FOCUSING ON THE FLESH:

MERLEAU-PONTY, GENDLIN AND LIVED SUBJECTIVITY

(Or, The Proble o! "h# I $ S%&ll $ 'T$l(&)* He$+,, M$(&)* S%&ll A)o%her Mo)olo*&-$l
Pre.e)%$%&o) $% S%&ll A)o%her Phe)oe)olo*# Co)!ere)-e I)%e)+e+ %o Overcome
D&.ebo+&e+ Mo)olo*/e01
Steven M. Rosen 2000
City University of New York/College of Staten Island
Let e start wit! a "refatory note. #!e s$%&title of t!is talk !as %een aended and no
longer 'orres"onds to w!at is "rinted in yo$r "rogra. #!e alternative version was ins"ired %y
dis'$ssions wit! 'olleag$es s$'! as (rnie S!eran) Lloyd *ilden) +etsy +e!nke and ,altra$d
Ireland) and it reads as follows- .#!e /ro%le of ,!y I a Still a 0#alking 1ead)2 Making Still
3not!er Monologi'al /resentation) at Still 3not!er /!enoenology Conferen'e Intended to
Overcome 4ise%odied Monolog$e.5
/!enoenology is intent on gro$nding t!e s$%6e't) "$tting fles! %a'k on !er %ones)
aking !er live. #!e old Cartesian s$%6e't is anyt!ing %$t gro$nded. 1e is a !ig!&flying deus ex
machina) a deta'!ed agent intervening in worldly affairs fro a%ove. Like !is 3ristotelian
"rede'essor) !e is an unmoved mover) seeking to 'ontrol nat$re) to s!a"e !er to !is ends)
wit!o$t !iself %eing s!a"ed or 'ontrolled. So) w!ile she is 'o"letely o"en to s'r$tiny) e7"osed
to !is view) he reains 'loaked in anonyity. 1is "ost$re is '!ara'teri8ed %y its &rre2er.&b&l&%#.
1e sets !iself to f$n'tion in %$t one dire'tion- from !is own s$%6e'tive 'enter to t!e o%6e'ts t!at
are 'ast %efore !i 9(rwin Stra$ss) 4rew Leder and ot!ers !ave dis'$ssed t!is %asi' from-to
dis"osition:. In t!is orientation) w!ere awareness is geared to ove e7'l$sively ;forward);
whatever t!e Cartesian s$%6e't attends to) !e akes into an o%6e't. *iven t!is irreversi%le
gearing) t!e s$%6e't 'an never !iself %e known) sin'e !e $st only %e t!at from which t!e
knowing of t!e object o''$rs.
(ven now) at t!e %eginning of t!e twenty&first 'ent$ry) t!e Cartesian "ost$re of
irreversi%ility 'ontin$es to %e taken for granted %y ainstrea "!iloso"!y) and in so'iety&at&large.
+$t ay%e we 'an !o"e t!at t!e phenomenological challenge to t!e ainstrea %eg$n in t!e
nineteent! 'ent$ry is starting to !ave ore of an i"a't. #o t!e "!enoenologist) t!e a'tivities
of t!e deta'!ed Cartesian s$%6e't are ideali8ing o%6e'tifi'ations of t!e world t!at 'on'eal t!e
'on'rete reality of t!e l&!e3orl+. <%s'$red %y t!e lofty a%stra'tions of ($ro"ean s'ien'e) t!is
eart!ly real of lived e7"erien'e is in!a%ited %y s$%6e'ts t!at are not anonyo$s) t!at do not fly
a%ove t!e world) e7erting t!eir infl$en'e fro afar. In t!e lifeworld) t!e s$%6e't is a f$lly sit$ated)
f$lly&fledged "arti'i"ant engaging in transa'tions so intiately entangling t!at it 'an no longer
rig!tly %e taken as se"arated eit!er fro its o%6e'ts) or fro t!e worldly 'onte7t itself. #!is is
w!at 1eidegger eant w!en !e '!ara'teri8ed t!e 'on'retely lived s$%6e't as a being-in-the-
world.
/er!a"s ore t!an any ot!er "!enoenologist) it was Merlea$&/onty w!o ade it 'lear
t!at) in t!e lifeworld) t!ere 'an %e no 'ategorial division of o%6e't and s$%6e't. #!e lifeworld
s$%6e't=far fro %eing t!e disengaged) !ig!&flying deus ex machina of 4es'artes=finds itself
down aong t!e o%6e'ts) is ;one of t!e visi%les; 9Merlea$&/onty) >?@A) ". >BC:) is itself always an
o%6e't to soe other s$%6e't) so t!at t!e si"le distin'tion %etween s$%6e't and o%6e't is
'onfo$nded and ;we no longer know w!i'! sees and w!i'! is seen; 9>?@A) ". >B?:. Merlea$&
/ontyDs "la'eent of t!e s$%6e't aong t!e o%6e'ts was of 'o$rse no aterialisti' red$'tion of
t!e s$%6e't to t!e stat$s of mere o%6e't 9an inert l$" of atter:. Rat!er) !is gro$nding of t!e
s$%6e't is indi'ative of t!e a%ig$o$s diale'ti'al inter"lay of s$%6e't and o%6e't t!at is fo$nd in t!e
lifeworld. <r) wit! Merlea$&/onty) we ay say t!at w!en t!e s$%6e't is re&e%odied) %ro$g!t
down into t!e lifeworld) Cartesian irreversi%ility gives way to a re2er.&b&l&%# of s$%6e't and o%6e't.
