The Stonewall Inn
𓃗
untitled
Monterey Bay Aquarium

bliss lane
we're not kids anymore.
noise dept.
🪼
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Show & Tell
Game of Thrones Daily
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
wallacepolsom
No title available

★
hello vonnie

Origami Around

izzy's playlists!
One Nice Bug Per Day
Jules of Nature

seen from Singapore
seen from Singapore

seen from Singapore

seen from Türkiye

seen from Australia

seen from Bangladesh

seen from Singapore

seen from Russia

seen from Spain

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Vietnam
seen from Türkiye
seen from Philippines
seen from Ukraine

seen from Netherlands

seen from Australia
seen from United States
@chrisengel
The Banshees of Inisherin, 2022 dir. Martin McDonagh
The inner self that we long to express is . . . modelled on an ideal found in our cultural environment. Whatever this identity may be . . . each is guaranteed to serve as an exemplar, and will possess the quality of exemplarity. Striving to be like our model, we will desire to become exemplary ourselves. This means seeking out admirers or disciples of our own, just as our model found a disciple in us. Unfortunately, others are not looking to become our emulators. On the contrary, they will want to retain their own hard-won identities and, propelled by the same dynamic, to attract emulators of their own. We end up in a sort of existential power struggle in which each wishes to emulate and none wants to emulate. Everyone wants to be the influencer, nobody the influenced: and so the public sphere becomes a theatre with all actors and no audience.
Alexander Douglas, Against Identity: The Wisdom of Escaping the Self
Saint Judas
by James Wright
When I went out to to kill myself, I caught A pack of hoodlums beating up a man. Running to spare his suffering, I forgot My name, my number, how my day began, How soldiers milled around the garden stone And sang amusing songs; how I alone Bargained the proper coins, and slipped away.
Banished from heaven, I found this victim beaten, Stripped, kneed, and left to cry. Dropping my rope Aside, I ran, ignored the uniforms: Then I remembered bread my flesh had eaten, The kiss that ate my flesh. Flayed without hope, I held the man for nothing in my arms.
“Poetry both arises from and invites states of deep listening. A poet must attune their ear both to the voice of their imagination, where the poem originates, and to the sounds of their material, language, where the poem manifests. So, too, when we read a poem, we listen both to the speaker’s voice, as it shapes itself in words, and to our inner response to that voice, the way the poem resonates inside us. And when a poem is explicitly about the act of listening, we have another layer to attend to: our awareness of the poet’s awareness.”
— John Brehm, from The Dharma of Poetry: How Poems Can Deepen Your Spiritual Practice and Open You to Joy (Wisdom Publications, 2021)
''I am so small. I am so insignificant...but the force that flows through me is so powerful that I must go forward".
Hilma af Klint
April 29, 1919
Portrait of Goethe
* *. * *
The Philosophy of Touch
Soul, Consciousness, and the Knowing Hands
A philosophical pre-read for practitioners of massage and manual therapy
Steven Goldstein
Director, Fascial Therapy Institute Australia
fascialrelease.com
Preface
I have always been something of a lone wolf. Cautious. Careful. Someone who thinks for a long time before speaking.
So writing this is a significant step.
I have always been interested in philosophy. But for a long time I never felt I had the ability to comprehend what the philosophers were actually talking about — not in real time, not in real life. It felt remote. Abstract. Belonging to someone else’s world.
What changed that for me was touch. Finding the connection between philosophy and the field of touch, massage and manual therapy gave me a way in. Suddenly the questions that philosophers have grappled with, discussed and argued over for centuries began to feel urgent and practical. Who are we? How are we conscious? And what is the power that lies in touch — that particular power that helps facilitate change and healing in another person?
These are not merely academic questions. They are the questions underneath everything we do with our hands. And they are the questions I want to explore here.
Over the coming weeks I am sharing, in four instalments, a philosophical pre-read I have developed for participants in my courses. It is ambitious — and it seems to me no one has really taken the time to correlate the complex history that has affected and preceded where we reside within the broad community of massage and manual therapy.
Within this is the sense that we need to update our models and our language — and resist what one educator calls “borrowed science”: cherry picking emerging research, or putting the cart before the horse. We are doomed to repeat the past if we cannot understand it.
The article traces a lineage of thinkers — from the seventeenth century to the present day — who have wrestled seriously with questions that every manual therapist encounters in the treatment room, whether they name them as philosophical or not: What is the body? What is the mind? Were they ever really separate? What actually happens when one conscious human being places their hands on another?
These thinkers did not write for manual therapists. But the questions they were asking are exactly the questions that clinical practice raises, every day, in every treatment room. I have spent forty years trying to find the language for what I observe with my hands. This kind of thinking has given me that language — and helped me articulate why touch does what it does.
You do not need to agree with every philosopher. You do not need to resolve the questions they raise. But engaging with them tends to deepen the quality of attention a practitioner brings to their work. And attention, as we shall see, may be manual therapy’s most essential ingredient.
