2021/10/23

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind - Wikipedia

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind - Wikipedia

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search


The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind
JaynesOriginOfConsciousness.jpg
AuthorJulian Jaynes
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
SubjectConsciousness
PublisherHoughton Mifflin, Mariner Books
Publication date
1976
Media typePrint (HardcoverPaperback, Digital)
Pages512 (English edition)
ISBN978-0618057078

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind is a 1976 book by the Princeton psychologist, psychohistorian[a] and consciousness theorist Julian Jaynes (1920-1997). The book addresses the problematic nature of consciousness – “the ability to introspect” – which in Jaynes’ view must be distinguished from sensory awareness and other processes of cognition. Jaynes presents his proposed solution: that consciousness is a “learned behavior” based more on language and culture than on biology; this solution, in turn, points to the origin of consciousness in ancient human history rather than in metaphysical or evolutionary processes; furthermore, archaeological and historical evidence indicates that prior to the “learning” of consciousness, human mentality was what Jaynes called "the bicameral mind" – a mentality based on verbal hallucination.

The first edition was released in January 1977 in English. Two later editions, in 1982 and in 1990, were released by Jaynes with additions but without alterations. It was Jaynes's only book, and it is still in print, in several languages. In addition to numerous reviews and commentaries, there are several summaries of the book's material, for example, in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences, in lectures and discussions published in Canadian Psychology,[1] and in Art/World.

Jaynes's theories[edit]

In his book, Jaynes reviews what one of his early critics acknowledged as the “spectacular history of failure”[2] to explain consciousness – “the human ability to introspect”.[3] Abandoning the assumption that consciousness is innate, Jaynes explains it instead as a learned behavior that “arises ... from language, and specifically from metaphor.”[2] With this understanding, Jaynes then demonstrated that ancient texts and archeology can reveal a history of human mentality alongside the histories of other cultural products. His analysis of the evidence led him not only to place the origin of consciousness during the 2nd millennium BCE but also to hypothesize the existence of an older non-conscious “mentality that he called the bicameral mind, referring to the brain’s two hemispheres”.[4]

In the third chapter of the book, "The Mind of the Iliad", Jaynes states that people of the era had no consciousness.

There is in general no consciousness in the Iliad. I am saying ‘in general’ because I shall mention some exceptions later. And in general therefore, no words for consciousness or mental acts. The words in the Iliad that in a later age come to mean mental things have different meanings, all of them more concrete. The word psyche, which later means soul or conscious mind, is in most instances life-substances, such as blood or breath: a dying warrior bleeds out his psyche onto the ground or breathes it out in his last gasp. The thumos, which later comes to mean something like emotional soul, is simply motion or agitation. When a man stops moving, the thumos leaves his limbs. But it is also somehow like an organ itself, for when Glaucus prays to Apollo to alleviate his pain and to give him strength to help his friend Sarpedon, Apollo hears his prayer and “casts strength in his thumos” (Iliad, 16:529). The thumos can tell a man to eat, drink, or fight.

— Chapter 3[5]

Jaynes wrote an extensive afterword for the 1990 edition of his book, in which he addressed criticisms and clarified that his theory has four separate hypotheses: consciousness is based on and accessed by language; the non-conscious bicameral mind is based on verbal hallucinations; the breakdown of bicameral mind precedes consciousness, but the dating is variable; the 'double brain' of bicamerality is not today's functional lateralization of the cerebral hemispheres. He also expanded on the impact of consciousness on imagination and memory, notions of The Self, emotions, anxiety, guilt, and sexuality.

Reception and influence[edit]

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind was a successful work of popular science, selling out the first print run before a second could replace it. The book was nominated for the National Book Award in 1978, and received dozens of positive book reviews, including those by well-known critics such as John Updike in The New YorkerChristopher Lehmann-Haupt in the New York Times, and Marshall McLuhan in the Toronto Globe and Mail. Articles on Jaynes and his ideas appeared in Time[6] magazine and Psychology Today[7] in 1977, and in Quest/78[8] in 1978.

