Skip to main content
Log in

Embodiment on trial: a phenomenological investigation

  • Published:
Continental Philosophy Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper considers dimensions of animate life that are readily “embodied” by phenomenologists and by other philosophy and science researchers as well. The paper demonstrates how the practice of “embodying” short-circuits veritable phenomenological accounts of experience through a neglect of attention to Husserl’s basic conception of, and consistent concern with, animate organism. The paper specifies how in doing so, the practice muddies a clear distinction between the body ‘I have’ and the body ‘I am’, and a clear account of their lived conjunction in existential fit. In turn, the paper shows how the practice falls short of recognizing synergies of meaningful movement created by animate organisms; how it is tethered to talk of posture and sensation over kinesthesia and dynamics; and how, in general, the practice of embodying generates static rather than dynamic understandings of everyday life. The paper then critically considers how such liabilities preclude in-depth phenomenological insights into topics such as ‘ownership’ and ‘agency,’ and why inquiries into the nature of animate organisms require nothing less than fine-tuned attention to foundational experiences of animate life, including foundational ontogenetical experiences that undergird adult proficiencies and abilities, and hence fine-tuned attention to learning and to retaining what is learned in kinesthetic memory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012).

  2. Gibbs (2006).

  3. Gallagher (2005).

  4. Zahavi (2005).

  5. Hanna and Thompson (2003), Zahavi (2005), Jensen and Moran (2013).

  6. Gibbs (2006).

  7. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 109), Varela and Depraz (2005, p. 69), Gallagher (2005, p. 105), Gibbs (2006, p. 127, 130, 134).

  8. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 8).

  9. Gallagher (2005, p. 74).

  10. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 161).

  11. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, see e.g., p. 164).

  12. Husserl (1989, p. 292).

  13. Husserl (1989, p. 350).

  14. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 154).

  15. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 167).

  16. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 148).

  17. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 140).

  18. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 303).

  19. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 141).

  20. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 431).

  21. Sheets-Johnstone (1986/2009).

  22. Sheets-Johnstone (1986/2009).

  23. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 431).

  24. See, for example, Lakoff and Johnson (1980), Johnson (1987).

  25. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012); see also Gallagher (2005, 2012).

  26. Merleau-Ponty (1962, p. 141).

  27. Varela et al. (1991). An earlier analytic book titled The Embodied Mind offers a thoroughgoing investigation of alternatives to Cartesian claims. It supports a subject-object view akin to that of Brentano and even asks in its conclusion, “Could there be a disembodied mind?” See Vesey (1965).

  28. Gallagher and Zahavi (2008, p. 143, 144, respectively; 2012, p. 162, 163 respectively).

  29. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 162; italics added).

  30. Gallagher and Zahavi (2008, p. 145, 2012, p. 164).

  31. Gallagher and Zahavi (2008, p. 161, 2012, p. 180).

  32. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, pp. 110–111).

  33. Husserl (1989, p. 13).

  34. Husserl (1989, p. 273; see also Landgrebe 1977).

  35. Sheets-Johnstone (1999/expanded 2nd ed. 2011).

  36. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, pp. 112–117).

  37. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 31). The four steps they list are: the epoché, the phenomenological reduction, eidetic variation, and intersubjective corroboration.

  38. Husserl (1970, p. 362; italics in original).

  39. Stern (1985, p. 181).

  40. Sheets-Johnstone (2009).

  41. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 180).

  42. Husserl (1989, p. 63).

  43. Sheets-Johnstone (1990).

  44. Husserl (e.g., 1989, p. 35, 61, 96, 185, 351).

  45. Sheets-Johnstone (2011a, b, c, d, 2012).

  46. Sheets-Johnstone (2011a).

  47. Kelso (1995, 2009), Kelso et al. (2013), Kostrubiec et al. (2012).

  48. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 162, 237), Gallagher (2005, e.g., p. 43).

  49. Gallagher also refers to proprioception in terms of an “awareness of movement,” i.e., “proprioceptive awareness of movement may be the very first kind of consciousness to emerge in the developing nervous system” (Gallagher 2005, p. 105). However, he also goes on to question whether “proprioceptive awareness [is] really a form of consciousness” and concludes that it “functions only as part of an ecological structure,” hence that it is a matter of “ownership”: “the experiential differentiation between self and non-self” (ibid., pp. 105–106).

