Physicality and human health. How we think about the body

The relevance of the research topic is due to the fact that human corporeality as a socio-philosophical problem has constantly attracted interest: how bodily forces are revealed in the life and social existence of a person, what are the relationships of the body, soul and spirit and are there limits to their development. These issues are becoming even more relevant today, in the conditions of a dynamically and contradictorily functioning modern society that has entered the era of information civilization. Indeed, bodily attributes and metaphors occupy a dominant role in human life. Modern man, unable to imagine the physically intangible, seems to impose the concept of corporeality on immaterial, spiritual phenomena. But, strictly speaking, there is no “pure” physicality. The bodily embodiment of a person is carried out not in the world as such, but in the sociocultural world. Man is initially given only parts of his body, which he must transform into a certain integrity. If every other body appears for everyone as an object of external contemplation, then one’s own body is never such, i.e. neither an object of internal nor external contemplation. “It,” as I. G. Fichte noted, “is not an object of internal contemplation, since there is no internal general feeling of the whole body, but only parts of it, for example, in pain; it is not an object of external contemplation either: we do not see ourselves as a whole, but only parts of our body (unless in a mirror, but there we do not see our body, but only its image, and we think of it as such an image only because we we already know that we have a body)” 1. As we see, Fichte wants to say that a person must still master the body, make it his own in accordance with his moral destiny. In other words, the internal image of the body, or physicality, is always spiritually transformed.

Thus, the relevance of the problem of human corporeality is determined, first of all, by the fact that society must “record” the most significant cultural and value codes, and this “recording” obviously occurs on a special “surface” that does not have fixed boundaries. The socio-philosophical analysis of the problem of human corporeality is especially relevant in our time due to the anthropological “turn” in modern philosophy, the development of science and technology, the negative impact of the scientific and technological revolution on the essential forces of man, his physical, spiritual and mental development, in connection with the real a threat to man to live in an artificial, unnatural technical world, in the technosphere, which is incompatible with the existence of man as a natural, bodily being, incompatible with dangerous experiments on man (his cloning, etc.).

Corporality is a special phenomenon: the most inherent in man and one of the least known to him. The concept of “human corporeality,” which arose at the intersection of natural science, medicine and the humanities, is relevant primarily in the sense that it is intended to characterize the social qualities of the human body 1 . The human body, in addition to the action of the general laws of life, is subject to the influence of the laws of social life, which, without canceling the former, significantly modify their manifestation. The boundaries of the human body, as a whole, as is known, do not correspond to the boundaries of the physical body of a particular individual, while the boundary of the soul and body can be drawn along the body itself (“face” is “soul”).

The human body is a living, open, optimally functioning complex, self-regulating and self-renewing biological system with its inherent principles of self-preservation and adaptability. The body is a unity of multiples, since certain organs and organ systems arise during the embryonic period from a specific germ layer. “In human development, the embryonic period is critical. The embryo is especially susceptible to the influence of various environmental factors and depends on the state of the mother’s body.” 2 Therefore, both early and later disturbances in the functioning of one organ or any organ system are reflected primarily in the functioning of those organs or systems that are in the closest, “related” connection with them. The “body” system interacts with the environment and needs a constant exchange of energy (substances) with it. This exchange is possible due to the constant influence of stimuli from the external and internal environment. They are always new information for the body and are processed by its neuro-humoral system. Irritants affect the parameters of the body that were formed before this impact. Therefore, the nature of information processing depends on the nature of the information that has been recorded at that moment in the memory apparatus of the regulatory system. This is one of the fundamental factors in the formation of individual physical characteristics, formed at the dawn of biological life forms. Another important factor is the correspondence (congruence)/discrepancy (incongruence) of the current state of the organism and the objective situation in which this organism is currently located.

In modern philosophy, “body” is a philosophical concept that contrasts the corporeality of the individual with the incorporeal, transcendental subject. The body exists before the opposition of subject and object. It is included and involved in the material world (surfaces, landscapes, objects), and the world is encrusted in the body. Through perception, sensuality and reflection, we have the world and at the same time belong to it (M. Merleau-Ponty). It is more correct to talk about the subjectivity of the body, since sensuality and body language are at the same time a fabric, a figure of thought (intention).

In addition, the individual becomes aware of his body under the gaze of the Other. The individual’s relationship to his body is determined by the existence of the Other, normative (punitive) bodily practices that constitute a disciplinary, socially controlled body (M. Foucault). It is the Other who creates the horizon of things, desires, physicality. Bodily experience is formed as a double grasp, that is, the same tactile sensation, perceived as an external object and as a sensation of a material object, bodily reality for consciousness (E. Husserl). In other words, corporeality, the corporeal object and the body are the subjectivity of the body that perceives the external to itself.

The constitution of the body differs: 1) the body as a material object; 2) the body as “flesh”, a living organism, for example, the Dionysian, ecstatic body (F. Nietzsche); 3) the body as an expression and “center of meaning”, phenomenological body (M. Merleau-Ponty); 4) the body as an element of culture - the social body (J. Deleuze, Guattari), the textual body (R. Barthes).

The characteristics of corporeality are sexuality, affect, perversion, movement, gesture, death, etc. The activity of the body in the world gives it the quality of a mediator - “to be and to have” (G. Marcel).

The instrumental field of the body acts as bodily practices - availability (M. Heidegger), touch (Sartre), an articulated “desire to say” (J. Derrida), desire for pleasure (Freud). Touching and feeling, sensory-somatic communication dominate in the practice of creating and perceiving art objects. An actor's performance, for example, is the creation of a “body language” in which physicality and textuality are isomorphic. The invention of art objects is always carried out in a discursive environment in the form of a “textual body”.

Corporeality manifests itself as a process in the form of the body through asymmetries, characteristic movements, postures, posture, breathing, rhythms, tempos, temperature, “flowability,” smell, sound and hypnotizability. Corporality is changeable: its character changes in accordance with the sign of bodily-sensory processes. These changes are not identical to the processes of development, maturation or aging, but the listed processes influence it and are manifested in it. Since its formation depends on external and internal conditions, significant changes in these conditions entail changes in a person’s physicality. The state of physicality is reflected by the motivations, attitudes and, in general, the system of meanings of the individual, therefore it stores the generalized knowledge of a person and represents a material, visible aspect of the soul (psyche).

Just like the body (Slav. telo / lat. Tellus - basis, soil, earth), physicality is designed to perform protective and supporting functions in adaptation processes, and this is its first purpose.

The level of development of physicality (range) allows a person to “resonate” with the world to one degree or another, which is another of its purposes.

The final purpose of corporeality is to ensure the separation of spirit/soul and body at the moment of death.

2. MODERN PROBLEMS THREATS TO HUMAN CORPORITY

Man today is in danger of living in an unnatural technical world. The technosphere is developing much faster than the biosphere, and man, trying to adapt to life in an artificial environment, is forced to deal with his bodily organization. Modern forms of activity are so diverse that they require not only the development of specific skills and abilities, but also further improvement of the world of internal feelings. Nature leaves the human body unfinished so that it can be fully formed by the inner, sensory world. But it is always necessary to remember the unity of statics and dynamics in human existence. It should also be noted that the connection between spiritual values ​​and forms of satisfying some material needs, as well as the needs of the body, can be more direct and immediate (for example, in medical institutions they sometimes use specially selected music for the treatment of mental and physical illnesses ). “In a healthy body there is a healthy mind” - this “old Latin proverb can to some extent be wrapped up by saying: a healthy mind is a healthy body, since it has been established that cheerfulness and the will to live contribute to bodily recovery 1 .

