldn’t help anymore.
Seccond, no one in this worl and even the most brilliant cerebrating person (I am expressely avoiding names) will never be able to reach the stage where s/he will understand what Moshe meant by the words he wrote, because his method is to be understood only through experiencing it on oneself practically.
Even if someone would try to tear apart every sentence of Moshe and ridicule it that person would become herself ridicule because what Moshe writes has it origins not in a spiral of “cerebration with no connection to reality”, but is deeply founded in the proved experience of the human nature.
I have to quote Moshe from his book Awarenes Through Mevement again concerning all these attempts to cerbrate something about the Feldenkrais Method:
“We have seen that the structures used for thinking are loosely linkedwith those housing feeling. Clear thought is born only in the absemce of strong feelings that distort objectivity. Thus a necessary condition for the development of effective thinking is continuous withdrawal from feelings and proprioceptive sensations.
Nevertheless, harmonious developmment remains more important to the individual than discordant development even if effective thinking is the disturbing factor. Thinking that is cut off from the rest of the man gradually becomes arid. Thought that proceeds mainly in words does not draw substance from the processes of the older evolutionary structures that are closely tied to feeling. Creative, spontaneous thout must maintain a link with the early brain structures. Abstract thought that is not nourished from time to time from deeper sources within us becomes a fabric of words alone, empty of all genuine human content. Many books of art and science, literature and poetry have nothing to offer except a succession of words linked together by logical argument; they have no personal content. This also applies to many individuals in their daily relationship with others. ”
I can well finish my quotation with the folloing paragraph, but I ask anyone to read it in the book of Moshe because I have no time anymore, but my question to you, Rob, is to to prove your asserion in your number 2 and prove your collegues how intelligently and scientificaly can you tear apart and ridiculize my quotation of Feldenkrais.
Prove it practically and not only “epistemologically”!!!

Epistemology helps nothing for a better understanding of the ways the Feldenkrais method works because epistemology belongs to the intelectual realm of thinking, to the realm of verbalisation on phenomena which we know and understand very little about.
The fact is that in this intelectual way of considering and approaching the Feldenkrais Method this method nowadays is already no more the Feldenkrais Method, but some kind of gentle meaningless touch hear and there which makes one feel dizzy, unsafe and estranged from onself in the most of the cases.

People like you distroy the Feldenkrais method to its roots!!!

1. Carl is correct in pointing to the need for a new more effective epistemology. This is not only true for the Feldenkrais Method, but is urgent for all of the “sciences” that deal with that which lives. Unfortunately, as you point out, he does not show that he has a clue as to how to proceed.

2. Not that it is important, but anyone could do to the writings of Feldenkrais, what you did to the musings of Carl. When we reach the stage where we understand what Moshe meant by the words he wrote we forget how his writing reads to a scientist or intelligent layman. Trust me, every sentence could be torn apart and ridiculed.

3. Its a pity that the community’s ability to write intelligently about important epistemological issues affecting our work has decreased since Feldenkrais’ death over 25 years ago. Hopefully Paul’s paraphrase of Moshe’s fear: “It will take five hudreds years until we will (may be?) understand how our brain functions, because we look outwards for its manifestation.”, will prove vastly overstated. But if it’s epistemological hint – the key being not to focus on the outward manifestations, but on the internal subjective experience – is ignored, then it will prove prescient.

I hope that life is good in Mexico!

Rob

Of course I agree that science is complex, that nothing is as simple as it seems, including gravity, that there are always new paradigms emerging in science that bring us closer to truth, and that progress is made only with proper questioning and skepticism of the existing order. However, none of this implies that bodyworkers are well advised to ignore simple classic physics in favor of esoteric concepts like quantum mechanics.

Classical physics still works, and it has relevance for someone who wants to know how forces are applied to objects and objects move through space. By contrast, an understanding of quantum mechanics or general relativity is likely irrelevant for a bodyworker. Highly trained physicists in very specialized fields are able to understand and apply these concepts in their work. A bodyworker can probably not even understand these concepts much less apply them. In bodywork, we know enough about gravity if we can remember that it is a force that pulls down. It is irrelevant that it also curves space.

Imagine an architect, or car engineer, or plane builder who said his house, plane or car should not be judged according to limited mechanistic notions of classical science. Instead, the plane or house or car is based on a radical rethinking of the meaning of gravity, quantum mechanics, and the vital energies of the earth. This is a dead giveaway for someone who eschews basic science in favor of new age woo. And I’m not getting on that plane.

Similarly, when a bodyworker mentions that they use quantum mechanics as a basis for their practice, I am skeptical that they understand the field and have the ability to apply it to their work.

As to what Moshe believed in regard to vital or mystical energies, I have no personal knowledge here. However, I have certainly heard or read various instances where he makes fun of these concepts. In any event, what Moshe thought is not my ultimate measure of truth – I’ll follow where the evidence goes to the best of my ability.

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP (208.74.66.43) doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP (74.112.128.10) and so is spam.

“Whacky” it may be, but the world of quantum mechanics has yielded practical applications that have brought the human race to the brink of self-annihilation. I personally applaud the work of those who pursue more life-enhancing applications of the post-Planck quantum theoretical developments.

Refusal to embrace the possibility of a new paradigm would condemn us to living (perhaps an over-optimistic term) with the limitations of the old, mechanistic one. What possible virtue is there in that?

As for your dismissive reference to “a fascination with vitalism and mystical energies”, you may want to consider the fact that Moshe Feldenkrais took a keen interest in Chinese medicine – a fundamentally energy/information-based system (pure hocus pocus viewed from your Newtonian perspective) – to the extent that his personal collection of books on the subject outnumbered that of the nearby university library. While he was understandably careful to avoid the use of fuzzy language to describe the energetic aspect of his work, I’m told by individuals who studied with him in his latter years that he was becoming more and more concerned with this area that you evidently despise.

The authentic scientific process is one of constant revision and self-questioning. Your notion of a “simple and conventional science, such as gravity” is naive to say the least, and to my mind your argument is no more helpful to the Feldenkrais discourse than the pretentious nonsense spouted by Mr Ginsburg.

I tryed to read his palaver already 20!!! years ago, and just after only one sentence I stopped reading. Authentic intelectual phenomenological palaver with no connection with reality!

Moshe Feldenkrais deserves the death of his method which is happening since his passing away, because Moshe supported any idiot who payed him.
In a training, I have visited about 25 years or longer ago Mr Ginsburg put the question if anybody is aware of the number of the balks on the ceiling or of the number of the pipes of the heating. Since the death of Moshe there exists only a looking outwards ourselves which is taught: you have to look how your fellow trainee inclines his or her neck, and every tiny part of the body.

Feldenkrais writes in his “Elusive obvious”: “It will take five hudreds years until we will (may be?) understand how our brain functions, because we look outwards for its manifestation.” (my free translation out of memory of the german version)

Outwards looking and palaver without any connection to reality – this is what will remain out of the Feldenkrais Method in the future!!!

I appreciate your interest in trying to measure the Feldenkrais Method with science. Many people in the alternative health community are very clearly threatened by the idea that their beliefs and practices can be tested scientifically. Such testing creates the possibility that their work may be proven ineffective, or that their theories will be proven invalid. In order to avoid the pain of cognitive dissonance that might come from a real relationship to science, these people take several steps to protect themselves, including: massively overemphasizing the practical limitations of applying science; embracing “new paradgims” for science supposedly created by the wacky world of quantum mechanics, which do not involve measurement or objectivity; or maybe just denying that science has any value at all or that objective reality even exists.

As a rolfer and current feldenkrais student, I can see your frustration. Articles about rolfing in our journal frequently wade into the deepest philosophical waters about topics well understood by simple and conventional science, such as gravity. There are constant discussions of radical new paradigms for viewing reality, a fascination with vitalism and mystical energies, and of course numerous references to quantum mechanics.

Of course, this attitude seriously undermines the credibility of the alternative health community and makes it impossible to interact with the scientific community in any meaningful way. Thanks for trying to raise the bar.