It is mentioned in Richard Dawkins's 2006 work The God Delusion as "one of those books that is either complete rubbish or a work of consummate genius, nothing in between! Probably the former, but I'm hedging my bets." Jaynes's work on consciousness has influenced philosophers Daniel Dennett,[9] Susan Blackmore, and Ken Wilber, and the bicameral model of the cerebral hemispheres has influenced schizophrenia researchers Henry Nasrallah[10] and Tim Crow.[11]

The theory of bicamerality has been cited in thousands of books and articles, both scientific and popular.[12] It inspired early investigations of auditory hallucination by psychologist Thomas Posey[13] and clinical psychologist John Hamilton.[14] With further research in the late 1990s using new brain imaging technology, Jaynes's ideas received renewed attention[15][16] and recognition for contributing to a rethinking of auditory hallucinations and mental illness.[17]

In Popular Culture[edit]

  • In Douglas Adams' unfinished novel The Salmon of DoubtDirk Gently obtains copies of the Financial Times "from an old tramp in return for a blanket, some cider, and a copy of The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind."[18]
  • In 2009, American novelist Terence Hawkins published The Rage of Achilles, a re-telling of Homer's The Iliad that imagines the hero's transition from bicameral mentality to consciousness.
  • According to Brian J. McVeigh in The Psychology of Westworld: When Machines Go Mad, the notion of bicamerality is present in the 2016 science fiction TV series Westworld.
  • The idea of bicamerality has influenced novelists Philip K. Dick,[19] William S. Burroughs,[20] Neal Stephenson[21] and Robert J. Sawyer.[22]
  • In Neil Gaiman's American Gods, there is an allusion to Jaynes' theory. The novel's protagonist, Shadow, discusses theories about the origins of gods with a hitchhiker he picks up; the hitchhiker says "'I read some book about brains... how five thousand years ago the lobes of the brain fused and before that people thought when the right lobe of the brain said anything it was the voice of the god telling them what to do'."[23]

Conferences[edit]

There have been a number of conferences and symposiums dedicated to Julian Jaynes's theory. These include:

  • The McMaster-Bauer Symposium on Consciousness at McMaster University was held in November 1983, with lectures and discussion by Julian Jaynes, Daniel Dennett, and others.
  • A symposium on Jaynes's theory was held at Harvard University in December 1988, with lectures and discussion by Julian Jaynes, Daniel Dennett, and others.
  • The Julian Jaynes Conference on Consciousness was organized by Professor Scott Greer at the University of Prince Edward Island in 2006 and 2008 (a one-day symposium was held from 2002-2005), and featured speakers such as Daniel Dennett, Michael GazzanigaRichard RestakKarl Pribram, and many others.
  • At the April 2008 "Toward a Science of Consciousness" Conference held in TucsonArizona, Marcel Kuijsten (Executive Director and Founder of the Julian Jaynes Society) and Brian J. McVeigh (University of Arizona) hosted a workshop devoted to Jaynesian psychology. At the same conference, a panel devoted to Jaynes was also held, with John Limber (University of New Hampshire), Marcel Kuijsten, John Hainly (Southern University), Scott Greer (University of Prince Edward Island), and Brian J. McVeigh presenting relevant research. At the same conference the philosopher Jan Sleutels (Leiden University) gave a paper on Jaynesian psychology.
  • In June 2013, The Julian Jaynes Society Conference on Consciousness and Bicameral Studies was held in Charleston, West Virginia. The multidisciplinary program featured 26 speakers over three full days, including keynote talks by Professor Roy Baumeister, Professor Merlin Donald, and Dr. Dirk Corstens.

Publications[edit]

A growing number of publications discuss and expand on Julian Jaynes's theory. These include:

  • Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited (2007), which contains several of Jaynes's essays along with chapters by scholars from a variety of disciplines expanding on his ideas.[24]
  • The Julian Jaynes Collection (2012), which gathers together many of the lectures and articles by Jaynes relevant to his theory (including some that were previously unpublished), along with interviews and question and answer sessions where Jaynes addresses misconceptions about the theory and extends the theory into new areas.[25]
  • The Minds of the Bible: Speculations on the Cultural Evolution of Human Consciousness (2013) by Rabbi James Cohn, which examines the evidence for Jaynes's theory in the Old Testament.[26]
  • Gods, Voices, and the Bicameral Mind (2016), which includes essays on a variety of aspects of Jaynes's theory, including ancient history, language, the development of consciousness in children, and the transition from bicamerality to consciousness in ancient Tibet.[27]
  • How Religion Evolved: Explaining the Living Dead, Talking Idols, and Mesmerizing Monuments (2016) by Brian J. McVeigh [28]
  • The 'Other' Psychology of Julian Jaynes: Ancient Languages, Sacred Visions, and Forgotten Mentalities (2018) by Brian J. McVeigh [29]
  • The Psychology of the Bible: Explaining Divine Voices and Visions (2020) by Brian J. McVeigh [30]