In !is ost well&known e7a"le) Merlea$&/onty "ortrays t!e inter'!ange of s$%6e't and
o%6e't as a ;verita%le to$'!ing of t!e to$'!) w!en y rig!t !and to$'!es y left !and w!ile it is
"al"ating t!e t!ings) w!ere t!e Dto$'!ing s$%6e'tD "asses over to t!e rank of t!e to$'!ed)
des'ends into t!e t!ings; 9>?@A) "". >BB&BE:. ,!at we !ave !ere is a free reversi%ility of s$%6e't
and o%6e't w!ere) in one oent) y left !and "lays t!e role of s$%6e't) fingering an o%6e't) say)
t!is "age of te7tF w!ile) in t!e ne7t oent) y left !and itself %e'oes o%6e't to t!e
;s$%6e'tivity; of y rig!t !and. 3nd t!is re'i"ro'al relation is not liited to t!e senses) to to$'!ing
or seeing. 3''ording to Merlea$&/onty) ;3s t!ere is a reversi%ility of t!e seeing and t!e visi%le ...
so also t!ere is a reversi%ility of s"ee'! and w!at it signifies; 9>?@A) ". >CE:. #!is eans t!at t!e
s"eaking and t!inking s$%6e't=no less t!an t!e sensing s$%6e't=is an e%odied "arti'i"ant in
t!e eart!ly transa'tions of t!e lifeworld) not 6$st a deta'!ed cogito. 94o I feel like an .e%odied
"arti'i"ant5 in s"eaking to yo$ nowG 4o you feel t!at way in listening to y onolog$e) or in
yo$r intera'tions wit! ot!ers at t!is 'onferen'eG Is t!is "!enoenology 'onferen'e t!at is largely
'on'erned wit! .e%odied "arti'i"ation5 %eing 'arried o$t in an embodied wayG More a%o$t t!at
later.:
4es"ite Merlea$&/onty0s e"!asis on t!e interrelatedness of s$%6e't and o%6e't) !e
i"oses a signifi'ant liitation on it-
We spoke summarily of a reversibility of the seeing and the visible, of the touching and the
touched. It is time to emphasize that it is a reversibility always imminent and never
realized in fact. My left hand is always on the verge of touching my right hand touching the
things, but I never reach coincidence the coincidence eclipses at the moment of
realization, and one of two things always occurs! either my right hand really passes over
to the rank of the touched "i.e., becomes an ob#ect$, but then its hold on the world is
interrupted "it is no longer a sub#ect$ or it retains its hold on the world "remains a sub#ect$,
but then I do not really touch &% %% my right hand touching I palpate with my left hand only
its outer covering. 9>?@A) "". >EH&>EA.:
In ot!er words) w!ile w!at was s$%6e't 'an %e known as o%6e't a oent later) I 'annot know
s$%6e'tivity as such. #!e s$%6e't is still t!e one w!o does t!e knowing) w!ile t!e o%6e't reains
t!at w!i'! is known.
3""arently t!en) t!e intiate re'i"ro'ity of s$%6e't and o%6e't) t!eir t!oro$g!going
entwineent) does not add $" to a literal f$sion) at least not in ters of w!at !$ans 'an
experience. #o %e s$re) wit! little diffi'$lty s$%6e't 'an %e'oe o%6e't and vi'e versa) and t!is
reversi%ility attests to t!e fa't t!at t!ey "arti'i"ate f$lly in t!e sae order of %eing. Yet) a''ording
to Merlea$&/onty) ;t!e !inge %etween t!e) solid) $ns!akea%le) I...reainsJ irreedia%ly !idden
fro e.; So t!e %o$ndary dividing s$%6e't and o%6e't !olds fir in y e7"erien'e of t!eF in
"assing fro one to t!e ot!er) ne'essarily) t!ere is a %reak in y awareness) and t!is ga" attests
to t!eir $t$al e7'l$sion fro ea'! ot!er. Merlea$&/onty does go on to say t!at ;t!is !iat$s
%etween y rig!t !and to$'!ed and y rig!t !and to$'!ing I...J is not an ontologi'al void) a non&
%eing- it is s"anned %y t!e total %eing of y %ody) and %y t!at of t!e world; 9>?@A) ". >EA:.
Nevert!eless) w!ile t!ere ay not %e an ontologi'al void) t!e "res$a%ly ;irreedia%le;
epistemological void !e "osits wo$ld %e K$ite eno$g! to forever "revent t!e realization of f$ll&
fledged s$%6e't&o%6e't intertwineent.
So Merlea$&/ontyDs self&i"osed liitation %lo'ks t!e way %a'k to lived s$%6e'tivity.
3lt!o$g! t!e intiate relatedness of s$%6e't and o%6e't t!at wo$ld give a''ess to t!e s$%6e't is
inferred fro t!eir reversi%ility) any particular 'ognitive a't is itself a't$ally irreversi%le) is a $ni&
dire'tional oveent from s$%6e't to o%6e't. #o re"eat t!e e7a"le ada"ted fro Merlea$&/onty)
on one o''asion y left !and serves as s$%6e't as I "ass from it) to t!is "age of te7t) w!i'! is its
o%6e't. #!en t!ere is t!e ;irreedia%le !iat$s); after w!i'! it is now y rig!t !and t!at "lays t!e
role of s$%6e't) t!at from w!i'! y left is known as o%6e't. #!o$g! t!e identity of s$%6e't and
o%6e't is t!$s reversed fro t!e first o''asion to t!e se'ond) w!at does not '!ange is t!e
irreversi%ility of t!e a'tion within t!e given o''asion t!at "$ts t!e s$%6e't o$t of rea'!. #o %e
s$re) in "assing to t!e se'ond o''asion) I do 'oe to know w!at !ad %een t!e s$%6e't) i.e.) y
left !andF %$t I do not know it as s$%6e't) sin'e I a "resently taking it as y o%6e't. So) w!ile
/ontean reversi%ility '!anges w!at is %eing o%6e'tified) it does not!ing to '!allenge t!e a't of
o%6e'tifi'ation itself) t!e a't %y w!i'! we "ass from s$%6e't to o%6e't) t!ere%y o''l$ding lived
s$%6e'tivity "er se. I a s$ggesting t!en t!at /ontean reversi%ility 'onne'ts s$%6e't and o%6e't in
an a%stra't way) %$t) in concrete ters) it erely 6$7ta"oses two instan'es of t!e
dis'onne'tedness of s$%6e't and o%6e't. 3s a 'onseK$en'e) we reain $na%le effe'tively to re&
e%ody t!e s$%6e't) ret$rn it to t!e lifeworld. I wo$ld now like to "ro"ose t!at=%eyond t!e
/ontean reversal of s$%6e't and o%6e't fro one o''asion to t!e ne7t=we reK$ire a .el!-re2er.$l
of t!e s$%6e't wit!in t!e given o''asion 9see Rosen) >???:. It is "re'isely !ere t!at t!e work of
*endlin enters t!e "i't$re.