Some serious illnesses are largely due to spiritual ill-health, which is associated with the loss of ideas about the dignity and beauty of a person. Nature itself today gives man, as it were, a sign to correct himself, to become morally purer and better. Of course, it is impossible to unambiguously link a person’s spiritual virtues with his longevity and health. The most important thing is that a person is given the ability to consciously influence his body, process, polish the organs of his bodily organization. After all, physicality is a concept that describes not just a structural organization, but also its living plastic dynamics.

Human corporeality acts as a property immersed not only in the space of individual life, but also in the space of being of other individuals. Ultimately, physicality is connected with the cultural and historical space of human existence.

Scientific and technological achievements are a factor complicating the situation, which since the twentieth century has become more confusing compared to previous eras. The development of technogenic civilization has approached critical milestones, which mark the boundaries of civilizational growth. This was revealed in the second half of the twentieth century in connection with the growth of global crises and global problems.

Scientists believe that in the 21st century. Biology will become the leader of natural science. One of the promising areas of development of this science is experiencing an unprecedented rise - biotechnology, which uses biological processes for production purposes. With its help, such widely used feed proteins and medicines are produced, for example, contributing to victories over hunger and disease. Genetic engineering has emerged on the basis of molecular technology, which by transplanting foreign genes into cells makes it possible to breed new species of plants and animals.

There is a danger hanging over our physicality. On the one hand, this is a threat to the weakness of our body in a world we ourselves have created; the modern technogenic world is beginning to deform the foundations of the gene pool. And it was the result of millions of years of bioevolution and withstood such a difficult battle with nature, giving us both intelligence and the ability to perceive the world above the level of instincts necessary for survival. On the other hand, there is a danger of replacing it with mechanical modules and information blocks or, on the contrary, “improving” it genetically.

Bodily health has always been one of the first places in the system of human values, but there are increasing warnings from biologists, geneticists, and doctors about the danger of the destruction of humanity as a species, the deformation of its bodily foundations. The genetic burden of the human population is increasing. The weakening of the human immune system under the influence of xenobiotics and numerous social and personal stresses is being recorded everywhere. The number of hereditary deformities, female infertility and male impotence is growing.

The establishment of the technosphere on the planet, the emergence of “cultivated” nature, bearing the stamp of the mind and will of people, cannot but give rise to new acute problems. It is now becoming clear that a person’s adaptation to the environment that he has adapted to his life is a very difficult process. The rapid development of the technosphere is ahead of the evolutionarily established adaptive capabilities of humans. Difficulties in connecting the psychophysiological potentials of a person with the requirements of modern equipment and technology have been recorded everywhere, both theoretically and practically. The ocean of chemicals in which our daily lives are now immersed, sudden changes in politics and zigzags in the economy - all this affects the nervous system, the abilities of perception are dulled and this manifests itself somatically in millions of people. There are signs of physical degeneration in a number of regions, the uncontrollable spread of drug addiction and alcoholism. The increasing mental stress that people increasingly face in the modern world causes the accumulation of negative emotions and often stimulates the use of artificial means of stress relief: both traditional (tranquilizers, drugs) and new means of mental manipulation (sects, television, etc.). ).

The problem of preserving the human personality as a biological structure in the conditions of a growing and comprehensive process of alienation is growing more and more, which is designated as the modern anthropological crisis: a person complicates his world, forces are increasingly being called upon that he can no longer control and which are becoming alien to his nature . The more it transforms the world, the more social factors are generated that begin to form structures that radically change human life and, apparently, worsen it. Modern industrial culture creates ample opportunities for the manipulation of consciousness, in which a person loses the ability to rationally comprehend existence. The accelerated development of technogenic civilization makes the problem of socialization and personality formation very complex. The constantly changing world breaks off many roots and traditions, forces a person to live in different cultures, adapt to constantly updated circumstances.

The invasion of technology into all spheres of human existence - from the global to the purely intimate - sometimes gives rise to an unbridled apology for technology, the peculiar ideology and psychology of technicism. A one-sided, technicalized consideration of human problems leads to the concept of attitude towards the bodily-natural structure of man, which is expressed in the concept of “cyborgization”. According to this concept, in the future a person will have to give up his body. Modern people will be replaced by cybernetic organisms (cyborgs), where the living and the technical will give some new fusion. Such intoxication with technical prospects is dangerous and inhumane. Of course, the inclusion of artificial organs (various prostheses, pacemakers, etc.) into the human body is a reasonable and necessary thing, but it should not cross the line when a person ceases to be himself.

Among the problems of modern civilization, scientists identify three main global problems: environmental, social and cultural-anthropological.

The essence of the environmental problem is the uncontrolled growth of the technosphere and its negative impact on the biosphere. Hence it makes sense to talk about the ecology of spirituality and physicality. For example, the crisis in the spirituality of society has created devastation in the environment. And in order to overcome this crisis, it is necessary to restore the original harmony of man with nature.

The anthropological problem is the increasing disharmony between the development of natural and social qualities of man. Its components are: a decline in people's health, the threat of destruction of the gene pool of humanity and the emergence of new diseases; separation of man from biosphere life and transition to technosphere living conditions; dehumanization of people and loss of morality; splitting culture into elite and mass; an increase in the number of suicides, alcoholism, drug addiction; the rise of totalitarian religious sects and political groups.

The essence of the social problem is the inability of the mechanisms of social regulation to the changed reality. Here we should highlight the following components: the growing differentiation of countries and regions of the world in terms of the level of consumption of natural resources and the level of economic development; large numbers of people living in conditions of malnutrition and poverty; growth of interethnic conflicts; the formation of a lower stratum of the population in developed countries.

All these problems are directly related to the spirituality and physicality of a person, and it is not possible to solve one of these problems without solving the others.

CONCLUSION

The concept of “human corporeality” arose at the intersection of natural science, medicine and the humanities, and it is intended to characterize the social qualities of the human body. The human body, in addition to the action of the general laws of life, is subject to the influence of the laws of social life, which, without canceling the former, significantly modify their manifestation. The human body is a living, open, optimally functioning complex, self-regulating and self-renewing biological system with its inherent principles of self-preservation and adaptability. Corporality refers to the quality, strength and sign of a person’s bodily reactions, which are formed from the moment of conception throughout the course of life. Corporeality is not identical to the body and is not a product of the body alone. As a reality, it is the result of the activity of the triune nature of man. This is a subjectively experienced and objectively observable expression and evidence of the vector of an individual’s total energy. Corporality is formed in the context of the genotype, gender and unique biopsychic characteristics of the individual in the process of his adaptation and self-realization. The basis for the formation of physicality is a single memory.