Thanks, All the zest, Deborah

Agreed about the sports thing – I’ve integrated many principles from feldenkrais into sport/fitness, as have some of my colleagues, specifically an austrian Feldy named Kurt Kothbauer – he use to be with the canadian Alpine ski team as head conditionning coach – he didn’t a lot of Feldenkrais blended warm-ups and much more….here are two clips of his athletes talking:

http://www.youtube.com/user/irenegutteridge#p/u/12/WmLO8GOJrMc
http://www.youtube.com/user/irenegutteridge#p/u/11/tHqoIWK2JkU

Ryan – I am in 100% agreement. If people truly want the work to spread and if they want to make a good living giving the work away will be a big boon. The work becomes more valuable the better it is known.

I could go on and on about it, but try to limit my time on the computer on weekends!!

cheers – Ryan Nagy

Imagine a future where teams are connecting with each other doing spinal touches for general tuneups and integrating at a basic level. Imagine the cohesion that team learns. Think of how much better their performance will be if they have basic FI and ATM creation skills and are working together to evolve their team, their lives, their future families, and the world. If we empower them and electrify them to pay it forward these skills and the resulting evolution of mind, body, emotional management, connecting to others can work to create a better future. Stop worrying about how to get paid if you empower others with trade secrets the snowball you roll down the hill will fill the world leaving a trail right back to you as a source for more expertise and you will make a mark on the world and be paid well for it! How do you want to be remembered?

PAY IT FORWARD!!!

By by
Piero from Rome (Italy)

I think the reason that I find the whole training conglomerate so distasteful is that a) Few people who take trainings ever practice b) Many people don’t take the trainings (consciously or otherwise) to become practitioners and are paying for something they don’t need or want. And many get trapped into thinking the work is somehow about ATM, FI and building a practice. It can be. Though it certainly doesn’t have to be.

I think the commercial applications can be a doorway in for those who eventually want to go deeper or suddenly realize “hey, this has little to do with my back/jaw/ fill in the blank.” Those who don’t, don’t. And they at least get to feel a little better. Or don’t have to get surgery or take drugs or do something equally invasive.

All of the above is also why I want to get more free and open source stuff out there. (And to be honest, putting free and open source Feldenkrais online tends to piss a few people off and that’s a nice added bonus. ha ha.)

cheers! – Ryan

Most of what I have been doing – and have recently turned up the volume on – is creating websites designed to reach a specific group of people who have specific needs, specific words and ideas that they use to describe themselves and then engaging in conversation with them about those ideas. I’m starting with what they want and then designing what I offer to meet that.

Once the connection and trust is there it can evolve into other areas that they may want to engage or learn about. But I’m not going to start there. Unless, of course, I am dealing with people who are already there and are comfortable talking about awareness, mindfulness ect.

- Ryan

If I was to explain it like Moshe it would be “I don’t give a “*#<|*" about the body I am after flexible minds.

I try to be less profane and more profound in that I am helping a person to experience "natural mind".

You don't need to explain it to most children because they are living it.

I think it’s interesting that the ‘problem of definition’ mirrors the ‘katsu-matsu-shiatsu’ problem Moshe was talking about – if we’re going to call it a problem at all. (Is it? What makes it so? Would ‘building a fence around the law’ help or hinder? etc)

I tend to agree with what Kim and Mark have said on the issue. OTOH – putting on my best Advocatus Diaboli hat, the argument could be made that ‘if you really know what you’re doing, you should be able to describe it to a six year old’.

It’s an interesting puzzle.

I’ve been reading Ryans blog for some time, but this is the first time I’ve decided to write.

In my training were shown a lecture Moshe gave at the physics conference. He was invited along with other physicists who went on to study other things and made some discoveries in fields not related to physics.

I don’t remember exact words he used so please forgive me if I misquote or misinterpret something.

He started describing what “human being” as a response to series of his own questions.
He listed what we have:
1) skeleton
2) muscles
3) nervous system

But in order for the above 3 things to function we need 4th thing – the environment.
By interacting with environment we can learn.

So drawing on this lecture one could say is that Feldenkrais Method is about creating learning environment for the person. Or could one say that in FI practitioner becomes the environment for the other person?

Hope this makes sense. Sorry, I can’t do a better job of paraphrasing the lecture. Hopefully somebody more eloquent remembers seeing this video and can chime in

Good luck!
Igor
PS Thanks to Ryan, whos post triggered this interesting discussion.

This is where I’m at…….after 16 years of practicing this work and feeling like people are actually getting something for their lives, I am no closer to finding the perfect turn of phrase that immediately enlightens anyone. I can track at least 4-5 different ways I’ve put the work out to the public and the experiment has resulted each time in the “huh” response.

The most beautiful part of it is that I no longer worry, care, obsess, cry, or rant about the fact that I can’t make myself understood. I am saying less and practicing more. The people who want to come and shift something in their lives find me and I no longer have clients who wish I was someone else.

I am reminded of the lesson I learned from Dennis Leri during my training. Through a rather painful conversation in which I wanted to “KNOW” and Dennis didn’t want to answer, I was able to observe my own process of needing to know as if life depended on it. I see that striving and thrashing and urgency in the many conversations about what Feldenkrais is or will be defined. We can’t and won’t be defined in a way that gives justice to this multi-faceted work. On the Laughing Squid website, the “what we do” section, they list 10 things and then at the end they proudly proclaim they will not be limited or defined. Hmmmm, could that be our situation?

The applications of the Feldenkrais Method to human life are too numerous to quantify. Our job as practitioners is to get to know the person we are speaking to and give them one handle to approach it from and invite them inside the inner chamber to get the rest…..IF they want to.

http://www.upmc.com/Services/integrative-medicine/outpatient-services/Pages/feldenkrais.aspx

Many Feldys do not want clear definitions because part of the definition is there is no definition and therefore people ask them to do something they have no desire to do.

They (me in the past) want to be in two worlds one that wants to be without awareness and clear definitions (the real economic world) and the other more zen like world of contemplation

There is no real place of intersection between the two. My view is pick a side and go with it but if you pick the undefined you cannot care if you have money or students.

> “lay people” are not going to care. They are never going to care.

Well, I think you’re either mis-reading what I wrote or we’re talking past each other. Given that 99.999999 % of everyone *is* lay people (unless one intends to solely focus on working with other Feldenkrais prax)….then maybe, oh, I dunno…there should be some effort made to talk to people in a meaningful way that doesn’t diminish either party.

Or we can all keep thinking we crap rainbows and sunshine

>You asked how Moshe got people to the door? Why care?

I’m simply curious to know how he attracted people to his work – was it simply his own gravitas or something else? Given the article Ryan quoted above, it may behoove people to consider a supposedly successful (?) example of doing Feldenkrais work (as opposed to “katsu-matsu-shiatsu)” and not having to dumb that down. I think it’s the dumbing down that ultimately cheats both parties (as the above article suggests).

> In my tradition it is a complete life of teaching if you get just one person to wake up. The only
> reason to care is either ego or money, so be careful about the idea of intention.

I think we’re talking past each other here, Mark.

“lay people” are not going to care. They are never going to care.

I view the body as a piece of furniture the mind sits in. 80% or so are addicted to slip covers. Feldys and other meditators and yogis might get the slip cover off but are still addicted to the chair. I try to get people to sit on the bare floor but it is nearly impossible.

You are asking people to take a deeper look when they spend their entire lives actively avoiding what you are asking them to do.

You asked how Moshe got people to the door? Why care? In my tradition it is a complete life of teaching if you get just one person to wake up. The only reason to care is either ego or money, so be careful about the idea of intention.

I once jokingly suggested that we should have a Feldenkrais Elevator Pitch competition: I would provide $50 to the person who could come up with best, clearest explanation of what feldenkrais is (ie: not just ‘cute’: I can do cute with the best of them) – and why the lay person should give a crap – in 30 seconds or less. I’ll put my money where my mouth is if Ryan wants to sponsor the competition and have folks write in

I think some of the language we use around this stuff does not help at all. It’s a part of why the above issue around identity exists. Language leads thought, leads intention as the NLP crowd would have it.

Further –
From what I see, a lot of the the language is either meaningless or too reliant on ‘in-crowd’. (Or as a recent tai chi forum post has it – arrogant & condescending:). I’ve been as guilty of this as anyone else. I’m still learning not to be shmuck, which I hope old man Moshe would approve of

As a final brain-fart:
It might make for a good retrospective piece from either Ryan or you – how did Moshe get folks into the door in the first place, way back when?

