the philosophy of movement
“This is part of the reason why it is nonsense to speak of observing, inspecting, witnessing or scrutinising sensations, since the objects proper to such verbs are things and episodes.” – Ryle 2009 p 189
I would propose that this thought is an example of how how faith in text trumps corporeal experience. Sounds like par for the course for a philosopher.
People can see, hear and jolt one another’s bodies, but they are irremediably blind and deaf to the workings of one another’s minds and inoperative upon them (Ryle, 2009, p.3)
brain + body = mind
mind – brain = body
mind – body = brain
considering, however, that the brain is a subset of the body…
‘ “Intelligent practice is not a step-child of theory. On the contrary theorising is one practice amongst others and is itself intelligently or stupidly conducted.”
Ryle pg 26, The Concept of Mind, New York: Hutchinson’s University Library, 1949
“Ryle went on to argue that…thinking…is merely an adverbial-like modification of activities.” Lyon pg 189 Gilbert Ryle: An Introduction to His Philosophy, Sussex: The Harvester Press,1980
“Despite the criticism that this statement faces within philosophical discourse…” Lycouris pg 64 Destabilizing Dance 1996 ‘
Is it any wonder that the second statement faces criticism with philosophical discourse? How dare anyone challenge the primacy of mind?
What does it say about dance and philosophy that an idea from 1949 is still controversial?
The three quotes above come from Destabilizing Dance, Lycouris’ dissertation through University of Surrey.
Training enables the dancer to be fully bodily engaged in a reflex and able to reflect on it simultaneously. In other words, unifying the body/mind, or rather not unifying as that implies a split, but existing as a whole.