INSTALMENT ONE — The Historical Roots
The early question: what is the body, what is the mind, and were they ever really separate?
In this first instalment I introduce five thinkers who laid the groundwork for everything that follows. They worked across three centuries and several countries, disagreed with one another profoundly, and yet were all circling the same unanswered question: how do we hold the physical and the conscious, the measurable and the felt, in a single honest account of what a human being is? That question has not yet been fully answered. But these five gave it a shape and a language that we are still working with today.
René Descartes (1596–1650)
“I think, therefore I am.” — René Descartes
The philosopher blamed for splitting mind from body was not, in fact, trying to cause trouble. He was trying to create a safe space for science to exist in a world where the Church prosecuted scientists. Understanding what he was actually doing changes how we read everything that followed — and places him in unexpected kinship with the manual therapy world’s own struggle to hold the mechanical and the experiential in the same hand.
Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677)
“The human mind is the very idea or knowledge of the human body.” — Baruch Spinoza
Spinoza offered the first great challenge to Descartes: mind and body are not two separate things. They are two different ways of reading the same underlying reality. The tissue tells you about the person. The person is in the tissue. He also gave us the concept of conatus — the body’s inherent striving to persist and flourish. We are not imposing correction on a passive mechanism. We are working with a system that is already moving toward its own integrity.
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804)
Kant made a claim that has direct and rarely acknowledged implications for palpation: we never know the world as it actually is. We know it as it comes to us — filtered through our senses, shaped by our prior experience, organised by the particular lens of the person doing the perceiving. When you place your hands on a patient’s tissue, what you are touching is not the tissue as it objectively is. You are touching the tissue as it presents itself through the meeting of your nervous system and theirs. The palpatory encounter is always, already, an act of interpretation.
This is a position some clinicians have pushed to a radical conclusion. If all perception is filtered and interpreted, the argument goes, then palpatory literacy is largely self-deception — all we can truly do is engage the skin, and everything else is bias dressed as skill. There is a Kantian logic to this. But it is Kant with the door closed.
What Kant actually gives us is not a reason to stop perceiving but a reason to perceive more honestly — to hold our interpretations as interpretations, remain open to being wrong, and resist the temptation to mistake our model of the tissue for the tissue itself. That is not a limitation on clinical practice. It is a description of what rigorous clinical practice actually looks like. The practitioner who arrives at the table already knowing what they will find has stopped learning. The practitioner who holds their perceptions lightly, questions their own readings, and stays genuinely curious — that practitioner is working in the spirit Kant intended.
Uncertainty is not the end of palpation. It is the beginning of honest palpation.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)
Hegel proposed that consciousness is not a fixed state but a process — a movement toward greater self-awareness and integration that never fully arrives. Growth happens through encounter with what resists us, not by avoiding it. A patient arrives with a chronic pain pattern that has become self-reinforcing. The therapeutic encounter introduces something that disrupts that pattern. The tissue reorganises, the nervous system finds new options. What Hegel describes abstractly as the movement through contradiction toward resolution is what we experience concretely as clinical change.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832)
“Every object well contemplated opens a new organ of perception in us.” — Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Known as a poet and playwright, Goethe was also one of the most original scientists of his era. He developed what he called delicate empiricism — arriving at a phenomenon without prior judgment, letting the thing itself teach you what it is rather than fitting it into a category you brought with you. The practitioner who arrives at the treatment table already knowing what they will find is not practising delicate empiricism. The practitioner who arrives genuinely open, and lets the tissue teach them — that practitioner is working in a Goethean mode, whether they have ever heard the name or not. It is, in simpler language, the art of not knowing in advance.
In the next few days instalment 1 the Historical Roots will expand on these seminal philosophers and how they relate to our clinical experience.
Steven Goldstein
The Stream and the Fringe: William James and Palpatory Awareness.
Instalment 2
William James (1842–1910)
William James was the first major thinker in the Western tradition to treat consciousness empirically without reducing it to mechanism, and his foundational image remains one of the most accurate descriptions of how conscious experience actually feels from the inside. Consciousness, he argued, is not a chain of discrete states but a stream — continuous, flowing, doubling back on itself, impossible to step out of and observe from the outside.