Scholarly commentary[edit]

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind is one of those lush, overambitious books … that readers, on finishing it, find that they think about the world quite differently.” — Tanya Luhrmann, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology, Stanford University, in “What Book Changed Your Mind?,” Chronicle of Higher Education

“[Jaynes] has one of the clearest and most perspicuous defenses of the top-down approach [to consciousness] that I have ever come across.” — Daniel Dennett, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, Tufts University, in Brainchildren

"Julian Jaynes’s theories for the nature of self-awareness, introspection, and consciousness have replaced the assumption of their almost ethereal uniqueness with explanations that could initiate the next change in paradigm for human thought.” — Michael A. Persinger, Ph.D., Professor of Behavioral Neuroscience, Laurentian University, in Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness

"[Jaynes'] proposal is too interesting to ignore." — David Eagleman, in Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain

Controversy and criticism[edit]

In general, Jaynes is respected as a lecturer and a historian of psychology. Marcel Kuijsten, founder of the Julian Jaynes Society, asks why, in the decades after the book's publication, "there have been few in-depth discussions, either positive or negative", rejecting as too simplistic the criticism that "Jaynes was wrong."[4]

Jaynes described the range of responses to his book as “from people who feel [the ideas are] very important all the way to very strong hostility. ... When someone comes along and says consciousness is in history, it can’t be accepted. If [psychologists] did accept it, they wouldn’t have the motivation to go back into the laboratory ...”[8]

W. T. Jones, a sociologist who has been described as "one of Jaynes's most thoroughgoing critics", asked in 1979, "Why, despite its implausibility, is [Jaynes's] book taken seriously by thoughtful and intelligent people?"[2] Jones agreed with Jaynes that "the language in which talk about consciousness is conducted is metaphorical", but he contradicted the basis of Jaynes's argument – that metaphor creates consciousness – by asserting that "language (and specifically metaphor) does not create, it discovers, the similarities that language marks". Jones also argued that three "cosmological orientations" biased Jaynes’s thinking: 1) "hostility to Darwin" and natural selection; 2) a "longing for 'lost bicamerality'" (Jones accused Jaynes of holding that "we would all be better off if 'everyone' were once again schizophrenic"); 3) a "desire for a sweeping, all-inclusive formula that explains everything that has happened". Jones concluded that "... those who share these biases ... are likely to find the book convincing; those who do not will reject [Jaynes's] arguments ..."[2]

The neurological model in The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind was a radical neuroscientific hypothesis that was based on research novel at the time. Today, his hypotheses are still controversial to many in the field.[citation needed] However, the more general idea of a "divided self" (contrasted with a "unitary self") has found support from psychological and neurological studies, and many of the historical arguments made in the book remain supported, and have not been disproven (although due to the theoretical nature of the work, it may require further study to experimentalize some of the ideas).[31]

An early criticism by philosopher Ned Block argued that Jaynes had confused the emergence of consciousness with the emergence of the concept of consciousness. In other words, according to Block, humans were conscious all along but did not have the concept of consciousness and thus did not discuss it in their texts. Daniel Dennett countered that for some things, such as moneybaseball, or consciousness, one cannot have the thing without also having the concept of the thing.[32] Moreover, it is arguable that Block misinterpreted the nature of what Jaynes claimed to be a social construction.[33][34]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ In this context, the term refers to the history of the mind without the usual connotation of "psychohistory" in reference to psychoanalysis.

Translations[edit]

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind has been translated into at least seven foreign languages:[35]

  • GermanDer Ursprung des Bewusstseins durch den Zusammenbruch der Bikameralen Psyche
  • SpanishEl Origen de la Conciencia en la Ruptura de la Mente Bicameral
  • FrenchLa Naissance de la Conscience dans L’Effondrement de L’Esprit Bicaméral
  • ItalianIl Crollo della Mente Bicamerale e L’origine della Coscienza
  • Japanese神々の沈黙―意識の誕生と文明の興亡 (日本語) 単行本
  • Korean의식의 기원 : 옛 인류는 신의 음성을 들을 수 있었다
  • Persianمنشا آگاهی در فروپاشی ذهن دو ساحتی

References[edit]