Among the problems of modern civilization, scientists identify three main global problems: environmental, social and cultural-anthropological. The essence of the environmental problem is the uncontrolled growth of the technosphere and its negative impact on the biosphere. Hence it makes sense to talk about the ecology of spirituality and physicality. For example, the crisis in the spirituality of society has created devastation in the environment. And in order to overcome this crisis, it is necessary to restore the original harmony of man with nature. The anthropological problem is the increasing disharmony between the development of natural and social qualities of man. Its components are: a decline in people's health, the threat of destruction of the gene pool of humanity and the emergence of new diseases; separation of man from biosphere life and transition to technosphere living conditions; dehumanization of people and loss of morality; splitting culture into elite and mass; an increase in the number of suicides, alcoholism, drug addiction; the rise of totalitarian religious sects and political groups. The essence of the social problem is the inability of the mechanisms of social regulation to the changed reality. Here we should highlight the following components: the growing differentiation of countries and regions of the world in terms of the level of consumption of natural resources and the level of economic development; large numbers of people living in conditions of malnutrition and poverty; growth of interethnic conflicts; the formation of a lower stratum of the population in developed countries. All these problems are directly related to the spirituality and physicality of a person, and it is not possible to solve one of these problems without solving the others.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anisimov S.F. Spiritual values: production and consumption. — M.: Thought, 1988.


Zharov L.V. Twenty years of experience in studying the problem of human corporeality (Act speech). -Rostov n/d: Publishing house of Rostov State Medical University, 2001.


Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language, - M.: State Publishing House of Foreign and National Dictionaries, 1961.


Fundamentals of perinatology / Ed. prof. N.P. Shabalova and prof. Yu.V. Tsveleva. M., 2000.

Human corporeality is defined by the Boss as the bodily sphere of fulfillment of human existence. Boss is one of the few existentialists who pays serious attention to human corporeality. Physicality is not limited to what is under the skin; it is widespread, as is the attitude towards the world. Boss speaks of the continuation of the physicality of ways of being-in-the-world. He gives an example of pointing to something. Corporality extends to the object that is pointed at, and even further, to all the phenomena of the world with which I deal. Such corporeality is a manifestation of human existence; it has not only a material, but also a semantic, existential character. A person's attitude towards the world is always reflected in his attitude towards his body.

The traditional natural science approach considers the human body as one of many natural objects. Obviously, only thanks to this approach does it become possible to influence a person, as well as control him through physicochemical and cybernetic methods. Only in this case does it become possible to use the natural scientific research method. There is nothing wrong with the natural scientific method itself. The problem is that this kind of idea of ​​​​a person is transferred to the entire human reality.

Boss says that by considering the corporeality of man exclusively as a material thing, natural science neglects everything that makes the corporeality of man actually human. As an example, he cites art objects, in particular paintings by Picasso. Boss wonders whether the natural science approach would be able to grasp the essence of these objects through its method - i.e. measuring the dimensions of the paintings, conducting a chemical analysis of the paint, etc. The Boss's answer is unequivocal - of course not. In his opinion, the situation is similar with the study of human corporeality.

A person, according to Boss, feels most like a person precisely when he ceases to be aware of his physical corporeality. However, when a person forgets his body, he does not cease to be bodily. All manifestations of human life are bodily. Gazes, ideas and visualizations are just as physical as direct touch, since in these cases we are dealing with color, smell, taste and surface texture. Everything that we see with the so-called inner gaze is also bodily. Even the most abstract mathematical thoughts are permeated by our physicality.

In order to understand the essence of human corporeality, we must distinguish it from the corporeality of inanimate physical objects. A similar division can be made from two starting points. The first concerns the ultimate boundaries of our corporeality and the corporeality of physical objects. The second represents the fundamental difference between the locations (ways of occupying space) of human existence and inanimate material objects.

If we consider the human body as a physical object, its boundaries will end at the skin. At the same time, the indisputable fact is that wherever we are, we are always in some kind of relationship with something beyond our skin. Does it follow from this that we are always outside our physical body? This assumption also misleads us. The boss says that in this case we will mix the phenomena of Dasein and human corporeality. We will never be able to comprehend the phenomenon of corporeality if we consider it separately from the world. The differences between these two types of physicality of a person and an inanimate object are, first of all, not quantitative, but qualitative.

Although Boss says that the phenomena of Dasein and corporeality are different, nevertheless, we can still find many common features. This is, first of all, the so-called forwardness in relation to human corporeality, which found its expression in the so-called bodying forth. Our body always seems to extend further forward in both spatial and temporal aspects. It extends to the potential ways of being in which we exist and which constitute our existence at any given moment in time. “The boundaries of my body coincide with the boundaries of my openness to the world,” says Boss. Therefore, bodily phenomena must be understood in the context of a changing relationship with the world.

As an example, Boss cites illustrations from the case of Regula Zürcher. Regula walks into a cafe with her friend and starts talking about summer holidays. At the same time, she assumes a relaxed pose in a chair, as if she were already on a beach in the Canary Islands, while her eyes and ears are tuned to the café's surroundings. Thus, it would be incorrect to say that Regula crossed the ocean only in her thoughts; according to the Boss's concept, she did it also physically, as a complete human being.

From whatever angle we view human corporeality, we always find that bodying forth precedes perception and actual existence. Indeed, says Boss, human corporeality is phenomenologically secondary, although our feelings tell us about its primacy.

Boss focuses on the difference in the limits of perception of our senses and what lies at the very basis of their ability to function. For example, my ear cannot hear something a thousand kilometers away, but my “audibility” can, my eye cannot see what will happen here in a month, but my vision can.

The next point, as mentioned earlier, concerns the differences between the corporeality of humans and inanimate objects in relation to the place they occupy. This difference lies in our relationship to “here” and “there”. “At any given moment in time,” Boss writes, “my “here” is determined by the being of the things to which I am open. I am open time-space and exist by meeting things where they are” (Boss, 1979, p. 105). The being-here of things is radically different, since at any given moment in time they are not open to anyone or anything.

The boundaries of my physicality coincide with the boundaries of my openness to the world. The consequence of this is that our openness allows us to push the boundaries of our physicality. And to the extent that we remain closed, to the same extent our corporeality narrows. Simply put, openness expands our living space and sphere of presence in the world, while closedness narrows it (Boss 1979, pp.100-105).

Ecology of knowledge: In this short article I will try to present four basic concepts of corporeality. They describe how a person, society and culture perceive the body. These concepts are simultaneously present today in individual representation

I was given a body - what should I do with it?

So one and so mine? ©Osip Mandelstam

In this short article I will try to present four basic concepts of corporeality. They describe how a person, society and culture perceive the body. These concepts today are simultaneously present in individual perceptions, in social practices, and in culture-forming forms of politics. They define, for example, areas such as healthcare and fashion, they influence both psychological well-being and the arts equally.

History knows periods when the topic of the body attracted more attention, as well as eras when it faded into the shadows. It can be said that a significant part of human history unfolds in the confrontation and intricacy of these two trends.

My focus will be on the contemporary: how these different paradigms live and co-exist today, shaping industries, public policy, art and worldviews. These paradigms can be distinguished by their answers to two key questions: “is the body an object or a subject?” and “what is the relationship between body and mind (soul)?”

The body as a properly functioning mechanism (the body as a detached object)

This approach is perhaps the most common today. He has a serious and objective background. It goes back to the first anatomists who studied dead, motionless bodies and tried to comprehend the internal structure of man. This approach is supported by the idea of ​​the body as a mechanism, which is often associated with the Cartesian dualism of body and soul. Industrial production and war in the twentieth century also added weight to this paradigm. Man as “cannon fodder”, man as part of an assembly line of production, as well as the rapid development of medicine and the growth of the fashion and sports industries — all this only contributes to the spread of an object-based view of the body in the twentieth century.

