Psycho-Physical Attitude and ‘The Tyranny of The Should’s’

Lessons this week reminded me how useful it can be to contrast how we use ourselves when we approach something from the perspective of ‘wanting’ to do it, rather than believing that we ‘should’ do it. Both ‘wanting’ and feeling that we ‘should’ do something are, from a psycho-physical perspective, attitudes within which certain uses of the self are embodied. 

With the former if directly expressed we will often come up into an attitude where we are focussed, freer, lengthening in stature, with our breathing released – we are properly speaking more relaxed; we are using ourselves well. In the latter, we respond to feeling that we ‘should’ do something by tightening around our faces, pulling forward, pulling down, making our movements jerky, as we force ourselves into an action, where our free choice is either denied or hidden. 

Whether we choose to do something because we want to or because we feel we should in different contexts, depends on habits that can reach back into early childhood.  Habits that we evolve in relation to how our will and spontaneity were construed by our parents and the culture we found ourselves in. 

Three caveats here, the first is that learning to recognise what we want, we are not always at first skilful at listening to ourselves, we too often carry an external threat with us, which we tighten ourselves against. Secondly, that once we can freely express what we want, it does not follow that we can freely move into carrying it out, we can try and then tighten ourselves. The freedom of thought and action, as well as the freedom in thought in action that Alexander advocates comes from sustaining inhibition through out the entire cycle of expression and action. Thirdly, to recognise what you want, to be able to express it, does not necessarily make for selfishness, egotism and the dominance of individual wishes and preferences. Rather, it allows for recognition of oneself, one’s desires, wishes, wants and the irreducibility of one’s freedom to choose for oneself and not to be slave to what psycho-analyst Karen Horney termed the ‘tyranny of the should’s.’

In developing Conscious Control of one’s own individual psycho-physical attitude here, it is worth remembering that Alexander was explicit in saying that it was not all about thinking about your head and neck, important as that is. What is important is thinking about why you are doing it, even the most unpleasant, unwished for tasks can be transformed by the change in experience that comes from recognising one’s intentionality in choosing to pursue them. A favourite formulation of this comes from Ouspensky via Maurice Nichol. This says that we have a right not to be negative and if you apply inhibition to this in its fullest and most radical sense you will soon come up!

Use – a scientific concept.

A working understanding of ‘use’ is something anybody with an interest in Alexander Technique has to acquire. A ‘working understanding’ involves practice and ability to employ oneself purposefully, and skilfully in any activity. Indeed ‘practice,’ ‘employment,’ ‘skill,’ ‘purpose,’ as well as ‘habit’ provide the etymological roots for ‘use,’ which is the founding abstraction of Alexander’s work.

That ‘use’ is foundational for Alexander work should be clear to any one, that it is an abstraction is sometimes missed, with ‘use’ being taken as something concrete. Where use is taken concretely it becomes common to accuse people with no knowledge of Alexander’s work of misusing themselves. This I think is a mistake on a number of levels, foremost of which is that the practical problem for many people is that they have no concept of using themselves at all. ‘Use’ is how Alexander began to analyse his own actions and how he analysed the actions of his pupils. ‘Use’ is therefore the unit of analysis of Alexander work. To develop a working concept of use, a person has to abstract from his or her own experience - something practical that works.

Doing so they have to abstract the ‘similarity of the difference,’ to borrow a phrase from David Bohm, that the use of themselves can actually make to their lives and the difficulties that they are experiencing. In doing this, ‘use’ comes to explain what has happened and what is happening.

‘Use’ therefore elucidates the subject matter of Alexander’s work, as well as providing the explanatory power and the unit of analysis. These three elements together, are what the great Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky, saw as being necessary for the methodological grounding of a scientific discipline. Which is how John Dewey characterised Alexander’s work. It is a scientific discipline for each person that seeks to learn it, like Alexander, to borrow a phrase, this time from Kelly who was inspired by Dewey they are ‘personal scientists.’ 

To view people as ‘personal scientists’ is to recognise the importance of intentionality, of wishing and willing – something Walter Carrington in his published talks stressed as being necessary for success in Alexander work. 

To talk about being a ‘personal scientist’ here is to follow Dewey in ‘Human Nature and Conduct’ in saying that while we rely on habit we must also be able to use our intelligence to review habits and change behaviour as necessary.

Which is very much how Alexander came to see things. The difference between Dewey and Alexander being, as the former, I think would have admitted, is that the Alexander Technique provides the practical way of changing things, turning them around. 

How Do We Know?

This is one of the four fundamental questions that philosophy seeks to answer according to Kant, it is also something central to applying the Alexander Technique to develop Conscious Control. It is a question that most new pupils come to ask in learning Alexander’s technique, as they realise that they can no longer rely on their sense of feeling, it is unreliable, the judgements it contains are not to be trusted. 

Now, if you have the time you can engage with Kant, who has much, that is of use to say; you will hopefully emerge wiser, but it will really do you no good if you are trying to learn the Alexander Technique. In lessons what you think you know is immediately thrown into question when it comes to simple acts like sitting, standing walking, let alone anything else – feeling is not enough. Something else is needed.

One needs a standard and fortunately there is one there – the gold standard when it comes to judging how one is going at any given moment. That gold standard lies not within one’s attention but within one’s awareness of one’s breathing. If one’s breathing is released, relaxed and easy, even while exerting your self, you are going to be going well. You will also find that if you have a back problem for example your back will be supporting you to the best of its ability.

Good support and good breathing go together; there was a reason why Alexander was known as the ‘breathing man’ and it is just this. Now the great thing about using breathing as a standard is that relaxed, easy, released breathing is hard to fake, it is a continuously reliable feedback loop that goes with you over time.  The feeling of standing straight, tall, is too often illusory. We are too good at thinking this, only to be proved wrong, as Alexander students too often find when they start lessons – if you pull forward habitually when standing, straightening up through freeing one’s neck is going to feel like leaning backwards.

There are other answers to the question of how do we know, but this is the best in terms of the on-going immediacy of experience. Longer term we know from being aware of the success of ourselves in applying Alexander’s technique and finding the release in breathing; the lightness in being and sense of well being that go with this, along with an improved sense of balance, as well other indicators of improved functioning. These though are indirect outcomes of aiming for conscious control of our use and not direct attempts to sort out our problems.

Direct attempts almost, if not always go wrong, we need to stop, and when it comes to many complaints it is as an absence of something that indicated our success and achievements in relearning how to sit, stand, walk, talk or understand others. Absence of pain if we are lucky is an outcome, always to be welcomed, it is not something to be looked for; the way markers, are gathered instances of consciously released breathing; developed over time into conscious control of ourselves – which is something worth aiming for.

No blog next week as I am away.