3 a6or t!ee in Merlea$&/onty2s earlier work is t!e ."ria'y of "er'e"tion.5 *endlin
9>??E: 'alls t!is into K$estion in !is "a"er titled) .#!e /ria'y of /er'e"tion) 3n 3n'ient and
Modern Mistake.5 3''ording to *endlin)
&he error is to be*&) with perception in our attempts to understand things. 'erception
inherently involves the division between what appears, and someone to whom it
appears( When reality is based on perception, reality becomes 3h$% $44e$r.. )eality is
made of percepts. &he perceiver drops out of reality. *ut why this dropping out, since
everyone means to include the perceiver+ It is because within the world of percepts we the
perceiver appears only as something perceived. 9>??E) ". B:
In ot!er words) $nder t!e "ria'y of "er'e"tion) if t!e s$%6e't does not reain entirely
anonyo$s) it is t$rned into a ere o%6e't.
Lor t!e "ria'y of "er'e"tion) *endlin wo$ld s$%stit$te t!e ."ria'y of t!e body5 9>??E)
". @:. .I#J!e "er'eiver is a living body)5 !e says) and) given t!at t!is is so)
we notice that 4er-e4%&o) inserts a kind of screen between the body and its environment. It
is as if the body can relate to its environment only through five little holes in the screen,
the five senses (. *ut it is obvious that bodies relate concretely with their environments,
in fact, bodies $re environmental interaction processes such as breathing, feeding,
growing, and so on. 9>??E) "". B&E.:
*endlin goes on to o%serve t!at)
-ike perception, language is made to be a screen,a second screen. .ccording to the
current assumptions "influenced particularly by the thinking of /eidegger$, we cannot live
organically, bodily, directly in our situational environment. 0urrently one assumes that our
bodies have ( only always already languaged meanings. -anguage 1makes us.2 9>??E) ".
E.:
In t!is way) .lang$age and '$lt$re are ade to %e a s'reen t!at f$n'tions soet!ing like t!e
"er'e"t$al s'reen5 9>??E) ". C:. <f 'o$rse) t!is ."ria'y of lang$age5 is no ore a''e"ta%le to
*endlin t!an t!e "ria'y of "er'e"tion. Instead !e e"!asi8es t!at .t!e !$an %ody M lives
immediately in its environent) %ot! "!ysi'ally and so'ially5 9". C:) as well as ling$isti'ally.
4oes Merlea$&/onty2s notion of 0reversi%ility)2 for$lated later in !is 'areer) 'orre't t!e
s$%6e't&o%6e't d$alis i"li'it in !is earlier t!esis of t!e ."ria'y of "er'e"tion5G ,!at I2ve tried
to s!ow) in looking ore 'losely at 0reversi%ility)2 is t!at t!e intended 'orre'tion falls s!ort of t!e
ark. #!e liitation Merlea$&/onty "la'es on 0reversi%ility2 %etrays t!e lingering infl$en'e of
ass$ing t!at "er'e"tion 'oes first. *endlin) for !is "art) stresses t!at .'on'e"ts t!at $se o$r
own %ody sense of sit$ations) 'an "rovide an earlier %eginningF we need not %egin wit!
"er'e"tion5 9>??E) ". @:. In a""ealing to .o$r own %ody sense)5 in gaining an .internal %ody&
sense5 9". @: of t!e 'on'e"ts we $se) t!e 'on'e"ts organi8e t!eselves s"ontaneo$sly. #!$s
*endlin s"eaks of %ody&%ased 'on'e"t$al a'tivity as .self&organi8ing5 9". @:. Lor y "$r"oses)
t!e ter .self&reversing5 s!o$ld work %etter) sin'e it %rings o$t ore dire'tly t!e 'ontrast wit!
/ontean 0reversi%ility)2 and) at t!e sae tie) it ay 'onvey a ore vis'eral sense of !ow t!e
%ody works in s$'! a "ro'ess- In self&reversal) t!e %ody draws back in upon itself) oves
%a'kward into t!e gro$nd of its own a'tivity as t!at a'tivity o''$rs. #!is oveent %a'k into t!e
self does not erely n$llify w!at is other. ,e do not !ave .pure s$%6e'tivity5 !ere) a .s$%6e't
wit!o$t an o%6e't5 9as in 'ertain idealist views of 'ons'io$sness:. ,it! self&reversal) o%6e't&
aking s$rely 'ontin$es) e7'e"t t!at now t!e s$%6e't gains a %odily awareness of its o%6e'tifying
a'tions in t!e very "ro'ess of 'arrying t!e o$t. ,e 'an say t!at self&reversal entails a kind of
4ro4r&o-e4%&o).
(tyologi'ally) to per'eive is to ;take !old of; or ;take t!ro$g!; 9fro t!e Latin) per)
t!ro$g!) and capere) to take:) and to con'eive is to ;gat!er or take in.; #!ese a'tivities
'orres"ond to t!e ordinary from-to) ;forward gearing; of Cartesian s$%6e'tivity. #!e ter
;"ro"rio'eive; is fro t!e Latin) proprius) eaning ;oneDs own.; Literally) t!en) "ro"rio'e"tion
eans ;taking oneDs own); w!i'! 'an %e read as a taking of self or ;self&taking.; #!e ter finds
its ost 'oon $sage in "!ysiology w!ere it signifies an organisDs sensitivity to a'tivity in its
own $s'les) 6oints and tendons. In fingering t!is "rinted "age wit! y left !and) I 'an indeed
o%tain a "ro"rio'e"tive sense of t!e a'tion of t!ese $s'les. #!e s!eet of "a"er is t!e o%6e't
and y left !and) "laying t!e role of s$%6e't) "al"ates t!e o%6e't) engages in o"erations $"on it
t!at I 'an 'oe to know via "ro"rio'e"tion. #!is a't in w!i'! t!e s$%6e't ;takes itself; 'ertainly
sees different fro Merlea$&/ontyDs e7a"le of t!e left !and %eing taken by t!e rig!t !and as
its o%6e't. In *endlin2s dis'$ssion of t!e %ody2s self&organi8ing a'tivity) !e also sees to %e
getting at a kind of "ro"rio'e"tion) "arti'$larly w!en !e '!ara'teri8es t!e .internal %ody&sense5
gotten w!en walking as involving .an aa8ing sense for lots of $s'les all at on'e5 9>??E) ". @:.