  1. ^ Jaynes, Julian (April 1986). "Consciousness and the Voices of the Mind". Canadian Psychology27 (2).
  2. Jump up to:a b c d Jones, William Thomas (1979) Mr. Jaynes and the bicameral mind: a case study in the sociology of belief. Humanities Working Paper, 23. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA. https://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20090714-105138181
  3. ^ Kuijsten, Marcel (2016). "Introduction". In Kuijsten, Marcel (ed.). Gods, Voices and the Bicameral Mind: The Theories of Julian Jaynes(First ed.). Henderson NV: Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0-9790744-3-1.
  4. Jump up to:a b Kuijsten, Marcel (2006). "Introduction". In Kuijsten, Marcel (ed.). Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited (First ed.). Henderson NV: Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0-9790744-0-0.
  5. ^ Jaynes, Julian. The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind (First ed.). Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0618057078.
  6. ^ Leo, John (1977). "The Lost Voices of the Gods". Time14.
  7. ^ Keen, Sam (November 1977). "Julian Jaynes: Portrait of the Psychologist as a Maverick Theorizer". Psychology Today11.
  8. Jump up to:a b Rhodes, Richard (January–February 1978). "Alone in the Country of the Mind". Quest/78. Ambassador International Cultural Foundation. 2 (1).
  9. ^ Dennett, Daniel (1992). Consciousness Explained. Back Bay Books.
  10. ^ Nasrallah, Henry (1985). "The Unintegrated Right Cerebral Hemispheric Consciousness as Alien Intruder: A Possible Mechanism for Schneiderian Delusions in Schizophrenia". Comprehensive Psychiatry26 (3): 273–82. doi:10.1016/0010-440X(85)90072-0PMID 3995938.
  11. ^ Crow, Tim (2005). "Right Hemisphere Language Functions and Schizophrenia: The Forgotten Hemisphere"Brain128 (5): 963–78. doi:10.1093/brain/awh466PMID 15743870.
  12. ^ "Google Books". Retrieved November 18, 2017.
  13. ^ Posey, Thomas (1983). "Auditory Hallucinations of Hearing Voices in 375 Normal Subjects". Imagination, Cognition, and Personality3(2): 99–113. doi:10.2190/74V5-HNXN-JEY5-DG7WS2CID 146310857.
  14. ^ Hamilton, John (1988). "Auditory Hallucinations in Nonverbal Quadriplegics". Psychiatry48 (4): 382–92. doi:10.1080/00332747.1985.11024299PMID 4070517.
  15. ^ Olin, Robert (1999). "Auditory Hallucinations and the Bicameral Mind". Lancet354 (9173): 166. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)75304-6PMID 10408523S2CID 28869281.
  16. ^ Sher, Leo (2000). "Neuroimaging, Auditory Hallucinations, and the Bicameral Mind"Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience25 (3): 239–40. PMC 1407719PMID 10863883.
  17. ^ Smith, Daniel (2007). Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the History, Science, and Meaning of Auditory Hallucination. Penguin Press.
  18. ^ Adams, Douglas (2003). The Salmon of Doubt: Hitchhiking the Galaxy One Last TimeBallantine Books. p. 233. ISBN 9780345460950.
  19. ^ Dick, Philip (1977). A Scanner Darkly. Doubleday.
  20. ^ Burroughs, William S. "Sects and Death." Three Fisted Tales of Bob. Ed. Rev. Ivan Stang. Fireside, 1990. ISBN 0-671-67190-1
  21. ^ Stephenson, Neal (1992). Snow CrashBantam Books.
  22. ^ Sawyer, Robert (2009). WWW: Wake. Ace.
  23. ^ Gaiman, Neil. American Gods. Harper Collins, 2011, p. 151.
  24. ^ Kuijsten, Marcel (2007). Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0-9790744-0-0.
  25. ^ Kuijsten, Marcel (2012). The Julian Jaynes Collection. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0979074424.
  26. ^ Cohn, James (2013). The Minds of the Bible: Speculations on the Cultural Evolution of Human Consciousness. Julian Jaynes Society. ASIN B00B5LWV82.
  27. ^ Kuijsten, Marcel (2016). Gods, Voices, and the Bicameral Mind: The Theories of Julian Jaynes. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0979074431.
  28. ^ McVeigh, Brian (2016). How Religion Evolved: Explaining the Living Dead, Talking Idols, and Mesmerizing Monuments. Routledge. ISBN 978-1412862868.
  29. ^ McVeigh, Brian (2018). The 'Other' Psychology of Julian Jaynes: Ancient Languages, Sacred Visions, and Forgotten Mentalities. Imprint Academic. ISBN 978-1845409517.
  30. ^ McVeigh, Brian (2020). The Psychology of the Bible: Explaining Divine Voices and Visions. Imprint Academic. ISBN 978-1788360371.
  31. ^ Cavanna, AE; Trimble, M; Cinti, F; Monaco, F (2007). "The "bicameral mind" 30 years on: a critical reappraisal of Julian Jaynes' hypothesis". Functional Neurology22 (1): 11–5. PMID 17509238.
  32. ^ Daniel Dennett, op. cit., at pp. 127–128 in Brainstorms
  33. ^ Sleutels, Jan (2006). "Greek Zombies". Philosophical Psychology19(2): 177–197. doi:10.1080/09515080500462412S2CID 220329899.
  34. ^ Williams, Gary (2010). "What is it like to be nonconscious? A defense of Julian Jaynes". Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences10 (2): 217–239. doi:10.1007/s11097-010-9181-zS2CID 144561661.
  35. ^ "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind". Julian Jaynes Society. Retrieved December 18, 2020.