Let’s say a PT does a particular mobilization of the shoulder to affect an increase in ROM. You or I could do something very similar looking (from the outside) but for a vastly different reason.

For example, I could be looking to give this person a sense of what it means to have a solid, skeletal line of force transmission when they push/pull/lift, so that they can then take *that* felt sense (“I can support myself”) and generalize it to (with our help / suggestions/cues)…whatever their original issue was. That’s a very different notion to ‘shoulder moves more’.

(I know of course you know this; I mention it for the sake of the non-feldies amongst us)

The issue here is : Given that there are what…5000 or so Feldie prax. in the world…if we can’t define the work, it will be defined for us (and perhaps against our will). I’m aware that this almost happened in the US during the great ‘massage registration act’. The other likelihood is the kind of self-attenuation I mentioned above.

With the problem thus defined, perhaps a discussion could be had as to what to do about it? Folks are graduating and not feeling comfortable to do the work because issues around this very topic. I’m aware of IFF initiatives etc, but I wonder if others have any ideas.

My take is that this issue of self identity and self competence goes back to Moshe’s martial leanings (read throught the first 50 pages of Higher Judo to see what I mean). Reading between the lines, I think it’s pretty obvious that differentiation comes from competence in what you’re doing. But as a friend likes to say “yes, but there’s more to it then that”

ICBW. YMMV.

PS: Hurry up with DVD already. People need to see it

you wrote ‘there isn’t a cute & simple sound bite for what Feldenkrais is” -

you are SO SO right there –

one sound bite for Feldenkrais is like trying to do the same with the immune system or the endocrine system, or, or…

but one thing that does persist in the work, which was a big basis for the foundations (of the work) is the element of “Survival” – and if you look at all the body systems, they are constantly finding a way to “survive” given the situation, the environment the time of day, etc. So, it is kind of a catch-22 – there isn’t a sound bit – but there is.

If you look at 2 of the main foundations of the work “Martial arts” and “human development” – in those two – survival is insidious.

for me, and from how I was taught this “feldenkrais profession” –
it always goes back to the elemental pieces of:

“what does this person need, today, and maybe tomorrow – what didn’t they have (yesterday, this morning, or last week) that brought them here today – and how can I bring my toolbox into the room, and what I know about the Nervous system, muscles, bones, action, thinking, sensing and the wonderful human spirit that will bring this being to a place of better survival”…..then, if they come back…” did they keep this, and now can we work with thriving…….”

One of my peers (while in our training) posed a question to the trainer (jerry Karzen, moshe’s assistant) one day after watching Moshe do an FI with a student (if i can recall, a child with cerebral palsy)

…. “well, from what is Moshe doing – it just looked like glorified Massage therapy”….

Jerry’s answer was this:

” the difference IS in his intention”….

So – essentially, sure he is moving and manipulating, and sometimes with great force – muscles and bones etc., but how you intend the manipulation and moving, how you see this human being and what they need to do in their day to succeed and survive, thrive, i think, from my understanding of the method, should prevail in a “feldenkrais” lesson –

how can they be more fit for living – because, if it doesn’t contain an element of Function, or Integration with the real world – then Yes, it is just “Physical Therapy”, and not Functional Integration….

my pieces at midnight…..after just coming back from having an FI!

AND – to your final question…

no one can begin to predict or say what feldenkrais’ intention was in how to do ‘his work.”

Anyone who says “he wanted everyone to do this, or that, or create their own handwriting – i think is bogus..maybe he said that in 19##, but people change their minds given the times. Afterall – he wasn’t interested in having Amherst video taped – and then the first day of the training, there was no vid recording and he was pissed off that the video recording wasn’t happening (even though he didn’t want it)……good thing he changed his mind or else we wouldn’t have any footage of his teaching……grains of salt…grains of salt….

I’d heard that 30-40% of Feldies were / are PT’s (fwiw, Feldenkrais was strongly marketed to PT’s here in Oz initially, so we’re probably top heavy in that respect), so you can see where the old man’s ire is coming from. Here you are meant to be learning a different way of working with a person…and there you go doing the same old same old.

I’m disappointed surprised that – in the best martial tradition – he didn’t sneak up behind folks and thwack them with a Keisaku (Zen) stick, yelling ‘Wake up’! That would have suited him, I think

Kidding aside –

The problem is a two way one: If a lay person were to walk into a room, observe an FI for 5 seconds and walk out, most of them would likely say ‘that was massage or PT’.

Unfortunately, when that’s the context the world sees Feldenkrais in, then folks will (consciously or not) try to conform to that. (Moshe would have loved the irony).

Which then brings up the 1001 problems Moshe alluded to (and some the didn’t, like Insurance reimbursement etc)

The base of the problem is that there isn’t a cute & simple sound bite for what Feldenkrais is. It’s just too big of an idea to express in 10 words or less, without sounding smug.

While this kind of problem is to be expected when dealing with something of such an inter-disciplinary nature, it does make communication, discussion, marketing etc quite difficult. So, you have a kind of attenuation that occurs that (almost invariably) leads to the kind of ‘mental attenuation’ that Feldenkrais was talking about. A real Orwellian ‘doubleplusgood’ scenario (wherein nuances are removed for ease of consumption).

As a final point –

I recall hearing that Feldenkrais was initially against the formation of any ‘Feldenkrais Profession’ – rather, his intention was to have people take his work and use it to improve their own fields. Can someone confirm / deny?

PS: This phenomena is not unique to Feldenkrais. Read Mark Singleton’s ‘Yoga Body’ for what I understand is a rather controversial take of what yoga was/is and what yoga became.

THe why, i think is because so few of our “trainings’ have dared to go into University settings where younger folk are – most trainings, historically, are filled with trainees who are there because they are middle-aged and not well and the last thing these new grads want to do is challenge the status quo and go into UNI settings and offer a special topic course, which is where most courses at the Undergrad and Post-Grad level start out: as a special topics course -which eventually gets enough attention that it becomes a “normal” course, and with enough attention could eventually grow into an actual certificate program….etc.

Trust me – I’ve been working on this –

but, It would be great if more Feldies who have Post-Grad experience and have clout in their fields of past study and connections in University worlds could take some initiative and go and make something happen at this level – although many would say this will “kill the work”…not even trying, is killing it just the same….

Awareness is not something limited to an ATM class nor to the Functional Integration table. It has both political and moral consequences. Those consequences have been hijacked and bastardized by the actions of a few, aided by the selective ignorance of many. While I cannot fault someone for trusting what they were initially taught by their trainers. I can and will fault someone who does not have the emotional maturity to dig deeper, learn more and open possibilities beyond the myths he or she was taught. The community cannot move forward without open and honest information. Not only about what has happened in the past, but what is continuing to happen today.

Whether you like or respect what I am doing is of no consequence to me. I am doing it and will continue to do it. And it is necessary.

Good luck in your efforts.

- Ryan

You and your ilk sicken me at the moment. I am not here to support the naive and childish missteps of the Moshe wannabes. They are humane just like the rest of us… some more some less. But the mark of success I believe is if we learn to do less enough till we don’t cost more than are efforts gain. ( Am I doing less enough here for you to not become reactive but to allow this be of constructive value? )

If I may, your point is this… that something doesn’t add up for you. Fine!

It’s just that simple.

As you have shown, and I have shown, and the trainers have shown, all guild and non guild members, intimates of Moshe and the man himself have shown. We sure can act like silly monkeys with a neat new toy.

It’s just a Method, an educated way of being. True a few have been engaged in this Methodology for awhile longer than others. Being there first doesn’t give you dibs, or necessarily make you better, senior maybe… whatever. You may, but you don’t have to use what is The Feldenkrais Method. You may, but you don’t have to be a member of the Guild. This Method will hopefully pass down many generations. Long past our time. We are where we are. We’re not where we want things to be. But I will support a structure that gets things towards that end even if some of the thinking of some of the other monkeys is a bit shortsighted and backward.

Keep up with the Podcasts. I love them. Please be a bit more cordial with the rest of us monkeys!

You have to ask why?

It is this poison of competition that weakens our work and its presentation to the world. Ruthy also suffered greatly from this kind of abuse. I have also suffered from this, and so I know how destructive it can be.