+$t I now want to raise t!e K$estion of w!et!er t!is kind of self&reversal really does s$r"ass t!e
s$%6e't&o%6e't s"lit) or w!et!er it is a't$ally a ore s$%tle for of o%6e'tifi'ation) one in w!i'! t!e
s$%6e't reains deta'!ed and anonyo$s.
Re'all Merlea$&/ontyDs distin'tion %etween t!e reversi%ility of ;t!e seeing and t!e
visi%le); on t!e one !and) and of ;s"ee'! and w!at it signifies); on t!e ot!er. #!e forer
'on'erns t!e a'tivities of t!e sensing s$%6e't 9seeing) !earing) ta'tility) et'.:) w!ereas t!e latter
involves t!e thinking s$%6e't) t!e s$%6e't as it o"erates in t!e real of lang$age and
'on'e"t$ality. Merlea$&/onty "ointed to t!e superordinate role of t!e latter %y '!ara'teri8ing it as
;t!at 'entral vision t!at 6oins t!e s'attered visions) t!at $niK$e to$'! t!at governs t!e w!ole
ta'tile life of y %ody as a $nit) t!at I think t!at $st %e a%le to a''o"any all o$r e7"erien'es;
9>?@A) ". >EC:. If Merlea$&/onty was 'orre't) if t!e ;w!ole ta'tile life of y %ody; is governed %y
t!at ;$niK$e to$'!); t!at I think) t!en=to %ring t!e s$%6e't down to eart!) to gain an .internal
%ody&sense5 of it= it wo$ld indeed not %e eno$g! for e to "ro"rio'eive t!e $s'$lar a'tivity in
y !and as it gras"s t!e "rinted "age. ,ere I liited to t!at) t!en) w!ile t!e sensing s$%6e't
wo$ld %e f$n'tioning "ro"rio'e"tively) t!e s$"erordinate thinking s$%6e't wo$ld not %e. 3s a
'onseK$en'e) t!e "eri"!eral "ro"rio'e"tion of t!e a'tivity in y !and wo$ld %e ;'entrally
"ro'essed; in a non&"ro"rio'e"tive fas!ion) e7"erien'ed as itself %$t an o%6e't 'ast %efore y
'ons'io$sness. #!is 'ons'io$sness) t!is ;"$re ideality); as Merlea$&/onty 'alled it) wo$ld %e
o"erating in t!e failiar dire'tion !ere) oving ;forward); "assing from s$%6e't) to its o%6e't. In
t!at 'ase) t!ere wo$ld %e no .internal %ody&sense5 of it. #!erefore) to 9re:e%ody t!e s$%6e't in a
t!oro$g!going way) to ake it live) I 'annot liit yself to t!e ;"eri"!ery; %$t $st work wit! t!at
;central vision; of !$an s$%6e'tivity. #!e thinking s$%6e't is w!at I $st "ro"rio'eive.
4rawing a siilar distin'tion) 4avid +o! 9>??E: s"oke of t!e need for ;proprioceptive
thought; 9". 22?:) w!i'! !e viewed as a kind of meditative a'tion w!erein ;'ons'io$sness ...
I%e'oesJ aware of its own i"li'ate a'tivity) in w!i'! its 'ontent originates; 9". 2B2:. <f 'o$rse)
t!ere is more than one type of editation. ,!ereas 'lassi'al editation generally ais at
trans'ending t!e %ody) t!e self&reversal I a talking a%o$t wo$ld seek to ove %a'k into it.
3gain) t!e goal wo$ld %e re&e%odient) re'onne'tion wit! t!e lifeworld. +$t wo$ld t!is not
reK$ire a disengagement fro t!o$g!t and a ret$rn to t!e %odily sensesG I donDt %elieve so.
3lt!o$g! we are s"eaking !ere of a self&reversal of t!e thinking s$%6e't) not 6$st of t!e s$%6e't
t!at senses) Merlea$&/ontyDs I think is no deta'!ed Cartesian ego %$t "ossesses its own %odily
gro$nding. Lor Merlea$&/onty) t!e diension of lang$age and t!o$g!t o"erates as a ;se'ond
fles!); a se'ond order of e%odient- ;It is as t!o$g! t!e visi%ility t!at aniates t!e sensi%le
world were to eigrate) not o$tside of every %ody) %$t into anot!er less !eavy) ore trans"arent
%ody) as t!o$g! it were to '!ange fles!) a%andoning t!e fles! of t!e %ody for t!at of lang$age;
9>?@A) ". >CB:. It is t!is bodily '!ara'ter of lang$age and t!inking t!at is denied w!en t!inking is
geared to ove irreversi%ly ;forward); from t!e Cartesian s$%6e't) to its o%6e't. 3nd t!e
proprioceptive self-reversal of t!inking wo$ld ao$nt to a wit!drawal of t!e "ro6e'tions of t!e
Cartesian cogito) a ;retro6e'tion; t!at wo$ld dis'lose t!e a't$al gro$nding of Cartesian
'ons'io$sness in t!e ;se'ond fles!.;
,!at a%o$t endlin!s a""roa'!G 4oes !is "ra'ti'e of %odily self&reversal engage t!e
thinking %odyG 4oes it s$r"ass o%6e'tifi'ation %y en'o"assing t!e %ody of t!e cogito as s$'!)
t!at of t!e .se'ond fles!5G
*endlin2s "!iloso"!i'al work is an o$tgrowt! of !is work as a "sy'!ologist and
"sy'!ot!era"ist. 1is 'all for t!e ."ria'y of t!e %ody5 in o$r a'adei' and 'on'e"t$al affairs is
$nistaka%ly linked to t!e "ra'ti'e of focusing t!at !e innovated as an aid to "ersonal growt!.