Obviously, a dance teacher, doctor, or fitness trainer would rather think in terms of the body as a separate entity that must function “correctly.” This picture of the world is necessary in professions in which the correct and incorrect way of working the body, effective and ineffective, is normatively established.

The object in question may be more or less complex in structure, but it is still, first and foremost, an object. Two consequences follow from this.

First, the body easily becomes an object of control and manipulation. This is also expressed in delegating care and responsibility for my body to any kind of expert (which, in general, is normal when it comes to complex medical problems, professional use of the body in sports, dancing or hardware cosmetology, but is not vital when it comes to about beauty, food or health in the broad sense of the word). This also manifests itself in the appropriation of cultural and social norms regarding beauty and health standards. This also equally applies to sensitivity in matters of bodily safety and comfort — in the city, in the workplace, in the information space, etc. It is curious (and sad) that, for example, discussion of the topic of violence, including violence against women, always contains this objective flavor. The same applies to the concept of “victim’s guilt,” which we can see both in corporate policies (“We will create constant stress for you, and you have to spend money to maintain your health”) and in the condemnation of those who do not fit into “ standards of beauty and health” (“You need to eat less!”).

The second consequence is the fundamental separation of body and mind (or soul). Rooted in religious traditions in which the body was seen as dangerous, unknown and uncontrollable, this division (dichotomy or dissociation) persists to this day. In fact, the bodily is regularly relegated to the margins of attention, consciousness and, to a certain extent, culture. The body is something removed from me. There is “I” and there is “my body”. This tradition of “I am - this is not my body” is actively broadcast and reproduced from generation to generation. And due to the fact that social and
Technological changes in lifestyle over the last 100 years have only exacerbated this dissociation; this way of thinking about the body still dominates the overall picture of physicality. And, following it, we increasingly put our body in a subordinate position: the object is obliged to obey me. And if he, such and such, does not do this, then he is bad and will be punished, for example, deprived of pleasure. Or we begin to scold ourselves for not being successful enough managers.

By the way, it is this idea (or overcoming it) that underlies a variety of weight loss systems: some starve themselves with diets and exhausting exercises, others advise “coming to an agreement with your body.” Either war or diplomacy in relations between the warring parties.

Perhaps most interestingly, this paradigm relates to the practice of bequeathing a body, or directing what to do with a body after death. In the absence of the body-aware self—the “dead soul,” the decision-making subject—the body reverts to its object nature, becoming simply a physical object to be manipulated. Within the framework of the object paradigm, we seem to reproduce this approach, while still in our right mind and solid memory during our lifetime.

Thus, if we greatly simplify this paradigm, we can reduce it to a fairly simple formulation: the body is an object, the body is not me, I can relate to my body in different ways, we can enter into different object relations; I can treat him or take care of him, train him or ignore him, fear him or be proud of him, I can delegate him to other people or institutions. This paradigm is historically the oldest; it is most strongly entrenched in mass consciousness and cultural and social practices. Each of us can discover in ourselves the dominance or individual elements of this attitude towards the body.

The body in body-oriented psychotherapy (the body as a related object)

In the twentieth century, another way of understanding the body became widespread. In an attempt to overcome the dichotomy, or separation, of mind and body, body-oriented therapy comes into the picture. Under the influence of the complexities of the early twentieth century, the revolution in the scientific paradigm and the wave of enthusiasm for Eastern teachings, the topic of the body begins to attract more and more attention.

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that in body therapy the body is seen as a reflection and even literally the embodiment of the self. The body as a place for the materialization of various spiritual metaphors (“the heart aches,” “the brain explodes,” “the legs won’t move,” etc.). The body as a reflection of processes occurring with mental energy. The body is like an imprint of actions completed and imperfect during life. The body as some object connected with the mental, through which the mental (mind or soul) can be cognized, through the influence of which the mental can be changed. That is, from the absolute independence of the mental and physical there was a transition to the coherence of these two phenomena. Let us dwell in more detail on the model of this connection.

It is generally accepted that modern body-oriented therapy began with Wilhelm Reich. He was Freud's student, his follower, and later, as often happened with Freud's students, his active critic. The main thing that Reich reproached Freud for was ignoring physicality.

It is worth making one digression here, which is important for understanding the general model of body-oriented therapy. Science and scientists' ideas about the world spread in waves. At first, the model of atoms and mechanical interactions dominated. It was replaced by a model of liquids (for example, “electric current”). Then the “field” model began to develop. In the first half of the twentieth century, physics presented science with a quantum model. And if we look at different scientific fields, we can see how these “basic models” are spread, either explicitly or implicitly, across different fields of knowledge. But they do not spread instantly, but with some delay. If we talk about physics, the transition from the “fluid” model to the “field” model occurred in the second half of the nineteenth century (more precisely, starting in 1864, when James Maxwell published his first work, “The Dynamic Theory of the Electromagnetic Field,” and about It took 20 years to finalize and confirm the theory). Freud's first work, The Interpretation of Dreams, was published in 1900. And the “field” model appeared in psychology only in the 40s (Kurt Lewin’s field theory).

Therefore, it is no coincidence that Freud, and after him Reich and already his followers, speaking about psychic energy and its flow, imagined psychic energy as a kind of liquid. To understand the ideas of Reich and his follower Alexander Lowen, it is important to keep this idea in mind.

So, Wilhelm Reich imagined the body as a place of life and the embodiment of psychic energy. If energy flows freely, then the person is mentally healthy. If energy accumulates somewhere, stagnates, and does not pass through, then it means that not everything is in order with the free circulation of psychic energy.

You may have heard the expressions “muscle armor” or “muscle clamp.” It was Reich who introduced them into circulation. These are places of tense muscles that do not allow psychic (vital) energy to flow freely. Accordingly, if you “release” muscle tension and rid a person of the “shell”, then life will improve.

From the point of view of the logic of science, it is not surprising that Reich eventually began to look for the very vital energy that fills the human body. He called it "orgone". This energy, according to Reich, underlies the Freudian concept of libido, being a biological force. He created devices that accumulated it, and tried to treat various diseases with their help.

Reich's student Alexander Lowen was more fortunate than his teacher (at least he lived safely to a ripe old age, and did not die in prison of a heart attack at age 60, like Reich). Lowen's main ideas are a natural development of Reich's key ideas. Based on his idea that mental conflict is expressed in the form of bodily tension, Lowen created his own system of working with the body.

According to Lowen, the psyche influences the body through control. A person suppresses the urge to scream by clenching his jaw, squeezing his throat, holding his breath and tensing his stomach. A person can suppress the desire to attack with fists to express his anger by tensing the muscles of the shoulder girdle. At first, this manifestation is conscious, it saves a person from the development of conflict and pain. However, conscious and voluntary contraction of muscles requires energy and therefore cannot be maintained indefinitely. But if the suppression of a feeling must be constantly maintained due to the fact that its expression is not accepted by the outside world, the psyche gives up its control over the prohibited action and takes energy from the impulse. The suppression of the impulse then becomes unconscious and the muscle or muscles remain contracted or tense because they lack the energy to stretch and relax. Accordingly, from Lowen’s point of view, it is necessary to add the force of the “energy flow” so that the muscles can relax, as if “washing away” the congestion with the force of the flow. Therefore, the Lowen method involves maximizing tension in blocked areas.