Each of these great teachers was deprived of giving all of us the gift of their knowledge, and each has shown great courage in rebuilding their careers outside of the Holy Guild–because they were incapable of betraying the legacy Moshe’ left for them to share with the world.

If any graduate of any training ever wants to study with me, I am here also. Felicia

cheers – Ryan

A monopoly is created by “barriers” to entry.. Education requirements, money, restricted supply, guild membership and associated branding.  Natural monopolies are where there are implicit barriers like sewer lines.  There are few  of these.  

They think there is a unique product but really it is only a unique brand. 

The reality is that the product/service of somatic type practices is endless and no barriers. As an old yogi I met said, you silly people have hot yoga or twisty yoga or skinny model yoga, all you need is the ground and air. 

There are endless ways to be fed but only one mcdonalds. In monopolistic competitive markets the rational game is to create a well controlled  brand and put it everywhere ie Starbucks.  Or create a single niche and charge way too much and restrict output. 

I am a monopoly as I offer a practice that is absolutely unique, but my market is serviced by all the churches and hospitals in the world. So it is a distinction that has no economic meaning. What you are pointing out is the trainers create the niche (expensive and restricted) and the trained get stuck with a horribly weak brand. 

When people come to me and ask about trainings (maybe half a dozen in 15 years) I say if money and time don’t matter and you do it for yourself go for it, but it is an insanely bad economic choice.  

Ps I quit my Econ phd program to become a feldy and quit feldenkrais to not be branded 

it is Paul Feyerabend!!!

But all is well regardless. – Ryan

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ’0 which is not a hashcash value.

To me, our big question is how well does the WORK speak – and how is THAT communicated and grown once Elvis Has Left The Building?

Moshe had star power. He did not leave a well-oiled organizational machine to carry on his work after he left – that has been the job of others to create. And that is or ought to be a “work in progress”, always looking at ways to improve as we learn from our experiences.

The old battles ARE dead ends. Let’s move on, in some different way. I think we need to create something that gets PAST individual stardom, that captures and communicates the huge power and beauty of this work, so that we can perhaps move beyond individual personalities (and all the stuff that tends to go on when lots of strong personalities are involved) and grow THE WORK.

cheers -
Violet

The people that I mentioned – Anat, Mia, etc. Have that “star power” within the system and also without. They have an additional way of reaching people. Anat and Mia, in particular, are brands, with or without Moshe Feldenkrais. The others that you mention? Not so much.

You say:

“The attention and success that they have is something that a “Guild Trainer” will find very difficult to get”

um…..well….here I go:

From my own personal experience, which has been all with guild trainers, or at least have been certified by the FGNA have been, and I will name them, “Jeff Haller, Jerry Karzen, Bonnie Humiston, Beatriz Walterspiel, Alan Questel, Katrin Smithback”…..I learned immensely from these folk. I learned SO SO much. It has been a blessing. I never thought ‘huh, FGNA trainer, they MUSt be out there comparing themselves to a dead guy”.

They do their work not because of the fact that they have been anointed with the FGNA status, but because, at least it seems, they have a desire to do good work and bring something forward and to others.

Since i finished my training, I have experienced other trainers, Mia was one of them, and I will admit, she didn’t blow me away, nor did she offer anything of great use to my practice. (It’s the plain truth. I feel, think, sense, that my training and how I took it in and applied it was pretty damn good. I know many don’t have this parallel experience, and it seems that now, many trainers are now seeking out and capitalizing on the ‘many’ floundering practitioners who feel they have been ‘sold short’ in their training programs and need help. It seems a big clean up is occurring to resurrect such folk. but that is an aside all to itself….. )

I will give Mia this much: it was just pleasurable to see such a wonderful women at her age still so full of vigour, life and vitality. That WAS a blessing – but in terms of depth into the work – not so much.

IN terms of learning a higher level of skill, having studied with Moshe intimately doesn’t cut it. For me, it is a question of what you have done to further your own understanding of what Moshe might have done, looking at all, ALL the content, transcripts, lectures, ideas etc., that he had synthesized and put forth and then really studying the inner workings of the human system – not for your own convenience, but for the deep interest on human evolution and how it might be better improved – it seems that is what this work is all about?! – all the pleasantries and niceties of beautiful grace which that mesmerize, seem childish and old after a while.

The trainers and also assistant trainers that I have encountered that I have learned from either in FI, personal communication the most and have furthered my understanding, and/or thru various other realms, especially in the projects I have been working on, (Dennis Leri, Roger Russell, Carl Ginsberg, Deb Bowes, Allison Rapp, Larry Goldfarb, Russell Delman, Robert Spencer, Sheryl Field, ALiza Stewart…sorry if I left someone out) have been priceless in so many ways –

Monopoly or not and whether they compare themselves to a dead person or not……

the main nectar (I think) is how and what they are imparting to those they come in contact with, and HOW and WHAT their purpose is when they get out of bed every morning……….At least I know that is how I function.

As always, Ryan, thanks for the intellectual stimulation. Irene.

(And by the way – even though you are using a fake name, you are not anonymous. I know who you are…)

“People need to grow without limits or restrictions on what Feldenkrais teacher we study with, or what direction we take ourselves or the work takes us.”

I don’t have much to add at this point, but l keep the idea of a more inclusive and open community in mind (most times).

- Ryan

so, ryan, your jaw release program comes as a great relief and sign that there is still sanity in this woild. maybe i should adapt it and call it “The sounder jaw release program”.

Deborah
p.s., I just got the new book: Experiencing your Potential: Following Feldenkrais’ Work , The Elusive Border between Learning, Psychology, and Art by Abraham Z Shoshani, Dekel Publishin House off of Ebay, it seems wonderful, the more spiritual side of our wonderful work!

Do read “Meetings with Remarkable Men”! and see the movie, I always wanted a similar movie to be made about Moshe, and Terrance stamp could have played him….the movement sequences are fabulous, here’s a clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jbdj5KjDuM
DEL

Ospenceky’ s yaking about ‘awake’..
—————————————–

meine drei Groschen:

We are not awake to parts of ourselves. Why is that an Riding master might scream at his Riding Student: “Keep your heels down!” or “Sit back!” But the riding student doesn’t do it. It seems it might be an easy thing to do. But verbal instructions are useless to the fragmented consciousness. The student doesn’t know how to keep his heels down …doesn’t know how to sit back. Is he deaf? No, he is just dumb to the movements. It is no good screaming! The Riding Master will complain , “You’ve forced me to scream at you?. Is that what you call communication?

Well, the fact is that communication between human beings is not an verbal thing. You know: “Love is a many splendid thing!” and all that sort of horseshite…

John Quinn

All the zest,

Deborah

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP (208.74.66.43) doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP (74.112.128.10) and so is spam.

Moshe at the San Francisco training,
June 16, 1975; Monday Afternoon (begin tape 1A)

(Teaching ATM) “Somebody put his foot on the floor there, it’s not the same movement. Would you please look at that gentleman there. He has his knee bent, he doesn’t realize that foot stops participating in the movement of the hand. And I’m talking to him, you can hear — don’t bend your knee. Aha! Now, can you see what you need in order to wake somebody up when he’s consciously asleep.”

“That’s what Gurdjieff used to teach. You say they are in a waking state, but they are asleep, and that’s what it means. It’s not only that you tell it — you say five times, and until everybody stops and you make it clear to him, it’s only then that he realizes that his leg was acting by itself. He had no say in it. And that’s — what do you call it in psychology — alienation, schizophrenia? A person is not whole in himself. He’s divided in bits and one bit doesn’t know the other. Give it a name, and then you will never get rid of it! All right.”

I started to reread “The Elusive Obvious” last night, and Moshe spends some time in there talking about awareness – and that the kind of awareness he is talking about is more related to the “how” than the “what”.

In my own experience, and apparently in the experience of folks I work with, I can be quite conscious of WHAT I am doing, without having much awareness of HOW I am doing it. I just do it. When I start to explore the HOW, any action becomes very interesting – because that is where the options and choices and learning and discoveries lie waiting to be uncovered. And most people are surprised and intrigued once they notice and experience that the “how” is wide open with lots of variables for them to mess around with and check out.

My sense of the “awareness” Moshe was so interested in is an awareness that engages a person in meeting the world in creative and adaptable ways that generate real choices in how we do something. This to me is an awake engagement, different from just performing an action. (And so, even “basics” like walking, standing and sitting have become endlessly entertaining for me… who knew!)