Let2s say t!en t!at=in an effort to sto" %eing a .talking !ead)5 to sto" t!is a%stra't e7er'ise I2
engaged in of erely talking about re&entering t!e %ody=I a't$ally atte"t to go a!ead and do it
rig!t !ere and now %y doing soe focusing.
"I345)& /5)5 *)I56 6O074I38 595)0I45$
M/res$a%ly) yo$ 'o$ld enter your %odies) get a felt sense of w!at you are e7"erien'ing !ere
t!is orning. #!e onolog$e 'o$ld t!en endF I 'o$ld sto" !olding fort!) and we 'o$ld o"en a
fo'$sing&%ased dialogue aong $s) t!e kind of t!ing *endlin des'ri%es in t!e .Listening Man$al5
of !is %ook) "ocusing. 3ll well and good. +$t wo$ld t!is "ro"rio'e"tive a'tivity=t!is self&taking=
take t!e self of t!e cogitoG ,o$ld t!e felt) .internal %ody&sense5 %e of t!e Cartesian t!inking
s$%6e't "er seG <r wo$ld that s$%6e't reain deta'!ed and anonyo$sG I wis! I 'o$ld say t!at
'lassi'al fo'$sing wo$ld do t!e tri'k) %$t I2 not so s$re it wo$ld.
,!en I fo'$s on y feelings as I sit !ere %efore yo$) t!e %ody I enter for t!e felt sense
ig!t well %e t!at of t!e .se'ond fles!)5 of t!e cogito per se. +$t it doesn2t 'oe a'ross t!at way.
Rat!er) t!ere is a 'o"elling sense of it %eing .#teve $osen!s5 %ody alone. Listen to w!at
Merlea$&/onty says a%o$t t!e fles!) w!i'!) for !i) is t!e fles! of the world- #!e
flesh is not matter, in the sense of corpuscles of being "...$ is not mind, is not substance.
&o designate it, we should need the old term :element,: in the sense it was used to speak
of water, air, earth, and fire, that is, in the sense of a *e)er$l %h&)*, midway between the
spatio%temporal individual and the idea, a sort of incarnate principle that brings a style of
being wherever there is a fragment of being. &he flesh is in this sense an :element: of
*eing. 9>?@A) ". >B?.:
4efining t!e fles! in t!is way) Merlea$&/onty invokes t!e ontologi'al differen'e. #!e fles! of t!e
world is not erely a .s"atio&te"oral individ$al)5 not erely a being 9sall .%5:F it is .an 0eleent2
of %eing5 9'a"ital .+5:. 3nd .Steve Rosen5G #!e way !e is norally e7"erien'ed 9%y !iself and
ot!ers:) !e is 'learly 6$st an individ$alF an onti'ally 'onstit$ted entityF a finite "arti'$lar %eing w!o
is defined %y !is "ersonal needs and "ersonal !istory. I vent$re to say t!at .Steve2s5 "arti'$lar
s$%6e'tivity is an objectification of .se'ond fles!5 t!at "erits t!e generic t!inking s$%6e't to
reain aloof) to stay entirely o$t of sig!t. +$t let e try to "$t it in ore e7"eriential ters.
,!en .I5 enter .y5 %ody to gain a "ro"rio'e"tive awareness of .y5 feelings 9.y5
edginess) sense of dis"la'eent) need for validation) et'.:) t!ere is one t!ing of w!i'! .I5 norally
a not aware) do not %ra'ket or fo'$s $"on) naely) t!is .I5 itself. Rat!er) .Steve Rosen2s5
"ersonal identity is $nK$estioningly "res$""osed. ,!at is t!e effe't of t!isG 3 'ertain kind of
'losed 'ontainer is ta'itly 'reated for t!e feelings) sin'e it is taken for granted t!at t!ey are
'onfined wit!in a particular %ody) t!at of t!e .s"atio&te"oral individ$al)5 .Steve Rosen.5 ,!en
lived s$%6e'tivity is narrowed into .Steve Rosen2s5 personal s$%6e'tivity) t!e s$%6e't) along wit! all
of its feelings and eotions) is ade into an object. (ntering t!e %ody in t!is onti'al way) %y no
eans is t!e cogito!s own inwardly lived %ody "ro"rio'eived) felt fro wit!in. <n t!e 'ontrary) t!e
cogito reains anonyo$sF it aintains t!e dise%odied fro&to stan'e it !as !eld at least sin'e
t!e tie of 4es'artes.
It is like w!at I said a%o$t t!e liitations of ere $s'$lar "ro"rio'e"tion. I 'an indeed
o%tain a "ro"rio'e"tive sense of t!e a'tivity in y left !and as it "al"ates t!e "rinted "age. +$t
t!e .internal5 a'tivity %eing 'arried o$t ."eri"!erally5 %y y !and a't$ally a""ears as external to
t!e .'entrally lo'ated5 t!inking s$%6e't) w!o !as not %een "ro"rio'eived. Siilarly) .I)5 .Steve
Rosen)5 ay feel .y5 way into .y5 %ody t!ro$g! t!e 'oon "ra'ti'e of fo'$sing) %$t t!e
.inner fles!5 t!ere%y engaged will not %e e7"erien'ed as t!e flesh of the world. #o en'o$nter t!e
generic fles!) only a "ro"rio'e"tion of t!e cogito itself will s$ffi'e. Yo$ ig!t want to say t!at
Steve Rosen2s "arti'$lar fles! is t!e fles! of t!e world) %$t) in t!e o%6e'tifi'ation 'arried o$t %y
re'ogni8ing only t!e forer) t!e latter will 'ontin$e in o%s'$rity.
So ending t!is onolog$e) entering into a gen$ine dialog$e t!at s$r"asses t!e
o%6e'tifi'ations of $s .talking !eads)5 is not as si"le as it ig!t see. +efore t$rning to t!e
K$estion of 6$st w!at sort of "ra'ti'e would %e reK$ired for generic focusing) let e f$rt!er
'onsider *endlin2s ore re'ent "!iloso"!i'al work.