In addition to various techniques for working with tension frozen in the body, Lowen reinforced one very important idea in body therapy: unexpressed emotions literally freeze in the body. General vital energy (Lowen, in order not to repeat the teacher’s mistakes, called it simply “bioenergy”) ensures both the mental life of the individual and his bodily existence. The energy taken to hold emotions in the body seems to be “subtracted” from the total amount of human energy, overall vitality.

And in this sense, indeed, looking at the body, analyzing the degree of tension (tightness) of certain parts, paying attention to freedom and, as Lowen wrote, the “natural grace” of movements (more precisely, its absence), we can talk about this or that the type of person’s character, the characteristics of his behavior, etc.

It is also important to mention here that both Reich and Lowen, based on the analysis of muscle tension, developed their own descriptions of characters, unique typologies. Based on which parts of the body accumulate more energy and where there is not enough of it, based on where the muscle blocks are located, it is quite possible to “diagnose” a personality type. This is a normal “medical” approach to the topic.

There are many different ideas and methods of working in body therapy. I would like to dwell on one more thing, illustrating the understanding of the body as a reflection and embodiment of the inner world - bodynamics.

Bodynamics is a relatively new direction in body therapy (its author is Lisbeth Marcher), which began to develop about 40 years ago. Bodynamics is based on slightly different ideas about the relationship between the “soul” and the body, although it also talks about “character types” and childhood traumas. This approach no longer considers energy, but focuses on clearer physiological indicators. The point is that during the development of a child, in response to how the environment reacts to his attempt to satisfy his basic needs, not only hypertension arises in the muscles, but also a lack of tension and activity - hypotonus. And the combination of hyper- and hypotonicity of muscles, unique for each person, creates, on the one hand, the individuality of character, and on the other hand, the bodily image that we see. By the way, it is also interesting that there is a connection between how, in the course of life, certain childhood “traumas” are overcome and “character” changes, and how the body changes. More than once during the “training diagnostics” I heard the phrase: “Oh, here are obvious traces of a past injury, but judging by the body, it seems that you have successfully dealt with it.”

Despite the fact that methodologically (and ideologically) bodynamics differs significantly from the “energetic” approach of Reich and Lowen, they are united by the idea of ​​​​the relationship between the “soul” (psyche, mind, emotions, etc.) and the body. The body is a reaction to a person’s mental experience, its consequences and results. Therefore, through the body we can see personal history — and through the body we can change personal history by releasing emotions trapped in the body, reducing tension or retraining muscles. In a sense, in body-oriented therapy, the body remains an object directly related to the “I”, but still separated from it.

Directions also based on the direct connection between the “I” and the body: psychosomatics (unexpressed emotions are expressed physically in illness), the Alexander method (working with posture), the Rosen method (muscle relaxation through touch), Rolfing (structural integration through working with fascia) , some massage practices used in therapeutic work (palsing, myofascial release, etc.), relaxation techniques and even the notorious “Reiki” method.

This paradigm — “bodily problems are a consequence of mental problems” — is very common today. The most vividly simple train of thought “if in the body..., then (this is because) in the soul/in life...” is expressed in “everyday psychosomatics”, a striking example of which can be considered, for example, the books of Louise Hay and Liz Burbo.

The paradigm of the body as an object associated with the psyche can thus be formulated as follows: there is a certain (described differently in each specific model) connection between the body and emotions, character, way of life; body is an object associated with other life manifestations of a person; By influencing the body taking into account the type of connection, we can change some aspects of life. This view has managed to gain some popularity, which can be considered, if not widespread, then at least popular, thanks to the success of books in the “self-help” genre and, to some extent, due to the development of psychosomatics as a branch of medicine.

Body in art therapy (body as a mediator, body as a channel of communication)

If for body therapy the metaphor “body is a message” may be appropriate, then for art therapy, in my opinion, the metaphor “body as a messenger” (“body as a messenger, intermediary”) is quite suitable. Indeed, art therapy (or, as it is now more correctly called this type of activity, “creative expression therapy”) often uses the body as an intermediary between internal processes (or, more precisely, unconscious processes, the unconscious) and those who can perceive. This could be a spectator, a witness, or the person himself as an observer. Art in any of its manifestations seems to bring to the surface, make visible, observable and tangible some inner content. And in this sense, any “products” obtained during the artistic process can provide rich ground for thought, so to speak, they supply “material for work” no worse than the classical method of free association for psychoanalysis.

“Release your hand and draw”, “let go your body and move”, “let go your hand and write”, “let go your body and let it act or speak”… - all of these sentences used in the art therapy process use the body as a guide. The body becomes a means of expression.

But the point is not only that the body during the process can provide a fair amount of material for analysis, interpretation and comprehension. And it is not only the catharsis and affect possible in the process of bodily self-expression that have healing potential. The most curious thing that can happen in such a process is a change, transformation of the original impulse and experience. To put it very roughly: from negative to positive. To be more precise, this could be a transition from despair to joy, a way out of a dead end to liberation, a transition from powerlessness to confident activity, etc. If we use the “energy model” to explain such phenomena, then we can perhaps talk about that through the movement of the body (no matter in dance, drawing, vocalization or stage embodiment) experience, psychic energy, previously locked somewhere, receives not only a channel for expression, manifestation, breakthrough into affect, but also a form in which it can be transformed, a process by which it can change.

This phenomenon allows art therapy to work with “closed requests” (when the client does not want to report a problem or cannot formulate it). I don’t know what the problem is or I don’t want to talk about it, but by releasing my body into action (dancing, drawing, writing, performing, making sound), I allow “my healthy forces”, my active imagination, to find a solution to the problem themselves. It’s as if through activity, bodily activity, developing and transforming it, I find the “right” way that heals the body.

On the one hand, in this regard, art therapy has many similarities, for example, with modern culture, in which the body, bodily actions themselves are a manifesto. On the other hand, it is deeply rooted in ritual practices. Transformative ritual movements (for example, dervish dances), modern movement practices (for example, “5 rhythms” by Gabriella Roth) contain this mediating and transformative potential. Gabriella Roth's first book is even called Sweat Your Prayers.

In fact, the choice of art therapy as an example of the idea of ​​“the body as a mediator” is rather arbitrary. Many practices (therapeutic, artistic, and developmental) use this idea of ​​the body. The same psychosomatics that I mentioned in the previous part is inclined, among other things, to consider a bodily symptom as a sign. That is, the point may be not only that energy, not finding a “healthy” expression, forms reactions of the body that are dangerous to health, but also that through a bodily symptom the unconscious can “speak” to the person himself or to others, communicating some important information that cannot be conveyed in any other way.

“Conversation with the body”, “expression through movement” is used in many areas of psychotherapy: in psychosynthesis by Roberto Assagioli, in Gestalt therapy, in procedural transpersonal approaches. The transformative potential of unconscious movement is also used in Peter Lewin's somatic trauma therapy and some techniques in body-oriented therapy. And also in dance and movement therapy and, oddly enough, in the behavioral approach. In a sense, the method of systematic desensitization used in working with phobias involves permanent and, to some extent, creative changes in the body's response to a threatening stimulus.