Stay tuned for some explosive blog posts…I just got an opinion from my lawyer about some information that I want to put online….

- Ryan

BTW – I have not forgotten about our mutual project…getting ready to launch another one and will be ready to roll shortly….

All the best on your new journey, friend!!!
Please be sure to post when we can all visit. And, you could offer up the TMJ Alternative Workshop: Get Out of the Country and Into Your Mind.

I’m fascinated by what you wrote as it mirrors something that I deleted from my post at the last minute. Namely, doing Feldenkrais in a non-habitual manner. That is, bringing my practicing into times and areas in which I had not been doing so – doing an ATM on the public library lawn, doing early morning sessions, late night sessions. Even looking for certain physical/emotional responses (tired, sad, annoyed) etc and then interrupting them by lying down and doing and ATM (or just a part of one).

It’s been quite instructive.

Thanks for commenting! – Ryan

Over recent years I’ve simplified my taijiquan formal practices down to a set of very short routines which I vary from session to session, sometimes with eyes closed, on rough ground, with a cup of water balanced on my head etc.

Moreover I redistribute my practice intent so that I’m integrating somatic attention into as many mundane movement activities as I can manage, eg. walking, climbing, food preparation, driving, sitting down, standing up, maintaining ‘static’ positions seated or standing and so on.

I keep reviewing what I’m trying to do at frequent intervals. Moshe’s thinking is deceptively simple and actually points toward areas of attention normally reserved for advanced meditative activity. He continues to amaze me with what he appeared to discover in one lifetime.

I will recommend your series to a chewing gum addict client, I think she´ll benefit greatly. I totally agree with your view of sharing knowledge. The turquoise waters of the warm caribbean are delight and probably we´ll all benefit from your refreshed inspiration. Have a safe trip,

Candia

cheers! – Ryan

One of my first exposures to Feldenkrais (I had many before I finally took the plunge and got certified) was as a result of a fractured jaw. Someone recommended a series of Feldenkrais tapes (casettes – that’s how long ago this was!) on TMJ – I can’t remember whose they were.

I did the tongue and jaw movements on those tapes, faithfully, for the next 7 weeks. When I had my jaw unwired, after having it rendered virtually immobile because it was wired shut, my doctor took out the wire cutters and released me.

He told me not to expect to be able to talk very well for a while and to expect some soreness and that I would have to slowly wean myself back onto eating solid foods, as it would be difficult for me to open my mouth and to chew for a while.

As he snipped the last wire, he asked me to test how it felt, gently.

His jaw nearly hit the floor when I opened my mouth wide and grinned, with no pain.

Like most MD’s, even though he was astounded and had no clinical explanation for my zero loss of mobility and my lack of pain, he remains skeptical of what I do now in my practice, to this day!

Here’s hoping your new series will astound, dumbfound and confuse many more MD’s and “traditional medicine” practitioners. I’m sure it will.

Best,
Justin

“God’s Pain-Free Purpose for Your Mouth”
“Holy Rollers: Tongue and Jaw Circles For A More Spiritual You”

Don’t forget to trademark your terms and sue the shit out any who tries to use them.

——————-

Ryan,

You’re a riot!

Be well,
Yours’ in Feldenkrais
John Quinn

check out this godin post regarding the Why Yoga went nuts and Feldy hasn’t YET.

Subtle is underrated and we need to take some courses on it. Our advertising efforts are bleak as well as how we teach our prax’s how to “sell” this work….we are also very old school and do very little to even begin to convey what our work is really about…We tend to neglect the foundational pieces of the feldy work and the “why it works” and this gets washed away in a big mess with all the “claims” of “how this can improve this and that and this and that and and” bla bla bla…

I;’ve had many ask why we don’t have the word “Feldenkrais” on the Baby Liv Clip that we put out about 4 weeks ago, well, the reason is because it doesn’t need it…the basic elements of curiosity, innocence and play come through with very little need to explain….

and, the amount of emails I’ve had from Non-Feldy people who are professionals in other health-related fields are passing this clip on is astounding (and it shows on the youtube views) because it doesn’t shove any propaganda down their throats…It is Elemental, Clean and Interesting….then from Here people if interested choose for themselves to see what it’s all about….

Irene.

i’m just pondering why Yoga won over Feldenkrais,
and I looked up why VHS won over Betamax,
and found this article:

so considering the whole product,
Yoga got hip clothes, healthy drinks, celebrities, money, lifestyle, abs and ass

while Feldenkrais

got a bunch of old people, ugly offices with strange smelly curtains, and books
as easy to read as video recorder manuals by sony

that’s why.

whatchuthink?

Mr. Hot Pancakes

“Alexander’s long, intense sessions of sensory exploration had an effect not only on her own students but also on an Israeli admirer of her work, Moshe Feldenkrais. Feldenkrais, already trained in the techniques of F. Matthias Alexander when he was living in London, devised his famous Awareness Through Movement exercises by following Gerda Alexander’s format of intense sensory exploration while lying quietly on a floor.”

From http://www.somatics.com/hannart.htm

I look forward to meeting you in person some time.

cheers! – Ryan

I don’t know much about Gerda Alexander, but I do know that the other Alexander – Matthias – did accuse Moshe of stealing his work. Convergence fo the creation of ideas does seem to happen regularly. Alfred Russel Wallace sent Charles Darwin a letter explaining his ideas on the theory of evolution and Darwin was shocked to realize how much Wallace’s ideas were similar to his own. Though I don’t think Darwin threw him down the stairs. Rather, he just published his own book as quickly as possible.

I think your educational director was in err to tell you of his experience with Rolfing. Better for a student to have his own experiences and come to a conclusion – in my opinion.

Great to hear from you.

cheers! – Ryan

If we want to expand and deepen our own self-rediscovery process, we will do ourselves a great service by noting where these outstanding individuals reached in their own process and picking up the process from there. Work once done is never lost to the collective consciousness. It has only to be tuned into.

Bypass the priesthood wherever possible. Go direct to source – find it in yourself. We’re all human, all built on the same blue-print – we all have access to the self-same portal standing right here.

Anyone who tells us “sign here, climb this ladder – cost X thousand dollars – and THEN you just might be worth something” is probably just one of life’s ways of testing our discernment.

I’ve had some Rolfing too. Painful, but useful. Did something cool to my psoas (so as?) and open some things up.

Great to hear from you. Keep the faith!

– R

I have had some latter day Rolfing lessons but they were nicht sehr gut. Ida Rolf was in her grave by then and we were in the terrible modern times. The end was near.

Still, I don’t consider the Feldenkrais Method, as we know it today. and the rolfing method, to be anything alike Still, to have studied Rolfing for five months…it wouldn’t hoit!
But nobody’s making a connection here. Vas ist das?

Maybe Tom Myers would know?

About what are we talking?

John Quinn

You said “I don’t understand why it was discussed during the lawsuit. How is competency related to the legality of the service marks?” I see a very direct link.

My understanding of this (which I ask anyone to correct if my understanding is incorrect) is that at present, the characteristics used to identify and distinguish what is a Feldenkrais training are primarily a description of the structural elements: the number of hours, the teaching of things similar to how it was done for the Amherst training, etc. But what we don’t have is a description of the expected competencies of a beginning practitioner, or what skills, knowledge and competencies a training ought to be teaching – and teaching in a way so that graduates in fact know that stuff and work that way. And so, we accredit trainings (and thus restrict the use of the services marks) based on the structure of the trainings – which relies on the argument that only this structure can do the job. But if one cannot specify what “the job” is, this can be a tricky argument to make.

I have read that piece from Jeff before, but I don’t understand why it was discussed during the lawsuit. How is competency related to the legality of the service marks? Something else that I am fascinated by is that fact that the guild settled out of court. According to George Krutz FGNA spent:

“…we still owed probably around 300.000 dollars after we got the final bill, after we had already paid a few hundred thousand dollars.”
http://feldenkrais-method.org/en/node/1053

That’s a great deal of money to spend to settle out of court.

As to this:

“so that [we] CAN function with a better, clearer base of support and greater ease and freedom, with fewer structural constraints.”

I can only agree. I take it as a given that we can. But I don’t see how the current system can evolve with so many constraints. If I could blow it all up tomorrow, I would do so.