  50. Sherrington (1953, p. 249).

  51. Sheets-Johnstone (1999/expanded 2nd ed. 2011).

  52. Leder (1990. p. 31), quoted by Gallagher and Zahavi (2008, p. 138), Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 157).

  53. Sheets-Johnstone (2003, 2009, 2011b).

  54. Luria (1966, 1973). We might note incidentally that while there are no academic departments of “proprioceptology,” there are departments of kinesiology, departments devoted to the study of the neuromuscular system. However transmogrified by a motorology, as in “motor control,” “motor skills,” and the like, what is being studied are realities of human movement, realities specified in the neurophysiological body but experienced in various ways as lived realities, both in normal and impaired movement (as in sport injuries and physical therapy after a stroke); realities that in other words resonate in living animate bodies, hence in kinesthesia and everyday kinesthetic melodies.

  55. Jeannerod (2006, pp. 55–56).

  56. Stern (1985, pp. 78–79).

  57. Stern (1985, p. 71; italics in original).

  58. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 180).

  59. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 155).

  60. To isolate a single muscle contraction, not to mention isolating a series or conjunction of muscle contractions, is indeed an extraordinary feat if mastered and accomplished at all.

  61. Sheets-Johnstone (2010, 2011c).

  62. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 44).

  63. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 44; see also pp. 179–180).

  64. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 180).

  65. Sheets-Johnstone (1990, p. 286).

  66. Sheets-Johnstone (1999, p. 276, 2011a, b, c, d, p. 240).

  67. Nauta and Feirtag (1979, p. 88).

  68. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 180).

  69. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 162).

  70. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 163).

  71. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 164).

  72. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 180).

  73. Husserl (1973, pp. 92–99).

  74. Husserl (1973, p. 93; italics in original).

  75. Husserl (1973, p. 93, note #1).

  76. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 44, 88, 179).

  77. Husserl (1973, p. 97; italics in original). The phenomenological realities constitute singular characteristics of the non-alien and include the following five characteristics of the non-alien: (1) field of sensation, (2) an ‘I govern’, (3) a repertoire of ‘I cans’, (4) a reflexive relationship between organs of sense and objects of sense, and (5) a consummately and uniquely singular psychophysical unity (ibid.). For a discussion and amplification of these characteristics of the non-alien from a genetic perspective, i.e., a tracing back to ontogenetical grounds, see Sheets-Johnstone (1999).

  78. Husserl (1973, p. 97; italics added).

  79. See Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, pp. 179–180).

  80. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, p. 180).

  81. Gallagher and Zahavi (2012, pp. 44, 179–180).

  82. See Johnstone (2012).

References

  • Gallagher, Shaun. 2012. Phenomenology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, Shaun. 2005. How the body shapes the mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, Shaun, and Dan Zahavi. 2008. The phenomenological mind. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, Shaun, and Dan Zahavi. 2012. The phenomenological mind, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs Jr., Raymond W. 2006. Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, Robert, and Evan Thompson. 2003. Neurophenomenology and the spontaneity of consciousness. In The problem of consciousness: New essays in phenomenological philosophy of mind, ed. Evan Thompson, 133–161. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, Edmund. 1970. The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology (trans: Evanston, David Carr.). Northwestern University Press.

  • Husserl, Edmund. 1973. Cartesian meditations (trans: Cairns, Dorion). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

  • Husserl, Edmund. 1989. Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy, second book (Ideas II) (trans: Rojcewicz, R. and Schuwer, A.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

  • Jeannerod, Marc. 2006. Motor cognition: What actions tell the self. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, Rasmus Thybo and Dermot Moran. 2013. The phenomenology of embodied subjectivity (Contributions to Phenomenology, vol. 71). New York: Springer Publishing.

  • Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, Albert A. 2012. The deep bodily roots of emotion. Husserl Studies 28(3): 179–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelso, J. A. Scott. 2009. Coordination dynamics. In Encyclopedia of complexity and systems sciences, ed. R. A. Meyers, 1537–1564. Berlin: Springer.