In addition, using movement as a metaphor for some difficulty in life, you can, by changing the movement or finding a more suitable one, suddenly easily resolve the problem itself (I have observed this effect in my work more than once). There is something magical about this: the problem seems to be solved by itself.

In addition to psychotherapy, one can find the embodiment of the “body as mediator” paradigm in contemporary performance art. Although the history of artistic performances goes back about 100 years (the first public performances of artists of the twentieth century, where the element of processuality inherent in visual plastic art began to actively manifest itself, date back to the era of the historical avant-garde of the beginning of the century, or more precisely to the experiences of futurism and dada) , only starting from the 1960s–70s, it was the physical that became an important subject of study by the artist and provoking the public. The artist explores his own physicality and invites the viewer to witness this exploration and join in through the exploration of his own bodily response. In this process, the body acquires its own voice, not just describing what is happening at this moment with the soul, but materializing this message. In a performance, the content is not told - it is self-presented. A certain message (text or action) becomes not just a statement about something, but a demonstration of what this message says. The performances of Marina Abramovich, Yves Klein, Hermann Nitsch, Ulay are a vivid embodiment of this idea.

Another very striking example of the paradigm is Butoh dance, modern Japanese plastic art. If anyone wanted to see what the naked soul looks like in a variety of experiences, he would do well to look at butoh. Although butoh is a dance with all the attributes inherent in dance (technique, choreography, traditions), it is in a sense “anti-aesthetic”; it is built on the bodily experience of internal states that are initially ambiguous and contradictory. One of the fruitful ideas contained in butoh was the redefinition of dance from a simple art of movement to the manifestation of a sense of the essence of one’s own body.

The idea of ​​the body as a conductor, as a channel or intermediary more actively connects the physical and mental (soul or mind), strengthens this connection, creates various forms for it and brings it to the forefront. The body in this paradigm acquires even greater weight and significance. The very idea that “the body can speak” (akin to the title of Alexander Girshon’s book “Stories Told by the Body”) emphasizes the possibility of the subjectivity of the body and the significance of this aspect of the body. This point of view is close to people who are not alien to art and psychology, but (at least in terms of aesthetics) encounters strong resistance and misunderstanding of “ordinary people.”

Integral view of the body (body as a conscious subject)

Today there is another paradigm of physicality, which is gaining increasing momentum and distribution. It is worth saying that in trying to describe it, I am entering the slippery path of unclear definitions and a reality that is still just becoming. In a sense, trying to capture the essence of this paradigm in words is somewhat similar to trying to capture this sensation of a “conscious body” — easier to feel than to express in words.

It is perhaps important to clarify that in this case the use of the word “integral” is not directly related to the ideas of Ken Wilber and his integral concept of everything.

Ideas about the body and corporeality naturally changed along with the change of leading paradigms in culture. An essentially mechanistic concept of medicine and sports, trying to clarify, overcome this mechanism, a kind of “early modern” concept of Reich and Lowen, a typical “modern” concept of art therapy... In this logic
“integrality” should probably be attributed to “postmodernism”, especially since the idea of ​​“body”, “corporality” is one of the key concepts of postmodernism. The metaphor of the body is actively used in relation to any kind of “text” (Roland Barthes), society (Gilles Deleuze). “Corporality” becomes a designation of vitality, vitality, primordiality and, at the same time, structure.

When ideas are scattered in the air, when they are purposefully or spontaneously implemented in everyday practices in the form of trends, they cannot but influence the development of certain areas of activity and ideas.

The ideas of an integral view of the body, it seems to me, are largely the result of everything that has happened over the last 30–40 years. This is the notorious “sexual revolution”, and experiments with drugs, trying not only to “expand consciousness”, but also to overcome the limitations of the experience of everyday bodily sensations. It is no coincidence that almost all bodily practices that initially arose within specific functional areas — training dancers, body development, rehabilitation, etc. — now emphasize that their purpose and benefits are not so much applied and practical as integral (“to treat not only the body, but and soul”; developing “a deeper level of understanding of the full use of the body as a whole”). Even though they are not formally psychotherapy, they all use bodily awareness as a way to integrate and develop experience, as a way of living and feeling one’s own vitality.

A significant problem faced by almost all authors and practitioners discussing the integral approach to the body is the lack of a descriptive language. The reality of integral bodily practices is addressed not only and not so much to the functional benefits of these practices for physical health and psyche (although this benefit is obvious), but rather to rather subtle bodily sensations. On the one hand, these practices are associated with the development of the sensation of one’s body (the development of the proprioceptive sense), and on the other hand, the ongoing, procedural nature of these sensations turns out to be fundamental. It is precisely this bodily present continuous that does not yet lend itself to a clear description.

However, there are some common points that unite different approaches, methods and schools that one can try to describe.

The most important thing is the fundamental unity of the physical and mental. In the most general sense, we are talking about the original continuity, coherence of the physical (in its most diverse manifestations) and the mental (also in its most diverse manifestations). The very word “integral” emphasizes not that the body and psyche are connected in some way (and we analyze or correct this connection), but that they are one. This fine line between connection and inextricable coexistence is conveyed in practice through the sensations and experience of bodily living of the current moment in time, but is not yet captured in rational (non-poetic) language. To denote this unity, the integral approach managed to develop a general term, which, alas, cannot be adequately translated into Russian - bodymind. That's it, in one word.

Another common theme across all integral approaches is the idea of ​​body consciousness/awareness/awareness. I used different forms not only because it is quite difficult to translate the term body awareness used in the approaches into Russian. For the integral approach, the result (awareness), the process (awareness), and the aspect of intellectual activity (consciousness) are equally important. We are talking about directing attention to the sensations of the body, focusing attention on proprioception and internal sensations of the body. It is valuable in itself, not in connection with subsequent functional benefits, but as a significant component of immediate existence.

There is one interesting detail here. Active use of the term body awareness itself seems to have begun with the work of Moshe Feldenkrais. And the word “somatics” as a modern designation for an approach and a group of methods based on an integral understanding of the human body was introduced by his student Thomas Hanna. Both authors traditionally belong to the field of body-oriented therapy (at least in the Russian tradition of this direction). Although, in fact, they became one of the first authors (both texts and practical approaches) to introduce this intonation of integrity into bodily practice.

Another important aspect that is significant for all approaches and practices in the integral paradigm is the idea of ​​a person as a moving being. In the integral approach, movement is necessary for the sensation of the body, but it is also an integral property of the human body. Actually, bodymind, the relationship between body and psyche, exists in the movement of the body and naturally manifests itself through it. If earlier greater importance was given to the functionality of movement (in the body-oriented approach) and its expressiveness (in art therapy), then in the “new” (integral) anatomy the body is not conceived without movement. Moreover, we are talking about both the movement of the body itself and the movement within the body (movement of fluids, transmission of movement through muscles and fascia, and similar phenomena).

Another interesting feature of the integral understanding of the body is the way in which different approaches discover and manifest the idea of ​​​​the unity of the bodymind. In order to overcome the dichotomy of body and psyche, one involuntarily has to change the boundaries of consideration.

This may be an appeal to evolutionary history and, accordingly, the discovery of evolutionary patterns of movement (Bartenieff Fundamentals) — the use and confirmation of the biogenetic law “ontogenesis repeats phylogeny.” This can be a movement “deeper” of the body and the study of proprioception and interoception of body systems (Body-Mind Centering). Another focus (or method) is to study the interaction between the bodymind and the environment. This is attention to spatio-temporal conditions, and to gravity, and to the geometry of space, developed in different practices; and theoretical studies of corporeality in relation to social or cultural landscapes and processes (Richard Shusterman's Somaesthetics, John Urry's tourism studies, and so on).

The main pathos of the modern integral paradigm of the body can perhaps be expressed quite simply: the body has much more significance than we are used to thinking.

The integral body approach does not (at least not yet) have an established language. In different directions, schools, and from different authors you can find the words “integral corporeality” (integral body), somatic approach, bodymind (or body-mind), embodiment. All of them are now synonymous to refer to this paradigm.

The integral approach to understanding the body is still quite young. In recent decades, it has actively developed as a practice, formed into schools and developed authoritative texts within the framework of these schools. However, to an outside observer he still seems strange, almost wild. Without a language and a “scientific” understanding of the mechanisms underlying these practices, it is quite difficult to explain what all these people are doing, making strange movements and carefully listening to something barely audible and imperceptible inside their bodies.

Fortunately, today neuroscience is coming to the aid of an integral approach to the body. While not always able to explain why and how exactly these phenomena work, scientific research (primarily using fMRI) demonstrates that “this actually happens.” The scientific works of John Kabbat-Zin (programs for working with stress, eating disorders and depression based on programs for the development of bodily awareness), Amy Cuddy’s experiments (the influence of the nature of the posture on the endocrine system), various instrumental studies of practicing Buddhist monks right in front of the respectable public - all this clearly demonstrates that the integral idea of ​​the body is not only messages from various spiritual teachers about the correct world order, but also a completely reliable fact of our existence.

The integral paradigm of physicality is natural in the changing conditions of the big world. After the mass wars of the twentieth century, the increasing relevance of environmental issues, the gradual revision of attitudes towards the themes of violence, freedom, etc., something inevitably had to begin to change in the idea of ​​the body. The integral approach increases sensitivity to weak signals from the environment and society, precisely because it sensitively listens to the sensations of the individual and collective body, catches weak signals and reactions, and is aware of them. It allows you to set a new dimension to the problems of urbanization and ecology, politics and healthcare, education and personal development. This paradigm manifests itself in completely understandable social practices: practices of legal regulation in areas related to the body (smoking, family and children, healthcare, etc.), insurance practices, logistics of traffic flows and urban navigation, food, military invasions, organization working conditions and much, much more).

Despite the complexity of logical understanding and the relative (for European culture) novelty of this paradigm, today it is surprisingly easily integrated into social practices. This is partly due to the wave of popularity of mindfulness practices (yoga, meditation, etc.): meditation today is practiced by entire work teams, from Google to the British Parliament. Another important reason, in my opinion, is a more general paradigm shift that has emerged in the twenty-first century, which is significantly changing ideas about what is possible and acceptable in politics, economics, and social practices. The integral paradigm of corporeality turns out to be simply one of the components of this larger modern concept of man and the world.

Comparative table of approaches to physicality

I will now try to bring together the paradigms of understanding the body that were discussed above.

The very identification of these paradigms is somewhat arbitrary. It is likely that any other researcher will be able to identify not four, but some other number of basic ideas, or will use a different basis for identifying paradigms. This is a subjective perspective that helps me both as a researcher and as a practitioner.

It is important that these paradigms, as ways of thinking about one’s body and about the body in general, exist simultaneously today. By analyzing our own thoughts on this matter, we can always detect the manifestation of any of these paradigms. And they may be different depending on the context or current situation. published

The human body is created with a large reserve of capabilities, but a person uses it very rarely, once or twice in his entire life, and sometimes this reserve may turn out to be completely unclaimed. Safety margin is a guarantee of our survival, biological protection, and is used only when it comes to life and death. In the face of mortal danger, when the threat to life is colossal and death seems inevitable, the human body can work miracles. There are many examples of this.

A child is under the wheel of a car, and his mother, in order to save her child, lifts the car as if the car had no weight.

An elderly man, when he was chased by an angry bull, literally jumped over a two-meter fence, although in his youth he was not an athlete.

The polar pilot was repairing his plane and suddenly saw a polar bear behind him, who lightly pushed the pilot on the shoulder with its paw, as if inviting him to look back. In the next fractions of a second, the pilot was already standing on the wing of the plane, located above the surface of the earth at a height of about two meters. Later, the pilot could not explain how he managed to do this.

In St. Petersburg, a two-year-old child fell out of a 7th floor window; his mother barely managed to grab her child with one hand; with her other hand she held onto the brick of the cornice. Moreover, she did not hold it with her whole hand, but only with her index and middle fingers, but with a “death grip.” When the woman was removed, her rescuers, with great effort, barely unclenched her fingers. Then they spent several more hours calming down and persuading the woman to let go of her child’s hand.

There is a known case when, during a flight, a bolt got under the pedal in the cockpit of an airplane and the control jammed. To save his life and the car, the pilot pressed the pedal so hard that he cut off the bolt like a blade of grass.

The newspaper Nedelya published an interview with pilot I.M. Chisov, whose plane was shot down by a Messerschmitt in January 1942 over Vyazma. “...the plane began to fall belly up. I had to leave the car. The astro hatch, through which you can get out, turned out to be below my head (and I myself was upside down). Well, the altitude began to take its toll: the hoses leading to the oxygen devices were broken. And the hatch cover latch got jammed! If they had told me before that the astro hatch could be knocked out with a punch, I would never have believed it; but I discovered it in exactly this way (I still don’t understand how I did it), - said I.M. Chisov.

There was a fire in the house, and the old woman, “God’s dandelion,” saving her lifelong possessions, dragged a huge chest from the second floor of the burning house. After the fire, two young, healthy guys hardly carried this chest to its original place.

In 1997, two fairly tipsy Belarusians climbed into an enclosure with bison in Belovezhskaya Pushcha; they wanted to pet the bison. Either she didn’t like the smell of alcohol, or she wasn’t in the mood for a lyrical wave, she didn’t accept the tenderness of her fans. Literally after a few minutes of their acquaintance, one of them was sitting on the fence, and the second, less agile, was slightly touched by a horn. The drunkenness passed instantly, the only hope was for my feet. He found himself on the other side of the three-meter fence in the blink of an eye. Since there were no witnesses to their record, the super-fast running and jumping over an obstacle were not included in the Guinness Book of Records.

In 1998, the newspaper “Arguments and Facts” told readers about such a case that happened to a carpenter from the taiga village of Bazhenovka (Kemerovo region). A carpenter was walking through the taiga and came across a sleeping bear. His fear was so great that he grabbed a log lying nearby and ran with it as fast as he could to his home, three kilometers away. Only in the courtyard of the house did the carpenter throw down the log and catch his breath. Later, when he wanted to remove this log from the road, he could not even lift it. To this day, the carpenter cannot understand why he needed this log, because without it he could have run much faster.