- Ryan

I’m someone who thinks we need to, and can, always look at how we manage ourselves so that we ensure we have a useful, relevant, valued, and effective professional organization and structure. And what I keep on asking these days around stuff like what you have raised is: are the constraints that we have created (i.e. the structures we have created and imposed upon how we do things) necessary to keep as they are? Or, like in ATM and FI, could we consider them more as constraints we have placed upon our organization (temporarily) so that we could go explore and discover a clearer base of support and more effective way to function?

In the Continuing Education discussion forum on Yahoo, Jeff Haller wrote the following:

“In 2000, during the Baniel lawsuit in which we got hammered on the point that we
could not prove the efficacy of our trainings based on hours of attendance, it
was decided we had to look at training from the point of view of the competence
of the beginning practitioner. Carl Ginsberg, Beatriz Walterspiel and I sat on a
committee and with the help of Roger Russell put on two programs in Europe to
really define and come up with materials such as evaluation of students and of
training programs, curriculum development, on going training of training staff,
defining awareness from a Feldenkrais point of view, and developing competency
profiles for the graduating student. It was thought if we had this material we
could move training programs away from being tied to time and use competencies
as a basis for developing competent beginning practitioners with a greater
knowledge of how to provide training. Little came out of those long, long
meetings. It was great to go to Europe to see my friends but man we worked hard
for little if anything that came out of it. Fortunately on a good note Chris
Lambert of Australia, brilliant as she is still is working on the competency
stuff. I just got their latest draft and look forward to reading it.”

THAT’s the kind of stuff I think we need to be creating, so that we in our professional organization CAN function with a better, clearer base of support and greater ease and freedom, with fewer structural constraints. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to see what was generated through that work, and I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to bring that work forward and help make it happen in our community.

The info you posted contains a written consent from Moshe to designate the Feldenkrais Guild “to represent my registered mark “Feldenkrais” for all notices or processes in proceedings affecting the mark in the United States of America.”

I am curious as to whether that means Moshe had already registered the mark, and he was now consenting to have the Feldenkrais Guild represent that mark. (I think, but do not know for sure, that he did register that mark, through the Feldenkrais Foundation, which predated the Guild.) If that is so, Moshe had some reason for registering that mark, and for consenting to having the Guild “represent” that mark.

Moshe was clear at Amhearst that he expected people who practice his work (and in particular, those who practice it for pay) to practice it well enough that they not “disgrace” (his word) his work and his name. Mia, in her interview with you Ryan, indicated that Moshe expressed concerns that his work not be or become diluted. He cared that his work be practiced and taught well, and with integrity to what he was doing.

And so the challenge to us all is:
* What IS it that is the true essence of this fine work that he did and gave to us to learn and do and take out into the world? (Around which we can grow and build and do things in lots of different ways, but which serves as the common core essence that we all share.)
* And are there better ways to do that, and teach that, and grow that, than we have created so far?

I very much see the need need for an alive, lively process of some sort, that people are willing to engage in, that lets us become more clear about that first point.

I have heard lots of people say they are afraid or concerned that clarifying the essense of the work will kill it.

I think that UNLESS we can somehow clarify the essence, we will instead continue to do what we have been doing which is to construct STRUCTURES intended to somehow produce the essense without needing to say what the essence is. I think this way of doing things is going to bite us in the bum more and more often … And – it keeps us stuck in those structures rather than opening up freedom to look at more ways to teach, learn, and spread this amazing work.

Enough for now -
Violet

In attending the keynote to the annual FGNA conference last night, Elizabeth Beringer made a very good point, which deserves mention around “what we teach” and “where Moshe was going when he died”…she brought up the juice and complexity of the AMherst Transcripts and lessons and how different these lessons were “structured” in comparison to AY and San Francisco. The lessons in Amherst were often one sided, and the threads wove over days and days and days and linked to some very meaty and juicy lectures: This was where Moshe got to. And, it seems he never did anything haphazardly or by fluke, so perhaps this would be something to pay attention to…

TO me, it seems we haven’t even begun to really study and teach that material, nor fully understand the metaphor he was teaching in….afterall he said during that time “what I am teaching I could use Mathematics to do it as well…”

It seems such art is a necessary study for those in any Feldenkrais realm. To those that choose to develop their own curriculum, that is fine, but perhaps for those who are lazy, they simply go back to what we have already and decipher the code…OR, here is another stance, perhaps it is the other way around:
Perhaps those who are lazy would much rather create their own curricula and not dive into uncovering the grail and the blood, sweat and tears that goes with it such an endeavour..

I am plugging myself openly now (and Moshe) but I recently wrote a post that goes with the last lesson from the Amherst training, I am quite shocked when I meet people who have NEVER experienced this lesson, nor the significance of it, and the influence it has (can have) on FI practice and the entire spectrum of how we work. I quote Moshe, so you get a paragraph from the Transcripts!

http://pure-feldenkrais-whistler.blogspot.com/2010/07/amherst-diaries-where-real-healing.html

http://tinyurl.com/lsfc9m

Interestingly – despite providing the evidence asked for, the comment was soundly ignored.

BTW, here are two recent outcome studies from Australia –

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19299839

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19553385

There’s a current trial in New Zealand looking at the effects of Feldenkrais upon Spinal injury

http://www.feldscinet.org/

- Bob

Thanks again. Be well. – Ryan

Be well! – Ryan

So I see just two job profiles here:

1. the risk taker, like you described above. But for this you don’t need a four years professional training (tom myers/anatomy trains for example didn’t complete his feldenkrais training, i guess he left after 3 years when he had the feeling he had to move on …. like luke skywalker or something) and no devotion to a certain trainer or guild.

2. becoming a trainer, but as it is a pyramid and there are only so many students, there can only be so many trainers. no wonder regulations are so strict.

What I’ve learned in the feldenkrais professional training is part of the most valuable things I’ve ever learned in my live. The Feldenkrais Method is the most profound stuff I know and I’ve looked at I guess everything that’s out there. Including Yoga, Rolfing, Accupuncture, Gurdjieff, you name it.

So right now I’m busy with (1.) and to find out how to employ what I’ve learned in a way that many people can benefit from it, as well generates income for me. I guess Ryan and many others are doing the same. And I wouldn’t be surprised if that pyramid ship will sink eventually.

Almost 20 ago Yochanan Rywerant was part of creating IFF in order to integrate his students and Mias students into the teacher professional community. Look in the old IFF protocols! Then he decided that the feldenkrais politics were futile and concentrated in developing efficient ways to teach the meta teaching and refine what he already had written about. It is still a huge enterprise to understand the legacy and make it open & accessible. To look beyond the men involved and into the eccentric approach of how the nervous system and by that man learned to survive by learning. In order to create an alternative one has to let go off the old wrote the old man. It is a great passage in chapter 7 of the theory and practice of improving the ability. That is difficult.
The new means of contact and sharing of insights we establish with the internet may make that possible to stay freer in that sense.
My advice is that you simply let people know the facts you know and decide for themselves. Those who understand understand. Strip it of the language that makes man blind and agitated. We are a few who are interested in letting a counter history be heard. It is also painful for many to realize what they have paid for. The challenge is to inform in a clear way and create choices.
We will share, inform and learn

- Ryan

I don’t know much about how the structural group got nominated. I do have one small story. A person was asked to be on one of the committees that is supposed to make recommendations for changes. This person asked who else was on the committee and was told that David Bersen and Paul Rubin were members. Hearing those names, the person refused to serve.

So my brain wonders this:

How did Moshe’s Amherst training have 250+ people in a time when this stuff was a little woo woo, it wasn’t even a METHOD and there was no internet to virally promote it?

It worked because what he was doing was of quality. He simply wanted to share his findings and create some good. People talked about it – word spread…I think it’s time to remember such tactics…

Given our times and what this stuff is about (human evolution if you really look at it) the occupancy of our trainings should be a log of infinity. Definitely not 12.

but, all the IFF/SRC and political mumbo ‘trademarking” gumbo put aside….I will take this sideways viewpoint:

If you look at one of the reasons as to WHY the Declaration of Independence was constituted, a big reason was to make known the violation of King George the 3rd and that he was unfit to rule….