James also introduced the concept of fringe consciousness — the penumbra of awareness surrounding any focal experience. We are always aware of more than we can articulate: a felt sense of where the body is in space, a subtle orientation toward what is about to happen, an ambient knowing that surrounds every clear thought like a halo. This fringe awareness is extraordinarily relevant to manual therapy practice. The experienced practitioner’s palpatory intelligence operates largely in this register — not explicit propositional knowledge, not the conscious application of technique, but a felt, distributed sensing that resists verbalisation and cannot be taught by description alone.
This is why clinical mentorship and supervised practice hours matter in ways that classroom teaching cannot replace. The fringe awareness that constitutes skilled palpatory intelligence is transmitted through doing, through being in the room with someone who has developed it, through thousands of hours of hands-on encounter that gradually educate the practitioner’s sensory nervous system to attend in more refined ways. James would call this a cultivated extension of the fringe — a disciplined expansion of the zone of soft awareness that surrounds focal attention.
James was also one of the first Western thinkers to take non-ordinary states of consciousness seriously as data rather than pathology. His Varieties of Religious Experience, published in 1902, mapped the phenomenology of mystical states, conversion experiences, and the sense of presence with the same empirical rigour he brought to experimental psychology. This opened the door to treating altered states — including those that sometimes occur in deep bodywork, in both practitioner and patient — as philosophically and clinically significant rather than merely anecdotal curiosities.
“The greatest revolution of our generation is the discovery that human beings, by changing the inner attitudes of their minds, can change the outer aspects of their lives.” — William James
The Structure of Experience: Husserl and the Act of Palpation
Edmund Husserl (1859–1938)
Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology, made a methodological move that transformed philosophy and, indirectly, our understanding of therapeutic encounter. He insisted that rigorous inquiry must begin not with theories about experience but with experience itself — with the structures of consciousness as they actually present themselves from the inside. His method of epoche, or bracketing, involved setting aside assumptions about the external world in order to examine how consciousness actually constitutes its objects.
For manual therapy, Husserl’s concept of intentionality is the key contribution. Consciousness, he argued, is always consciousness of something. It is never simply present to itself in a vacuum but is always directed — reaching out toward an object, a quality, a sensation, a person. This directionality is built into the structure of awareness itself. When a practitioner palpates tissue, the consciousness involved is not passive reception. It is active, intentional engagement — hands that are not merely sensing but attending, shaped by clinical intention and directed toward specific qualities of tissue texture, tone, depth, temperature, and responsiveness.
This distinction between passive sensing and active attending has significant clinical implications. Two practitioners with equivalent anatomical knowledge and technical training may palpate the same tissue and register very different information, because the quality of intentional attention they bring differs. The less experienced practitioner may be processing sensation; the more experienced one is in dialogue with the tissue. Husserl’s phenomenology offers a framework for understanding why this is, and why the cultivation of intentional awareness is as important in clinical training as the acquisition of technical skills.
Husserl’s analysis of time-consciousness is also clinically relevant. He described how each moment of experience carries a retention — a just-passed sense of what immediately preceded it — and a protention — an anticipatory lean toward what is about to arrive. In palpatory work, this temporal structure is everything. The skilled practitioner is not sensing a static snapshot of tissue but a temporally extended phenomenon: how the tissue arrived at its current state, and where it wants to go. The hands are listening to a moving story, not reading a fixed sign.
Being There: Heidegger and the Thrown Body
Martin Heidegger (1889–1976)
Martin Heidegger shifted the entire ground of philosophy by insisting that the fundamental question was not what we know, nor even how we know it, but what it means to exist at all. His concept of Dasein — literally being-there — names the kind of existence that is always already embedded in a world, in a situation, in relationships, in time. We are never the detached Cartesian observer contemplating the world from a neutral distance. We arrive already inside it.
His concept of thrownness — Geworfenheit — is one of the most quietly useful ideas in twentieth century philosophy for anyone working with the human body. We do not choose the body we inhabit, the history we carry, the nervous system shaped by experiences that preceded our capacity to reflect on them. We are thrown into our situation before we have any say in the matter. The chronic tension pattern in the thoracic spine, the defended diaphragm, the hypervigilant postural set — these are not failures of will or character. They are the body’s testimony to its thrownness: the accumulated trace of a particular life, lived in a particular world, before the person had language or choice enough to respond differently.
Heidegger also gave us Being-in-the-world as a single hyphenated concept — deliberately refusing the separation of the terms — to insist that mind, body, and world are not three things that subsequently relate to one another. They are one structure of existence that can only be artificially pulled apart for purposes of analysis. The practitioner who understands this stops looking for the problem in the tissue and begins attending to how the tissue is the person’s way of being in their world.