  • Kelso, J.A., Guillaume Dumas Scott, and Emmanuelle Tognoli. 2013. Outline of a general theory of behavior and brain coordination. Neural Networks 37: 120–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostrubiec, Pier-Giorgio Zanone, J.A. Armin Fuchs, and Scott Kelso. 2012. Beyond the blank slate: Routes to learning new coordination patterns depend on the intrinsic dynamics of the learner—Experimental evidence and theoretical model. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 6: 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landgrebe, Ludwig. 1977. Phenomenology as transcendental theory of history (trans: Huertas-Jourda, J. and Feige, R.). In Husserl: Expositions and appraisals, ed. Peter McCormick, and Frederick Elliston, 101–113. Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press.

  • Leder, Drew. 1990. The absent body. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luria, Aleksandr Romanovich. 1966. Human brain and psychological processes (trans: Haigh, Basil). New York: Harper & Row.

  • Luria, Aleksandr Romanovich. 1973. The working brain: An introduction to neuropsychology (trans: Haigh, Basil). Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.

  • Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1962. Phenomenology of perception (trans: Colin Smith). New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

  • Nauta, Walle H., and Michael Feirtag. 1979. The organization of the brain. Scientific American 241(3): 88–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 1986. Existential fit and evolutionary continuities. Synthese 66: 219–248. Included as Chapter III in Sheets-Johnstone 2009.

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 1990. The roots of thinking. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 1999. Re-thinking Husserl’s fifth meditation, Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy Conference, Eugene, OR, October 8–10. Published in Philosophy Today 43(Supplement): 99–106.

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 1999/expanded 2nd ed. 2011. The primacy of movement. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2003. Kinesthetic memory, Theoria et Historia Scientiarum VII/I (Special issue on Phenomenology and Cognitive Science, ed. Shaun Gallagher and Natalie Depraz): 69–92.

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2009. The corporeal turn: An interdisciplinary reader, 64–90. Exeter, UK: Philosophy Documentation Center, US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2010. Kinesthetic experience: Understanding movement inside and out. Body, Movement and Dance in Psychotherapy 5(2): 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2011a. The corporeal turn: Reflections on gnostic tactility and kinesthesia, Guest speaker, Great Expectations Conference (neuroscience-philosophy conference on the brain). Gnosis Institute, Danish Pedagogical University, Copenhagen, February 2–4, 2010. Published in special issue of Journal of Consciousness Studies devoted to the Conference (2011) 18(7–8): 145–168.

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2011b. Kinesthetic memory: Further critical reflections and constructive analyses. In Body memory, ed. Sabine Koch, Thomas Fuchs, Michela Summa, and Cornelia Müller, 43–72. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2011c. The imaginative consciousness of movement: Linear quality, kinaesthesia, language and life. In Redrawing anthropology: Materials, movements, lines, ed. Tim Ingold. Surrey, UK: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2011d. Embodied minds or mindful bodies? A question of fundamental, inherently inter-related aspects of animation. Guest Lecture in conjunction with Alumni Achievement Award, School of Education, Department of Dance, University of Wisconsin, Madison, April 29, 2011. Published in Subjectivity (December 2011) 4/4: 451–466.

  • Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 2012. Fundamental and inherently related aspects of animation. In Moving ourselves, moving others: The role of emotion for intersubjectivity, consciousness, and language, ed. Ad Foolen, Ulrike Lüdtke, Jordan Zlatev, and Tim Racine, 29–55. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherrington, Sir Charles. 1953. Man on his nature. New York: Doubleday Anchor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, Daniel N. 1985. The interpersonal world of the infant: A view from psychoanalysis and developmental psychology. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varela, Francisco J., and Natalie Depraz. 2005. At the source of time: Valence and the constitutional dynamics of affect. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12(8–10) (special issue on Emotion Experience, ed. Giovanna Colombetti and Evan Thompson): 61–81.

  • Varela, Francisco J., Evan Thompson, and Eleanor Rosch. 1991. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vesey, G.N.A. 1965. The embodied mind: A philosophical investigation of the unity of mind and body experienced in voluntary movement and bodily sensation. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi, Dan. 2005. Subjectivity and selfhood: Investigating the first-person perspective. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maxine Sheets-Johnstone.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sheets-Johnstone, M. Embodiment on trial: a phenomenological investigation. Cont Philos Rev 48, 23–39 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-014-9315-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-014-9315-z

Keywords

Navigation