“The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

I do think we need to continue to bring such “facts” to our little “candid FEldenkrais world”, especially if there are trainers out there who sense it is their God given right to hold power over how this work evolves and the teaching of it – if so, I would urge and suggest that those of us who aren’t afraid of collaboration and sharing and evolving Moshe work to create our own Declaration so we can get on with it and do great Work.

If this work is to become more mainstream, there needs to be many changes. Will it be Feldenkrais? No one is Feldenkrais, but Moshe himself!

Thank you for opening up this can of worms Ryan!

- Ryan

BTW, in response to your blog about DZB and “The Advanced Workshop That Wasn’t,” I must say that I trained with David and have done a couple of advanced trainings with him, and I disagree with your sense that he doesn’t think FI can be taught in a workshop setting or at least that he doesn’t know how to do it well. While many of your descriptions of his behavior sound familiar, the workshop sounds really, really bad, and your outrage seems merited, I have learned an awfully lot about FI from David’s teaching.

At his best as a teacher, DZB’s embodied understand of FI is so transparent and luminous that it comes through as a kind of direct transmission–maybe much the same way as Moshe’s presence affected his students. And DZB has said things about FI that have stayed with me and helped me in my own work for clients for years.

“are you here for a lesson?”..

If we are teaching people how to learn again, then the term “lesson” fits. It just so happens that the basis for these “lessons” was developed by someone called Feldenkrais.

In my opinion, the marks are worthless anyway– which would be the point of giving them up, right? So who would steal them and what difference would it make?– and the obsession with them is pathological. ATM sounds like a cash machine, and the basic problem is that no one has heard of Feldenkrais (FeldenWHAT?), or Awareness Through Movement, or FI, and it’s just all totally confusing and useless. Alexander work, Rolfing, Tragerwork etc. just have one trademark name; it would make more sense to just talk about “Feldenkrais floor lessons” and “Feldenkrais table lessons”, or verbal and hands-on lessons, something like that.

as i read your articles i start to ask myself questions like
“Does anything that i know about Moshe from his books says can justify existence of such bureaucratic organisations?”
“Is there any development of FM that comes from the officials structures not from individuals as Ruthy Alon or Anat Baniel?”

As far as i know the answer is – No.

For me to see such powerful method (not a placebo as most of psychotherapies but a real thing) to stagnate and struggle to survive in shadows of the past is almost a physical pain.

And i see a lot of pure (almost) commercial self-help methods based on limited experience of their authors market aggressively and successfully providing no more than temporary relief and another delusion. Or things like pilates or core-strentgh exercises that everybody knows about.

What the hell?

Is it arrogant and childish belief of people in charge that efficient method will market itself or just rigidity?

From my point of view the duty of Moshe pupils is at least to fulfill his dream of making Method accessible for everyone not to hide it from the world.

gabrielle!

Like you do, I very much believe that the past is important. What was that quote from George Orwell? I think it’s: “He who controls the past, controls the future.” With the rise of the internet the past is out of the control of those who sought to profit from it. We are free to consult sources directly and without editing and come to our own conclusions.

I hope you are well – Ryan

Eva – I have not spoken to Denis about this. I have seen him write about the idea in an email that was circulated among trainers and the NATAB, though, I do not know if he was serious about it. I am raising the issue on behalf of practitioners. I don’t think they need to wait for the trainers to take action. It would be nice if FGNA could start being proactive and start making some changes now as opposed to waiting for the next crisis.

cheers – Ryan

You are asking some very interesting questions here, even if we put aside the possibility of fraud. I have often wondered about Moshe’s state of mind when he signed over control of the Service Marks to the Guild. From what I have heard, he was not fully himself after the strokes. Even though he wanted there to be a Guild, it is highly doubtful that he wanted to grant control over the structure and content of trainings to a group of his least experienced students. Did he realize that these relative newbies would become the final arbiters of the who and how of certifying newly minted practitioners to use the now Service Marked terms ATM, FI, and the Feldenkrais Method for the forseeable future? I don’t think that there is any doubt that this would not have been his intent.

I have spoken to many who were integral in creating the current structure of control that exists today. Each and every one of them believed that they were doing the best that they could at that time on behalf of the method. Those who are not invested in the status quo have serious questions about what they helped to create, those who have personal investments in the way things are believe that what was done was best.

Looking at how the Feldenkrais Method is utilized and seen in society today, how do you feel about how the Guild’s policy’s have served the method in the first 25 years after Moshe’s death? Do you see any changes on the horizon that will make the next 25 years better? Is the Feldenkrais community getting stronger or is it splintering and leaving society’s perception of the method less and less clear? Has the training community made trainings more clear, precise, and grounded? How many practitioners can explain what the method is today?

The past does matter Ryan. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. As individuals we all have compulsions which control our actions in some areas of our lives. In order to change, as the FM teaches us, we 1st have to stop doing what we have compulsively done in reaction to stimuli and turn on the bright light of awareness upon that which we do. The same is true for organizations such as ours. If we don’t bring the lessons of the method to our community’s actions it will continue to be a prisoner of its past just as our students who come to us for help.

Heck, one could just put in “Amherst” as a protest vote (akin to how 100,000 Australian’s put ‘Jedi’ as their official religion in the 2001 census).

I don’t know Allison and I can’t comment on why she has that section on the signup, but I can see how it might rile some folks up / act as a barrier to entry. Perhaps someone could invite her to comment here or on FeldyForum?

FWIW. ICBW

Attacking my intent and intelligence – as you did in the deleted comment – does not move the conversation forward and is an example of the type of ad hominen attacks that you accuse me of. I guess that makes you a hypocrite. You tell me not to do what you are doing.

I suggest that you take a good look at where your hostility and anger are coming from and deal with those sources.

It should also be pointed out that the article by Gorski is not even about the Feldenkrais Method. There as just a small portion of it that speaks about it. He specifically questions a claim that the method is “Confirmed by Neuroscience” to which he did try to confirm and was unable to do so and to which at this point you have not said a single thing to refute this. The simplest solution would be for yourself to actually refute that argument, present some evidence that it actually is “Confirmed by Neuroscience”. If you were to have actually done that then you would have easily put Gorski in his place. Gorski was also not doing an in depth article on the method and was not making a definitive statement about it but a simple opinion based on what he had seen, he states that from what he has seen it doesnt look to be more then glorified Yoga and “I’m left to come to the opinion that the Feldenkrais method borders on quackery.”

You are also now claiming that he refused to make even the barest attempt at research yet he clearly states that he did look up the research, he even acknowledges that he found about 34 papers but that none of them were published in any Neuroscience journals.

I don’t know Gorski personally and didn’t know anything about him until I came a cross his blog quite recently and I have no prejudice towards him but I will give him a lot of credit for one thing that he does which is when he responds to another article, paper, blog etc he will always respond to the information presented. He will take the statements made by other people and actually explain why they are wrong and back it up with resources. When he makes claims about people he backs up those claims with examples.

You on the other hand make claims about him without showing a shred of evidence that they are true. You Claim he is only “Scientific” when it meets his own personal agenda. Can you give examples?

http://www.psych.utah.edu/feldenkrais/index.php

Further, rip Dr. Schwarcz for not providing evidence but then fail to provide any yourself. Where are the 30+ studies you speak of? Why not let your readers see your sources and judge the validity themselves?

“First, there are probably no neuroscientists doing research that is specifically on the Feldenkrais Method. They might be doing research on principles related to the Feldenkrais Method (whether they realize it or not). But an outcome study directly about the Feldenkrais Method? Probably not. ”

You freely admit that there is probably not any neuroscientist doing this research and that they might be researching some of the principles that are related and also that there is probably not any outcome study directly about the method. Do you realize that your are actually supporting Groski’s claim about it being “Confirmed by Neuroscience”? Nothing you have said contradicts what Groski is questioning. If the methods are indeed “Confirmed by Neuroscience” then why not simply show where that is a fact? Where in fact does Neuroscience Confirm these methods? There may be 30+ Studies but are any of them in the filed of Neuroscience? Also if you are going to claim that there are 30+ Studies then please reference them. Am I supposed to take your word for it that there are 30+ Studies supporting the method? Where are these Studies published? Are they Peer Reviewed?

Groski may very well be wrong when it comes to this post but if he is you do a terrible job of proving it. Rather then arguing the facts and presenting a case as to why he is wrong you are resorting to an Ad hominem attacks.