His concept of Sorge — care — as the fundamental structure of human existence carries direct clinical resonance. To be human, for Heidegger, is not primarily to think or to perceive but to care: to be oriented toward, concerned with, engaged by the world and the people in it. The therapeutic encounter is, in these terms, a very deliberate enactment of that most basic human capacity — and the quality of the practitioner’s care is not incidental to the work. It is its foundation.
The Body That Knows: Merleau-Ponty and the Phenomenology of Touch
Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908–1961)
Maurice Merleau-Ponty is, of all the philosophers in this lineage, the one whose thinking most precisely maps the lived experience of skilled manual therapy. His central and revolutionary insistence — that consciousness is not in the body but is the body’s way of being in the world — dissolves the Cartesian problem from the inside. We do not have bodies that we somehow inhabit. We are our bodies. And the body is not a mechanism within which the person resides; it is the medium through which the person exists, perceives, and acts.
His concept of the corps vécu — the lived body — distinguishes between the body as object in the world (the anatomical, measurable, dissectable body of biomedicine) and the body as living subject of experience. This distinction is not merely semantic. It reframes the therapeutic encounter entirely. When you work with a patient, you are not working on a body while their mind observes from a polite distance. You are working with an embodied subject — a consciousness that lives in and through the tissue you are addressing. The restriction in the cervical fascia is not simply a mechanical finding. It is a biographical fact. It is the body’s way of having lived a particular life.
Merleau-Ponty’s concept of motor intentionality — the body’s pre-reflective, non-cognitive capacity to orient itself toward the world and toward task — describes something that experienced practitioners know intimately but struggle to teach. The practitioner’s hands develop, over years of clinical practice, a somatic intelligence that operates below the threshold of explicit thought. The hands know where to go, how much pressure serves, when to wait and when to initiate movement — not because the cortex has reasoned through the decision, but because the body has learned to read another body directly. This is not intuition in the mystical sense. It is the cultivated intelligence of an embodied consciousness that has been trained to attend in very particular ways.
His later and perhaps most profound contribution, from the unfinished The Visible and the Invisible, was the concept of flesh — la chair — which he used not in the biological sense but to name the fabric of being in which perceiver and perceived, toucher and touched, are continuous with one another. When you palpate, you are simultaneously touching and being touched. The tissue you feel is, in some sense, feeling you. There is a fundamental reversibility at the heart of tactile experience that dismantles the clean subject-object distinction. This is not metaphor or mysticism. It is the phenomenological structure of touch itself.
This has profound implications for manual therapy practice. The quality of the practitioner’s own tissue — their level of tension or ease, their autonomic state, their degree of present-moment awareness — is not irrelevant background noise. It is part of the palpatory encounter. The patient’s tissue is, at some level, reading the practitioner as the practitioner reads the tissue. This is the basis of the therapeutic relationship as a regulatory event, and it is also the philosophical grounding for the clinical importance of the practitioner’s own self-care and embodied development.
“The body is our general medium for having a world.” — Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, 1945
Installment Three coming soon: The Systems Thinkers and the Clinicians
[Steven Goldstein]
Lacy M. Johnson, The Other Side: a Memoir
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DaEsLquprMr/?igsh=c25qdTdqZWN5bmZr
"Do not let the day end without having grown a little, Without being happy, without having reached your dreams. Do not let yourself be defeated by disappointment. Do not let anyone take away your right to speak; it is almost a duty. Do not abandon the desire to make your life something special. Believe well that words and poetry can change the world. Whatever happens, our deep being remains intact, We are fully beings of passion. Life is desert and oasis. We fall, we hurt, we learn, we are the actors in our own story, Despite the contrary winds, this powerful work continues, You can write a stanza of it. Never stop dreaming, because in his dream, man is free. Do not abandon yourself to the worst of faults, silence. Most men live in silence. Escape! Appreciate the beauty of simple things. You can write poems about simple things, But one cannot sail against oneself. That makes life a hell. Love the fear that makes you move forward. Live intensely, without mediocrity. Do not forget that you are the future and approach this task with pride, without fear, Learn from those who can teach you. Do not let life slip away without living it." Carpe Diem - Walt Whitman
"We are so anxious to avoid suffering that we build a fortress of ideas around ourselves. We call it our philosophy, our religion, our political party. But a fortress is also a prison. It keeps out the enemy, but it also keeps out the light, the wind, and the unpredictable reality of the world. In the end, we die of suffocation behind our own walls." Cioran - Trouble of being born
“The tragedy of modern man is not that he knows less and less about the meaning of his own life, but that it bothers him less and less.”
— Václav Havel