See also[edit]

For other claims and analysis of Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, see

External links[edit]

올더스 헉슬리의 책 [영원의 철학] 안내 퀘이커 공부방 책읽기


1] 알라딘 서점 <영원의 철학>





2] 영원 철학 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전.


3] 永遠の哲学―究極のリアリティ (mind books)
byオルダス ハクスレー


4] 永遠の哲学 出典: フリー百科事典『ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』


5] オルダス・ハクスリー 出典: フリー百科事典『ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』

6] The Perennial Philosophy From Wikipedia


===
퀘이커 공부방 책읽기 
  • 방법: 페북 그룹
  • 시간: 매주 금요일 밤 한국일본시간 9시, 호주 애들레이드 시간 10시반
  • 책 디스커션: 1-1.5시간, 
  • 그 이후로는 시간있는 사람들끼리  잡담
  • 책은 27장으로 되어있고, 한 주에 한 장 씩
  • 공부 방식: 매주 모두가 책의 주어진 장을 읽어오고, 자신에게 인상 깊은 점을 한 둘 말할 준비를 해 올 것. 
---
The chapter titles are:

  1. That Art Thou[a]
  2. The Nature of the Ground
  3. Personality, Sanctity, Divine Incarnation
  4. God in the World
  5. Charity
  6. Mortification, Non-Attachment, Right Livelihood
  7. Truth
  8. Religion and Temperament
  9. Self-Knowledge
  10. Grace and Free Will
  11. Good and Evil
  12. Time and Eternity
  13. Salvation, Deliverance, Enlightenment
  14. Immortality and Survival
  15. Silence
  16. Prayer
  17. Suffering
  18. Faith
  19. God is not mocked
  20. Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum 
  21. Idolatry
  22. Emotionalism
  23. The Miraculous
  24. Ritual, Symbol, Sacrament
  25. Spiritual Exercises
  26. Perseverance and Regularity
  27. Contemplation, Action, and Social Utility
===
목차
해제_ ‘영원의 철학’으로 세계 종교의 심층을 보다

들어가며

01 그대가 그것이다
여기에 그분 말고 누가 있겠나

02 근본바탕의 성질
이름 없는 것에서 하늘과 땅이 생겼다

03 성격, 거룩함, 신성한 화신
동일시를 통해, 은총을 통해

04 세상 속의 신
그러나 특정한 조건을 충족시켜야 하리라

05 최고의 사랑
모든 오류는 사랑의 부족에서 생긴다

06 고행, 비집착, 올바른 생계
일상의 삶에서 일어나는 일들을 수용하기

07 진리
아무것도 씌어 있지 않은 두루마리가 진짜 경전이다

08 종교와 기질
체질과 기질에 따라 그 길은 다를 수 있다

09 자기이해
어리석은 자들은 스스로 깨어있다고 여긴다

10 은총과 자유의지
그대가 거절하지 않는다면 결코 버림받지 않는다

11 선과 악
악마를 보지 못했다면, 그대의 자아를 보라

12 시간과 영원
어떻게 시간적 상태가 비시간적 상태와 공존할 수 있을까

13 구원, 해방, 깨달음
자기 목숨을 살리려는 사람은 그것을 잃어야 한다

14 불멸과 존속
어디로도 가지 않고, 어디에서도 오지 않는 자

15 침묵
갈망과 혐오의 목소리를 고요하게 잠재우는 일

16 기도
제 안에서 당신 스스로에게 기도하소서

17 고통
돌아오라, 영원한 실재의 온전함으로

18 믿음
믿음은 극락으로 이끌지만, 다르마는 니르바나로 이끈다

19 신은 조롱받지 않는다
자신을 속이지 마십시오

20 종교로 인해 짓는 죄
가장 근본적인 속박의 원인은 잘못된 믿음과 무지

21 우상숭배
진리와 정의가 새로운 우상이 될 때

22 감정에 호소하기
정서와 느낌의 우상숭배는 대가를 치른다

23 기적
영혼과 신 사이에 드리워진 방해물

24 의식, 상징, 성찬식
영원으로 통하는 문인가, 속박의 도구인가

25 영적 훈련
새로운 질병을 유발할 수도 있는 약의 사용법

26 끈기와 규칙성
이제 충분하다고 생각하면 모든 것을 잃는다

27 묵상, 행위, 사회적 유용성
무엇이 이 세상을 지탱하는가




2021/10/22

동작을 통한 자각 [ awareness through movement , 動作-自覺 ]

동작을 통한 자각

상담학 사전
동작을 통한 자각



[ awareness through movement , 動作-自覺 ]

요약 펠덴크라이스(Feldenkrais)의 움직임을 통해 알아차리는 기법을 일반적으로 부르는 용어로, 가능한 한 매우 이완된 방법으로 천천히 기분 좋게 팔다리, 목, 머리, 몸통을 움직이는 연습을 함으로써 근육긴장과 신체정렬에서 일어나는 매우 미세한 변화를 알아차리고 느끼는 것

분야 무용동작치료



펠덴크라이스(1976)의 이론적 가정은 라이히(Wilhehttp://qa.terms.naver.com/preview.nhn?key=1537192479662.23lm Reich)의 근육무장 이론의 가정과 같아서 과거에 습득된 개인의 정서와 신념이 특정한 신체부위에 특정한 패턴의 긴장으로 축적되어 자세, 태도, 제스처, 동작 및 성격으로 일반화되어 있어서, 이러한 것을 통해 그 개인 전체 삶의 경험을 알아낼 수 있다고 믿었다. 그는 독일의 핵물리학자로 유도를 독일에 전파하다가 무릎 부상을 당한 뒤 자신의 장애를 극복하고자 심신학 분야의 연구를 시작하였다. 그의 연구는 동작을 통해 의식의 범위를 넓히는 것이다.

펠덴크라이스는 비일상적이고 친숙하지 않은 1천여 가지의 수많은 동작을 고안하여 피교육자에게 매우 이완되고 느린 동작을 되풀이하도록 연습시켰다. 그중 한 가지 예를 들면, 걷는 동작에서 오른쪽 골반뼈를 어깨 쪽으로 가까이 들어 올리면서 천천히 이완된 상태로 앞쪽으로 이동시키면, 오른쪽 다리가 들리고 이번에는 골반뼈를 아래로 내리면서 발을 바닥에 댄다. 그다음 왼쪽 골반뼈를 오른쪽 골반뼈가 했던 것처럼 하면서 되풀이하는 골반 걷기를 연습한다.

이렇게 자신의 자발적 근육을 익숙한 패턴이 될 때까지 반복하면, 내담자가 과거에 친숙했던 유형의 정서적 반응을 되풀이하면서 조건화되었던 근육패턴 대신 새로운 이완된 움직임을 습득할 수 있고, 근육과 성격을 억압하고 있던 무장이 풀린다. 동작을 통한 자각을 사용하는 이유는 빠른 동작 및 긴장된 동작, 그리고 동작 자체가 가지는 무의식적 특성에 대한 알아차림을 촉진하기 위해서다. 이 방법은 알렉산더의 기법 및 목표와 같이 개인의 자발성과 좋은 기분을 이용해서 자유로움, 가벼움, 균형의 감정 등을 얻는 데 효과가 있다. 또한 비일상적이고 친숙하지 않은 수많은 동작을 연습함으로써 내담자의 습관적 행동패턴을 변화시키는 데 도움을 준다.


[네이버 지식백과] 동작을 통한 자각 [awareness through movement, 動作-自覺] (상담학 사전, 2016. 01. 15., 김춘경, 이수연, 이윤주, 정종진, 최웅용)