Elizabeth Beringer grew up in the New York City area. An independent and
curious teenager, she studied Aikido and Acupuncture. At 19, she began to study
the Feldenkrais Method with Dr. Feldenkrais.
She studied and worked closely with Dr. Feldenkrais
from 1976 to 1984 in both Israel and the U.S. She has been involved with the
practice and development studied and worked closely with Dr. Feldenkrais from
1976 to 1984 in both Israel and the U.S. She has been involved with the
practice and development of the Feldenkrais Method for over 35 years,
and her accomplishments include founding and editing The Feldenkrais
Journal, developing educational programs and materials, co-founding Feldenkrais Resources
in 1984 with David Zemach-Bersin, and founding the Feldenkrais Institute
of San Diego, California.
Elizabeth has a 6th-degree black belt in Aikido,
which informs her approach to the Feldenkrais Method. She currently
directs Feldenkrais Professional Training Programs in London and at
the Feldenkrais Institute of San Diego. Elizabeth lives in San Diego
with her husband, cognitive scientist, Rafael Nunez, and their daughter. A
profoundly experienced FeldenkraisTrainer, Elizabeth has worked
extensively with a wide range of people and physical issues.
Studio interessante sulla neuroplasticità sulla quale si basava Feldenkrais ancor prima delle dimostrazioni scientifiche.
Forse, vale la pena sottolineare cosa si intenda filosoficamente per io, per non rischiare di usare lo stesso termine in modo diverso.
Io penso, con Tommaso e MacIntyre, che “dal momento che l’anima è parte del corpo dell’essere umano, l’anima non è l’intero essere umano, e la mia anima non corrisponde al mio io”.
Noi diventiamo quello che facciamo ripetutamente. Sta a noi decidere se indossare la maschera fatta per noi, togliendo quelle che non sono le nostre, o se invece nasconderci dietro ad altre. Man mano che ripetiamo quelle azioni, quella maschera diventa sempre più la nostra. Spetta a noi quale scegliere...
Forse va poi anche preso in considerazione cosa si intenda quando si dice che "the self is not a thing" e poi che "our self-image is never static".
Per me self e self-image non sono la stessa cosa. Inoltre, quando Heinz von Foerster dice "the Self should not be a noun, but a process: selfing", io penso invece che che sia entrambi e nessuno dei due.
Suggerisco la lettura dell'introduzione e del capitolo 1 di:
Mi piacerebbe che qualcuno, intervenisse in questo brain-storming.
"In reality our self-image is never static. It changes from action to action..."
About 15 years ago I took a radical turn in my ideas about the Self, in the Method and in life. I first met Dr. Heinz von Foerster when he came to present to the San Francisco training in 1977. Dr. von Foerster is a contemporary of Dr. Feldenkrais, and a strong proponent of systemic approaches to understanding human cognition.
About 10 years later I was fortunate enough to meet him again and he became a kind of mentor for me. At that time I was teaching an ATM class and I was having difficulty with one of the students. She seemed to be going through the series collecting ideas about herself to such an extent that it was becoming cumbersome. Students experience all kinds of interesting differences in ATM—noticing that one shoulder is more forward, or one leg turns out more—but most of them notice and move one. She was adding up all these "insights" in a way that was hindering rather than helping her learning; she had to catalog and compare them all in each scan. I asked Heinz about it. It was a question about awareness:
"How was it that the simple process of scanning was experienced in such a different fashion by the members of the class, and her in particular? What do you think was going on?" "Well," he said energetically as is his style, "this is clearly an epistemological problem. She thinks the Self is a collection of attributes and she is collecting them. The Self should not be a noun, but a process: selfing."
Heinz suggested that the experience of Self was situational, that we are part of a web of interactions, that affected but did not define our ongoing experience. I was selfing. What a relief!
This insight immediately affected my ATM teaching and especially my Fi.
If the Self is seen as a thing, then it has fixed attributes which can be acted upon. Selfing implies a dynamic process which is ongoing. As practitioners, we then participate in an active process; it may be a bit stuck, but it is nonetheless dynamic.
The Self as process and the opportunity that ATM presented to experience the plasticity of the Self.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento