tl;dr: your brain hallucinates sensory experiences that have no correspondence to reality. Noticing and articulating these “felt senses” gives you access to the deep wisdom of your soul.
I think this snark makes it clear that you lack gears in your model of how focusing works. There are actual muscles in your actual body that get tense as a result of stuff going on with your nervous system, and many people can feel that even if they don’t know exactly what they are feeling.
That’s true; I’ve had “butterflies” that gave me actual stomachaches and indigestion. “No correspondence to reality” isn’t exactly right, I’m not sure how to phrase it. Perhaps “no correspondence to external reality, if you consider normal bodily functions as external reality.”
But your claim that I lack gears in my focusing model is definitely true.
I had a tense neck for 7 days. I could do some thing to relax it but then after sleeping it was again fully tense. After those 7 days I did Focusing on it and resolved the issue with a session of Focusing.
Focusing can help for very physical issues.
On the other hand, given what I know from anecdotal reports, phantoms limbs can have felt senses. It seems possible to have the felt sense without a corresponding “external reality”.
I slightly object then to this phrase “I’ll start by explaining my most gears-like model for why focusing works”
yes, it is accurate, in that it’s YOUR most gears-like model, but to me this reads like a misuse of the term ‘gears-like’
‘gears-like’ implies—if it turned out to be some other thing or work some other way, you’d be shocked and would have to consciously check the evidence (the inside of the box) again.
later you include the right to claim it as a fake framework, which feels more like what it actually is.
Gears-like is a spectrum. Although there are places where my models lack gears and SquirrelinHell has more, I think there are enough gears in my model for me to say gears-like without misusing the term: e.g. making falsifiable predictions such as “dreams are as good as felt senses for noticing inarticulate motivations and aversions.”
hmm. i don’t really have much to say on that prediction. maybe it’s falsifiable. i find the comparison a bit odd.
i consider there to be two main ways of getting to know oneself.
inside view methods, like introspection; and outside view methods, like observing our own behavior over time and noticing patterns or analyzing dreams, thoughts, tastes.
they do seem both useful in getting to know myself. does that match what you predict?
I think this snark makes it clear that you lack gears in your model of how focusing works. There are actual muscles in your actual body that get tense as a result of stuff going on with your nervous system, and many people can feel that even if they don’t know exactly what they are feeling.
That’s true; I’ve had “butterflies” that gave me actual stomachaches and indigestion. “No correspondence to reality” isn’t exactly right, I’m not sure how to phrase it. Perhaps “no correspondence to external reality, if you consider normal bodily functions as external reality.”
But your claim that I lack gears in my focusing model is definitely true.
I had a tense neck for 7 days. I could do some thing to relax it but then after sleeping it was again fully tense. After those 7 days I did Focusing on it and resolved the issue with a session of Focusing.
Focusing can help for very physical issues.
On the other hand, given what I know from anecdotal reports, phantoms limbs can have felt senses. It seems possible to have the felt sense without a corresponding “external reality”.
I slightly object then to this phrase “I’ll start by explaining my most gears-like model for why focusing works”
yes, it is accurate, in that it’s YOUR most gears-like model, but to me this reads like a misuse of the term ‘gears-like’
‘gears-like’ implies—if it turned out to be some other thing or work some other way, you’d be shocked and would have to consciously check the evidence (the inside of the box) again.
later you include the right to claim it as a fake framework, which feels more like what it actually is.
Gears-like is a spectrum. Although there are places where my models lack gears and SquirrelinHell has more, I think there are enough gears in my model for me to say gears-like without misusing the term: e.g. making falsifiable predictions such as “dreams are as good as felt senses for noticing inarticulate motivations and aversions.”
hmm. i don’t really have much to say on that prediction. maybe it’s falsifiable. i find the comparison a bit odd.
i consider there to be two main ways of getting to know oneself.
inside view methods, like introspection; and outside view methods, like observing our own behavior over time and noticing patterns or analyzing dreams, thoughts, tastes.
they do seem both useful in getting to know myself. does that match what you predict?
What do you mean by “no correspondence to… normal bodily functions”? Something like: the butterflies in your stomach don’t help you with digestion?
Yes. The purpose of the sense/muscle tension/whatever else your brain and body is doing is solely to alert you of some nonverbal info.