I’d like to add a little something to go with teaching of “ideas”. (perhaps more than a comment),

Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote in his essay Nature:

“Whenever a true theory appears,
it will be its own evidence.
Its test is,
that is will explain all phenomena.”

Here is the thing – what Moshe Feldenkrais brought to the table in my opinion, and I am sure others would agree, is big. It is a part of this “true theory that can explain a lot of phenomena”, because if it wasn’t, it wouldn’t be able to be discussed across multiple disciplines and have effect on a such a wide variety of “stuff” – in essence it can explain a lot, maybe not all, but a lot of phenomena.

We are running a risk if we keep it under a blanket of protection, trademarking and copyright, because then this makes it look like a “product”. A product comes and go’s and doesn’t stand the test of time. True theory and Big ideas that make big differences in ALL aspects of human nature stand the test of time, ARE their own evidence, are potent, and certainly don’t need protection.

Are people seriously teaching AY word per word in the same order as on the transcripts? Would Moshe even teach his AY lessons word for word? From the Feldy history I’ve learned over the years, it took him numerous times until he was satisfied enough to record his AY lessons, and then, I am sure he changed them again and again. How would he teach now? His teaching even changed between San Francisco and Amherst trainings, did it not?

So is the copyright of AY and transcripts even the issue? Are they not a part of the history of the work? Is history copyright’able’ and trademark’able”?
Should it be?

Those that truly know this deep in their own nature (the importance spreading important ideas) will do whatever is necessary to teach and really do the work – regardless of being obedient to any “law”.

So “palpating vertebral joint movement” means touching someone’s vertebrae and being able to feel active or passive movement between two vertebrae.
There’s a joint (actually more than one joint) between each two vertebrae.
Now, I would think that the only part of a vertebra that you can really palpate is the spinous process, the part that sticks up in the back.

You could try to do this either actively or passively. For instance, let’s take C6 and C7. If you put a finger on C6 and another on C7, and have the person flex and extend their neck, you can feel the movement, right? You can feel the tips of the spinous processes getting closer together and further apart. No question about it. How about actively? Say you have the person lying supine, and you put one finger under the neck touching C7, or T1 maybe, so you can feel whether it moves or not, and you rotate the head very slightly, can you feel the movement of C6 on C7, or C7 on T1? I don’t know. Maybe. The things you’re touching, the tips of the spinous processes, aren’t directly connected, but each one is part of a vertebra, and there joints are between the other parts of the vertebrae. So you might be able to feel that, but it wouldn’t be terribly easy; and if you’re talking about lumbar or thoracic vertebrae, or the high cervical vertebra that you can’t actually palpate at all, it’s probably impossible.
So I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that PT’s or other somatic practitioners THINK they can palpate that, but in general they can’t. If so, then that would be an illusion, QED.

Ryan,

Accuse me of “mind reading” if you want, but I just want to say that in my training, there were a number of PT’s, and several of them did tell me that they felt they were being dissed, or bashed, or whatever, and I could see what they were talking about; the trainers did frequently make disparaging remarks about physical therapy, and also about medicine. We even had a visiting instructor one time who was a prominent Feldenkraiser AND a prominent PhD PT, and he complained about hearing his profession bashed all the time in the Feldenkrais world. I certainly heard myself, in the training, at the Guild conference, and on the Feldigest (precursor of the FeldyForum), much bashing of other somatic professions such as bodyworkers, and also much bashing of medicine, the scientific method, and science in general.
It did seem, btw, that the PT’s had the worst hands in our training, but hopefully they learned, and grew out of that; and they certainly do have a lot of knowledge that many prax don’t.

Now, I understand that there is plenty of room for valid criticism of Western scientific medicine, in particular of the reductionist approach many people have, and a kind of linear, mechanistic causality; and I understand that people go into alternative fields like Feldenkrais work because they’re dissatisfied with Western medicine. However, what I observed goes beyond that.
I mean, I like Feldenkrais people. They’re smart, good-looking, interesting, committed, etc. But the Feldenkrais community is just nuts on the subject of its relations with other professions, with the scientific consensus, etc.
You’re not allowed to compare Feldenkrais work to anything, and it seems like no one can say anything right if they’re not a Feldenkrais trainer.
I think this has a lot to do with Moshe’s ego problems; in the process of deifying him, his acolytes have enshrined them.

For instance, Moshe didn’t like the idea of diagnosis, and I can certainly see his point. Diagnoses can be wrong, and for what Feldenkraisers are doing, it’s better not to have a prejudicial idea of what someone can do, so it may well be better at times to ignore, or not even know about, the diagnosis.
On the other hand, for most things in medicine, it totally makes sense to make a diagnosis on base your treatment on that. It would be crazy not to.
Say someone has a fractured cervical vertebra with pseudoarthrosis (movement where there should be none!)– that personally probably needs surgery in order not to become paralyzed, and you have to figure out what that problem is before you go in and do surgery on it. Or if you have a spinal cord tumor, again, you need to know the mass is there so you can decide how to treat it. It’s just like fixing a leak in the plumbing, or fixing your car; figure out what the problem is so you can decide how best to fix it. People aren’t machines, and that kind of approach has its limitations, but it’s also enormously useful, and grounded in common sense. It might not be useful in Feldenkrais work, but there is no need to make an ideological issue out of it, or think people are stupid, misguided or evil, or insult them, just because they rely on the concept of diagnosis and treatment.

The Feldenkrais Method can be, and needs to be, compatible with everything else we know, and everything we know how to do, not be the adversary of other professions.

cheers!!

In retrospect, what I wrote is not entirely accurate. My main concern is to be a destabilizing agent. The current FGNA-derived systems is heavily weighted towards stability and control. And in my view, it serves as a major choke point stopping the growth – not of the work – but of individual’s developing themselves to do the work. More accurately, doing their own work. None of those levels are identical though they are often confused by those who think they are doing THE WORK.

We get into AY #’, which I think are great for our own practice and more devouted students, but the introductions of this work needs to be subtle and less fancy – afterall, who are you trying to impressed with crazy AY movement sequences – people at first just need to realize they CAN and DO have the ability to pay attention to themselves and change things. They need to understand the basics of human learning.

Ryan writes “In fact, no one (let’s be honest) really has a clue as to the best way for this work to develop, grown and touch the masses.”.

I would agree, (today at least), for a vast majority of what I see that goes on in our community (I generalize). People are stuck in the content of the work and forget the essence of what the work is for.

I would like to suggest to any practitioner reading this that making your teaching more state-dependent or phase appropriate is so critical to lock in a future students interest – and get more on board with this type of living and being.

Take this example from yesterday:
I just did a little demo to my Somatic Experiencing classmates (I am studying it) and one lady said, “well, I had this awful experience the only time I had a Feldenkrais session, she couldn’t adapt to where I was at and keep wanting me to drop my leg on the floor (she must have been supine with knees bent and feet standing),even though I was not digging it.”.
And from this, she never sought it out. Unhappy customer. Another, participant is an Anat Baniel Student, she asked “what lesson are you going to teach?”
I said “no specific number, I am going to teach something that will resonate with everyone, that will help them today while they are in class, and something that will make them start to think about their senses and how this might help their future clients (they are all therapists)”.

food for thought – Irene.

Thanks again! Like you, I am also determined that our work is known and practiced with excitement and passion by all those who decide to have it as part of their lives!

Personally, I try to do enough Alexander Yanai, Esalen and other workshop ATM’s so that I can be certain to have a nervous breakdown on a yearly basis.

I may be misremembering, but I think Bones for Life *does* count to advance training hours here in Oz. Maybe someone can confirm / deny? I’ve been thinking about doing their training. All up, it’s about as much as a training segment – ie: a lot after four years! I suppose knowing that it satisfied continuing ed requirements may help assuage that

Greetings and salutations from Poland

It’s actually quite interesting. Now I need to get myself to my own site and optimize it. Thanks for the lesson, once again.

Hey, super! You found ‘em.

I think we Feldies forget that most people are visually oriented. The vids are ‘cute’ and inspire folks to ‘have what she’s having’ (to quote “When Harry met Sally”).

I actually looked into the feasibility of running these ads in our subways here. The logistics didn’t work out, but such is life. Glad to have access to these clips!

cheers – Ryan