The Spirit Of Anatomy
Intuition is the most normal thing in the world. It is the foundation of our perception, our understanding and our response to the world.
Intuition is “normal” in a way that objective investigation isn’t. In fact, it’s unclear that objectivity exists; it turns out that E.coli in a beaker behave differently when observed.
The courses can be taken together or separately. The second course The Spirit of Anatomy, Part II: The Hips and Pelvis; Standing Up and the Core is starting Sept. 7th, 2021 @ 1p
I teach science. I use it every day in my work and teaching. But I don’t believe it is the only way to describe reality. Left as the only way of knowing, it would be a meager and mostly inappropriate preparation for body-based healing work. The problem is that ways of knowing that are not scientific have been pushed to the wayside because science is considered “real” while other ways of knowing, ways that rely more explicitly on intuition, are not.
I call science a religion because it has come to be considered equivalent to reality, and that equivalence has led to practices and thoughts that often supersede common sense and ignore or displace phenomena that are obvious but which can’t be explained within its paradigm. Many scientists are striving to embrace and construct explanations for spiritual and energetic phenomena – but a lot of scientific “findings” and ways of knowing are taken as absolute, stable truths even by esteemed, dedicated, and open-minded scientists, and certainly by lay people.
The minute a person starts thinking of “objective” science – or anything else – as equal to reality, they have to start hiding, ignoring, or setting aside information that doesn’t fit its model. The animating principle that separates a dead body from an animal, for an example, can be observed and described scientifically, but the nature of the animating principle is not examined by scientists. Even Descartes, the “father” of modern science, had a place for the soul in his model, but it was later put aside (perhaps when scientists failed to measure or identify it per se.) A remarkable set of scientists are digging into ‘the mystery of life’, but so far, it hasn’t been traced to its smallest individual datapoints and reconstructed in a synthetic process of individual studies, so it can’t be understood in scientific terms for now. For many people (even scientists!) the logical conclusion is that, despite evidence to the contrary, it doesn’t exist. Still, anybody knows the difference between a dead body and a person, and we know that something evanesces at death – even if one’s way of describing what evanesces happens in languages other than scientific.
Image 1: Julia Lillard
Image 2: Kate Gillie