,!en *ene takes off !is "sy'!ot!era"ist2s !at and "$ts on !is "!iloso"!er2s !at) w!en
!e 'alls for .concepts t!at $se o$r own %ody sense of sit$ations5 9>??E) ". @: so t!at we are
e"loying fo'$sing not 6$st as a tool for "ersonal growt!) %$t as an aid to s'!olars!i" and
"!iloso"!i'al resear'!) t!en) to %e s$re) !e is 'alling for a generali8ation of t!e fo'$sing "ro'ess.
+$t 6$st w!at sort of generali8ation is t!isG
Let2s 'onsider t!e $niK$e kind of 'on'e"t$ali8ing t!at *endlin 'arries o$t in !is own work.
In re'ent years) !e !as %een es"e'ially 'on'erned wit! %$ilding a general t!eory of "ro'ess.
(7a'tly !ow does !e "ro'eed wit! t!isG 1ere2s w!at I t!ink !e does- 1e enters !is %ody=not so
$'! to address a "ersonal iss$e) %$t to ask it !ow it itself is f$n'tioning in its own 'reative
a'tivity. 1e e7"erien'es t!e %ody2s way of '!anging) feels !ow it s!ifts as %lo'kages are %roken
and new o"enings are 'reated t!at allow it to ove forward. #!en *ene asks for a .!andle5 9a
word or "!rase t!at at'!es !is e7"erien'e:. Let2s say t!e answer !e gets is .'arrying forward.5
Unlike t!e !andles o%tained in psychotherapeutic fo'$sing) .'arrying forward5 is not to %e taken
as referring to *ene *endlin2s %ody alone. Rat!er) t!e ter is to !ave %roader signifi'an'eF it is
to serve as a 'on'e"t t!at signifies %odily "ro'ess in general.
*endlin "rofesses to %e an e"iri'ist and we !ave a 'lear&'$t e7a"le of it !ere. In
develo"ing !is "ro'ess t!eory) !e "ro'eeds inductively) oving fro t!e 'on'rete "arti'$larity of
!is "ersonal %ody to t!e a%stra't generality of t!e 'on'e"t$al world. I s$%it t!at) wit! this kind
of .generi' fo'$sing)5 t!ere is never any 'onta't wit! t!e flesh of t!e world. ,!at &erleau-'onty
was intiating in '!ara'teri8ing t!e 0fles!2 as a .general t!ing5 was neither a 'on'rete "arti'$larity
nor a erely abstract generality. 1is atte"t to voi'e t!e ontologi'al %ro$g!t !i to t!e notion of
a concrete generality) !is .2eleent2 of +eing.5 Merlea$&/onty $nderstood t!at t!e s$%6e't&o%6e't
s"lit 'o$ld %e s$r"assed) t!e cogito %ro$g!t down fro lofty anonyity and enfles!ed) only %y
engaging t!e ontologi'al=soet!ing *endlin a""arently does not do. Nevert!eless) it is evident
fro t!e liitation of /onty2s 'on'e"t of 0reversi%ility2 t!at !e 'o$ld not f$lly engage t!e ontologi'al
eit!er) sin'e !e 'o$ld not anage to 'arry o$t t!e generi' self-reversal ne'essary to gain a felt&
sense of t!e cogito "er se. In failing to K$estion !is own "ersonal identity) to %ra'ket !is .I5 in a
way t!at wo$ld lead to t!e generic .I)5 !e reained a .talking !ead)5 a "$rveyor of abstract
generality. 3s "!iloso"!ers) Merlea$&/onty and *endlin !ave t!is 'oon. It is an
.o''$"ational !a8ard5 fro w!i'! I yself s$rely 'annot 'lai an e7e"tion) given t!e way I
'ontin$e to f$n'tion !ere.
#!is %rings e to t!e K$estion of e7a'tly !ow y f$n'tioning wo$ld !ave to change in
order to ena't generi' fo'$sing 'on'retely. Yes) I $st %ra'ket y .I)5 %$t !ow) s"e'ifi'ally) a I
to do itG I2ve already entioned 4avid +o!2s ."ro"rio'e"tion of thought)5 adding t!at s$'! a
self&reversal of t!e t!inking s$%6e't wo$ld !ave to %e gro$nded in t!e generi' body) in Merlea$&
/onty2s .se'ond fles!.5 Can anyt!ing ore %e said a%o$t 6$st !ow I need to enter t!is %odyG In
*endlin2s a""roa'! to fo'$sing) we are advised to enter t!e %ody t!ro$g! t!e middle- .Let yo$r
attention refer inside) dire'tly) "!ysi'ally) to t!e 'ofort or dis'ofort in t!e iddle of yo$r %ody .
9>??C) ". :) say) in yo$r .'!est IorJ stoa'!5 9>??@) ". >:. #!e alternative I s$ggest so as to
fa'ilitate generic fo'$sing is t!at we enter t!e %ody t!ro$g! t!e head. My "ro"osal is %ased on
t!e work of t!e 3eri'an so'ial "sy'!iatrist) #rigant +$rrow.
