@tomgoldswain3 now I wonder if you already have a practice of mindfulness or something, in which case I agree that this is nothing special. The practices of awareness and focusing are close and neither is anything "special", unless of course one has never practised either before and have been caught up in surface reactions to things - which is the case with many counselling clients. I think Gendlin would agree with you, especially regarding the fluidity of experience. Have you read his book?
I would also say that what you experience should be focussed on in order for it to become clear, not so that you find more and more, that's just focusing or long enough for experience to have changed. Nothing special
@gingerburney As i read this, i'm interested in your impression. How can anyone prove either way? It's hypothesis vs hypothesis, and i do have valid reasoning for mine. Your interpretation of the origin of your experience seems to differ from mine. Interpretation is the key word here. I assume that experience is very fluid and changeable, whereas the Gendlin method assumes it's static and isolated and thus you can focus on it. This means we interpret sensations from different perspectives.
@tomgoldswain2 I get the impression you may not have tested this method out yet, do it and then check to see if you feel you are creating things or if you are receiving genuinely fresh information.
Why is there such emphasis on sensation? We see what we want to see when we try too hard. To notice sensations in the body you have to pay attention to yourself - thats it! If you keep looking of course you'll find something new! Even spending 1 minute to focus in means you could become more relaxed or anxious which changes your attitude which changes your sensation.
@tomgoldswain3 now I wonder if you already have a practice of mindfulness or something, in which case I agree that this is nothing special. The practices of awareness and focusing are close and neither is anything "special", unless of course one has never practised either before and have been caught up in surface reactions to things - which is the case with many counselling clients. I think Gendlin would agree with you, especially regarding the fluidity of experience. Have you read his book?
gingerburney 9 months ago
I would also say that what you experience should be focussed on in order for it to become clear, not so that you find more and more, that's just focusing or long enough for experience to have changed. Nothing special
tomgoldswain3 9 months ago
@gingerburney As i read this, i'm interested in your impression. How can anyone prove either way? It's hypothesis vs hypothesis, and i do have valid reasoning for mine. Your interpretation of the origin of your experience seems to differ from mine. Interpretation is the key word here. I assume that experience is very fluid and changeable, whereas the Gendlin method assumes it's static and isolated and thus you can focus on it. This means we interpret sensations from different perspectives.
tomgoldswain3 9 months ago
@tomgoldswain2 I get the impression you may not have tested this method out yet, do it and then check to see if you feel you are creating things or if you are receiving genuinely fresh information.
gingerburney 9 months ago
Why is there such emphasis on sensation? We see what we want to see when we try too hard. To notice sensations in the body you have to pay attention to yourself - thats it! If you keep looking of course you'll find something new! Even spending 1 minute to focus in means you could become more relaxed or anxious which changes your attitude which changes your sensation.
tomgoldswain2 1 year ago
I quite agree with "emanitudism". This is a really remarkable clip and thank you for posting it!
PowerTower159 2 years ago
what Gene says here is _really_ important for people to hear about Focusing
emanitudism 2 years ago