Years %efore +o!) +$rrow !ad s"oken siilarly of t!e need for !$an %eings to gain
"ro"rio'e"tive awareness of t!e organisi' %asis of t!inking and lang$age) t!ese %eing t!e
a'tivities +$rrow deeed res"onsi%le for t!e fragentation of !$an so'iety. +$rrow2s ter for
t!e t!inking s$%6e't or generi' .I5 anonyo$sly engaged in 'easeless o%6e'tifi'ation is t!e (I)
persona. I"ortantly) t!e f$n'tioning of t!e .I5 "ersona !as a distin't anatoi'al lo'$s. It is
'entered in w!at +$rrow 'alled t!e .'ere%ro&o'$lar5 region 9+$rrow) >?CB) ". C2@:) t!at is) in t!e
'ere%ral 'orte7 of t!e %rain and in t!e organ of vision asso'iated wit! it. +$rrow "ointed o$t t!at it
was t!ro$g! t!e "!ylogeneti' develo"ent of t!e 'ere%ral 'orte7 t!at lang$age and sy%oli'
a'tivity first arose. #!erefore) to gain an iediate felt sense of t!is a'tivity) it sees one wo$ld
!ave to .enter t!e %ody5 t!ro$g! t!e 'ere%r$. +$t t!is 'on'l$sion was infored %y ore t!an a
si"le logi'al ded$'tion. +$rrow 'laied to !ave !ad a spontaneous experience of t!e .I5&
"ersona2s %odily %ase) one t!at "rofo$ndly infl$en'ed all !is s$%seK$ent resear'!. 3fter a
"rolonged "eriod of inter&"ersonal strife wit! t!e e%ers of t!e gro$" t!at !e !ad esta%lis!ed to
investigate s$'! 'onfli't) !e %egan to noti'e a distin'tive "attern of tension aro$nd !is eyes and
fore!ead. +$rrow re'ogni8ed in t!is t!e 'on'rete e7"ression of t!e .I5&"ersona.
I !ave "ro"osed t!at) for generi' fo'$sing) one $st engage t!e .central vision5 of w!i'!
Merlea$&/onty s"oke) t!e .I think.5 In +$rrow2s ters) t!is eans %ringing attention=not so
$'! to t!e sensations in y '!est or stoa'!) or in y !ands=%$t to t!e o'$lar&fa'ial or
.'e"!ali' segent5 9>?CB) "". 2E?&CE:) t!at is) to t!e area of t!e %ody aro$nd t!e fore!ead and
eyes. +$rrow wo$ld 'a$tion $s not to 'onf$se t!e .I5 "ersona t!at resides t!erein wit! t!e ego of
t!e allegedly isolated individ$al. ,e ig!t say t!at t!is "ersona is t!e species-wide s$%6e't t!at
lies %e!ind t!e a""earan'e of individ$al s$%6e'tivity=t!e s$%6e'tivity of .Steve Rosen)5 for
e7a"le. +$t w!ile it is t!ro$g! t!e .I5&"ersona t!at we) as a s"e'ies) 'reate t!e i"ression of
o$rselves as erely isolated) dise%odied s$%6e'ts) t!e generi' .I5 itself is no dise%odied
s$%6e't. Rat!er) it is a bodily process) an integral as"e't of !$an f$n'tioning as a w!ole.
#!erefore) w!en +$rrow %e'ae attentive to t!e ;I;&"ersona 9rat!er t!an 'ontin$ing to %e
$nwittingly governed %y it:) !e e7"erien'ed t!is "al"a%le "attern of tension aro$nd t!e eyes and
fore!ead against t!e tensional %a'kgro$nd of t!e organis as a w!ole. 1e was t!erefore
"res$a%ly a%le to a""re!end in an iediate way w!at !e 'alled t!e ;solidarity of t!e s"e'ies;
9+$rrow) >?CB) ". H>:=w!at Merlea$&/onty wo$ld 'all t!e .fles! of t!e world.5
Lollowing !is first s"ontaneo$s "ro"rio'e"tion of t!e organis) +$rrow so$g!t to '$ltivate
t!e e7"erien'e in a systeati' "ra'ti'e !e naed .'otention5 9+$rrow) >?B2:. +$rrow des'ri%ed
!is "ro'ed$re as one of setting aside daily e7"eriental "eriods in w!i'! !e .ad!ered
'onsistently to rela7ing t!e eyes and to getting t!e kinest!eti' DfeelD of t!e tensions in and a%o$t
t!e eyes and in t!e 'e"!ali' area generally; 9>?CB) ". ?C:. +$rrow wo$ld say t!at=%e!ind .Steve
Rosen2s5 feeling of "erforan'e an7iety) !is sense of dis"la'eent) need for validation and so
fort!=t!e .I5&"ersona o"erates) and t!at t!is generi' .I5 anifests itself 'on'retely in t!e
$s'$lar a'tivity of .Steve2s5 eyes. It well ay %e a lot easier to "ro"rio'eive t!e a'tivity in t!e
!ands t!an in t!e eyesF t!e latter is s$%tler and ay take a great deal ore "ra'ti'e.
Nevert!eless) if +$rrow is rig!t) it is "ro"rio'e"tion of t!e a'tivity in and aro$nd t!e eyes t!at
wo$ld %e reK$ired for generi' fo'$sing. So it sees t!at) to 'ease and desist fro f$n'tioning
erely as a .talking !ead)5 y "ra'ti'e evidently wo$ld !ave to in'l$de o%taining a felt sense of
t!is very .!ead5 t!at is talking.
3s often !a""ens wit! a onolog$e of t!is sort) I !ave gone on at s$'! lengt! t!at I don2t
!ave t!e tie to "ro"erly 'on'l$de. In a't$ality) I %elieve t!ere are two additional reK$ireents
t!at wo$ld !ave to %e et for f$ll&fledged generi' fo'$sing. *iven t!e fa't t!at this .!ead5 $st
s!ortly sto" talking) I 'an only %riefly allude to t!e.
In an earlier "a"er on +$rrow 9Rosen) >??E:) I s$ggested t!at !is a""roa'! to 'otention
was liited %y ado"ting a "ro'ed$re in w!i'! !e atte"ted to remove !iself fro so'ial
intera'tion and ling$isti' e7'!ange. 3""arently) %y taking t!is stan'e) !e was seeking to regain
t!e original sense of t!e organis) t!at w!i'! e7isted "rior to t!e 'onfli't$al divisions introd$'ed
%y lang$age and t!inking. #!e "oint I ade in y arti'le was t!at) in +$rrow2s effort to render
lang$age .n$ll and void5 9>?CB) ". ?B: and to ret$rn to t!e $teness of t!e organis) !e a't$ally
was a%orting t!e f$ll awareness of sy%oli' f$n'tioning t!at is ne'essary in order to %ring t!e
'otentive "ra'ti'e to fr$ition. #!e alternative I s$ggested is a ore e7troverted) gro$" for of
'otention in w!i'!=rat!er t!an retreating fro lang$age and dialogi'al e7'!ange=t!ey are
in'l$ded in t!e e7er'ise. ,!at t!is eans is t!at "ro"rio'e"tion wo$ld not %e liited to t!e
.'entrali8ed5 a'tivity of t!e .I5&"ersona o''$rring inside t!e eyes and fore!ead %$t wo$ld e7tend
to t!e "eri"!eral organs of s"ee'! and 'o$ni'ation. #!e 8one of generi' fo'$sing wo$ld
t!ere%y %e e7"anded to in'l$de t!e a$dio&vo'al a""arat$s 9t!e o$t! and ears: t!at 'oes into
"lay in o$r inter"ersonal e7'!anges. +eyond "rivate "ro"rio'e"tive t!inking) we wo$ld speak and
listen to ea'! ot!er "ro"rio'e"tively) gaining f$ll %odily 'ogni8an'e of o$r 'o$ni'ative a'ts 9of
t!e sensations in o$r t!roats w!en we s"eak) for e7a"le) of t!e "!ysi'al '!ara'teristi's of o$r
words) not 6$st t!eir a%stra't 'ontent) and so fort!:. In t!is way) t!e onolog$e "res$a%ly
wo$ld %e s$"erseded %y a gen$ine dialogue.
3nd yet) evidently) t!is "ro'ed$re wo$ld still not s$ffi'e for a f$ll reali8ation of generi'
fo'$sing. #!o$g! I 'an indeed dire't y attention to t!e "!ysi'al '!ara'teristi's of t!ese words I
a s"eaking) and to t!e tensions in y eyes %e!ind t!e .aster word)5 t!e .I)5 a sall %$t
de'isive ga" reains %etween t!e a%stra't eanings of t!ese words and t!eir "!ysi'al
e%odient. #o %ridge t!is ga") to 'lose t!e "ro"rio'e"tive 'ir'le and w!olly erge t!e s"irit of
t!ese words wit! t!eir aterial %ase) I s$ggest t!at ore work $st %e done on t!e .s"irit$al5
side. #!at is) in addition to t!e 'on'rete e7"eriential work I !ave o$tlined) conceptual %allast
$st %e added to lang$age to %ring it down to eart!. (lsew!ere I !ave develo"ed t!is "oint in
de"t! 9Rosen) >??H:. ,!at it ao$nts to is transforing t!ese signifiers=t!ese "!onee
seK$en'es) or) in t!e 'ase of writing) t!e strings of letters=%y e7"ressing t!e topologically.
*tymologically) 0to"&ology2 'an %e defined as t!e a""li'ation of logos to topos=to "la'e) to t!e
'on'rete sit$ation or 'onte7t. Using self&referential to"ologi'al str$'t$res s$'! as t!e Moe%i$s
stri" and t!e Nlein %ottle=w!i'! I take as 'on'e"t$al 'o$nter"arts of "ro"rio'e"tive experience=
I !ave so$g!t to 'on'reti8e lang$age in s$'! a way t!at=like o""osing sides of t!e Moe%i$s=
'on'e"t and e7"erien'e flow into one anot!er wit!o$t a %reak. #!o$g! I %egan y work on
to"ology alost B0 years ago) it was only re'ently t!at I learned fro (rnie S!eran t!at) in fa't)
&erleau-'onty himself ade referen'e to to"ology. Lor /onty) t!e diension of t!e .se'ond
fles!5 serving as t!e 'onte7t of all o$r te7ts is a topological diension 9>?@A) "". 2>0&>>:.
+$t I 'an say no ore a%o$t any of t!is for now) sin'e I $st end y onolog$e. In
'losing) I !o"e t!at I !ave at least s!ed soe lig!t on t!e "ro%le entioned in t!e alternative
s$%&title to t!is talk- The Proble o! "h# I $ S%&ll $ 'T$l(&)* He$+,, M$(&)* S%&ll A)o%her
Mo)olo*&-$l Pre.e)%$%&o) $% S%&ll A)o%her Phe)oe)olo*# Co)!ere)-e Th$% &. I)%e)+e+ %o
Overcome D&.ebo+&e+ Mo)olo*/e0
)565)53054
+o!) 4. +o!&Rosen 'orres"onden'e Itrans'ri"ts of "ersonal lettersJ. In S. M. Rosen 9(d.:)
#cience+ 'aradox+ and the &oebius 'rinciple 9"". 22B&2CA:. 3l%any- State University of New York
/ress) >??E.
+$rrow) #. ,he #tructure of Insanity. London- Negan /a$l) #ren'!) #r$%ner and Co.) >?B2.
+$rrow) #. #cience and &an-s %ehavior. New York- /!iloso"!i'al Li%rary) >?CB.
*endlin) (.#. #!e "ria'y of "er'e"tion- 3n an'ient and odern istake. Un"$%lis!ed
an$s'ri"t) >??E.
*endlin) (.#. Crossing and 4i""ing- Soe ters for a""roa'!ing t!e interfa'e %etween nat$ral
$nderstanding and logi'al for$lation. &ind and &achines) C) >??C) CEH&C@0.
*endlin) (.#. Making 'on'e"ts fro e7"erien'e. International Lo'$sing Conferen'e) *lo$'ester)
M3.) >??@.
Merlea$&/onty) M. ,he .isible and the Invisible. (vanston) Ill.- Nort!western University /ress)
>?@A.
Rosen) S. M. 3 "ro"osal for an e7"anded 'otentive e7er'ise in so'ial self&inK$iry. /ifwynn
Correspondence) B) >??E) A&>2.
Rosen) S. M. ,!oleness as t!e %ody of "arado7. 0ournal of &ind and %ehavior) >A) >??H) B?>&
E2B.
Rosen) S. M. Irreversi%ility) reversi%ility) and self&reversal- 3 /!enoenologi'al a""roa'! to t!e
D!ard "ro%leD of 'ons'io$sness. Ninety&Lirst 3nn$al Meeting of t!e So$t!ern So'iety for
/!iloso"!y and /sy'!ology) Lo$isville) Nent$'ky) 3"ril 2) >???.