There was an accident on a winter road that resulted in casualties. To save her injured 40-year-old son, a 70-year-old woman put him on her back and walked 13 km through deep snow with such a burden, never stopping or lowering her precious burden. When rescuers on a snowmobile made their way to the scene of the accident, following the woman’s footprints, all along the way they saw only the tracks of one pair of legs.

Body and physicality. Over the entire history of studying and understanding the phenomenon of the body, representatives of various scientific disciplines have accumulated enough material to become confident that corporeality is a subject deeply and thoroughly studied, read, and interpreted. However, this can only fully concern the natural science paradigm (anatomy, physiology, anthropology, biomechanics, sexology, hygiene, etc.). The body as a material substrate, significant for the study and understanding of mental processes, the development of human consciousness, is increasingly being studied by psychosomatics and psychophysiology. V. Mukhina explains this interest by the fact that the real space in which our psyche unfolds and functions and our “I” is truly represented is the space of the human body.

Practical “work” with the body in the field of medicine, health technologies, etc. dates back thousands of years. In short, for the “natural sciences” the human body, for obvious reasons, is a subject of long-standing and close attention.

In addition to the use of the concept “body”, the concept of “corporality” has been widely used in recent years. In this regard, the question arises: are the body and physicality the same thing or are they different concepts? What is physicality as opposed to the body?

The analysis of corporeality, with a fairly complete overview and classification of various research approaches to the study of human corporeality, is presented in the works of modern domestic researchers I.M. Bykhovskaya (in the socio-cultural aspect) and V.L. Krutkina (1993) (in the ontological aspect). In this regard, I.M. Bykhovskaya believes that the term “corporality” does not mean the body that is natural in itself, but its transformation, an “acquired” state that arises not in return, but in addition to the natural one.

“Corporality” is a more or less cultivated body that has acquired, in addition to its original data, natural characteristics, those properties and modifications that are produced by the peculiarities of being a physical person in a specific socio-cultural context. That is physicality- these are new formations of the body, which from the first stages of human development and formation ensured survival through adaptation of the body to the natural, and then to the material artificial (technogenic and social) environment; it is the result of a socialization program deployed in historical terms)

One can agree with V.M. Rozin, who from the position of psychological science determines that physicality- not a biological organism, not what we recognize as our body, but a cultural, historical and semiotic phenomenon; a new formation caused by a new form of behavior, something without which this behavior could not take place, is the implementation of a certain cultural and semiotic scheme (concept), i.e. a certain body mode. a kind of text.

K. Heinemann (1980) physicality calls the “social structure” of the body. From his point of view, societies have made different things out of the body as a physical (biological) structure. Namely, the need to eat and drink, the ability to cry and laugh, the need to endure pain and illness remain constant. However, their biological background in different cultures is colored by different social shades. Our body always represents a “social structure” and is an expression of existing social conditions, how we perceive and control our physical self, how we use our body as an expressive means of expression, how we treat and control our body, how we use our body, we dispose of it and relate to it.

If we talk about the body as a social structure, he identifies four aspects: (“body technique”, “expressive movements of the body”, “ethos of the body” or attitude towards one’s own body, control of instincts and needs).

An analysis of the literature on issues of corporeality allows us to identify the external and internal components of corporeality.

External manifestations of physicality:

body shape;

body decoration (tattoo, feathers, costumes, etc.);

expressive body movements, i.e. body positions, gestures, facial expressions, etc.;

“body technique” (social norming of movements)

(methods of walking and running, rhythm of steps, movement of arms and legs, methods of basic motor actions).

bodily distance (proxemics).

Internal manifestations of physicality:

attitude towards one’s own body (acceptance - non-acceptance);

physical fitness and physical qualities;

condition of internal organs and systems;

control over the manifestation of biological programs (instincts and needs).

The difference between three spaces - natural, social and cultural - in which a person resides allows us to raise the question of the corresponding levels of existence, manifestation, and use of the human body. I.M. Bykhovskaya, in addition to the natural and social body (“social structure” according to K. Heisemann), also highlights cultural body

The “natural body” is understood as the biological body of an individual, subject to the laws of existence, functioning, and development of a living organism.

The “social body” is the result of the interaction of the natural body with the social environment: on the one hand, it is a manifestation of its objective, spontaneous influences that stimulate the reactive and adaptive “responses” of the body; on the other hand, it is derived from purposeful influences on it, from conscious adaptation to the goals of social functioning, a tool, and use in various types of activities.

By “cultural body” we mean the product of culturally consistent formation and use by a person of his bodily origin.

By cultural body we understand the physicality that is formed in an athlete, firefighter, rescuer, fashion model, actor, etc. in the process of conscious formation in the process of preparation for specialized activities.

In society, there is a phenomenon of transformation of the human body, which is studied by a number of humanities: philosophy, anthropology, sociology, psychology, etc. Comprehensive cultivation of the body in order to adapt a person for certain social functions has been carried out since ancient times. And human development in society has ceased to be a purely natural and spontaneously socialized process; it has become relatively manageable.

Formation of physicality. B.V. Markov 4] defines physicality as a special disciplined body, and the way of forming corporeality (disciplined bodies) is the creation of special disciplinary (disciplinary) spaces within which the previous system of incentives and reactions to new desires and aspirations is replaced. He includes such disciplinary spaces as: family, school, religion, medicine, art..., which in the form of various models and recommendations contribute to the formation of new body formations.

From the first stages of human development and formation, survival was ensured by adaptation of the body to the natural, and then to the material “artificial” (technogenic) and social environment. The body of a slave and a master, a knight and a priest, a scientist and a worker differ significantly from each other, and not so much externally as internally in the type of reactions, drives, ability of self-control and self-government. Games and dancing, coloring and tattooing, developing manners and gestures, control over effects - all this helps control the body, its needs and desires.

B.V. Markov identifies the “inner body” as a set of internal organic sensations, muscle tension, drives, desires, needs, experiences of fear, anger, delight, etc. and external: structure, appearance. The inner body is transformed in the process of repressing vital experiences and replacing them with ethical values. For the external body, aesthetic norms are significant... The formation of appearance, appearance and manners is carried out first on the basis of strict regulations, and then becomes a matter of taste and internal tact of an individual. In different historical periods the body was controlled in different ways. In traditional societies, power regulates the external body: uniform, clothing, mask, guise, posture, gestures, manners and ceremonies - all this strictly determines behavior and is a genuine document certifying social affiliation.... As social relations develop, control is transferred from external to internal... ..In modern society, it would seem that there are no strict prohibitions and canons regulating appearance, manners and canons regulating appearance, manners, clothing, etc. However, there are implicit communicative norms that organize both form and internal body affects. First, religion, and then fiction, through the art of verbal portraits and descriptions of emotional experiences, developed role models, according to which the appearance, manners, feelings, and experiences of people are organized.

In the course of history, various types of physicality are formed, and each social structure makes its contribution to the general civilizational process of control and management of the body. In modern civilization there is a particularly intensive process of production of new and exotic forms of physicality, which is radicalized by art, cinema, advertising, photography, and computer technology.

In recent years, body modification has attracted increased public interest as an extravagant new trend in modern fashion. In its most general form, body modifications are various forms and methods of modifying the body through damage to the skin (cutting, scarring, branding, piercing, tattooing, amputations and other surgical interventions), carried out voluntarily, independently or with the help of body modification specialists in order to achieve psychological benefits. , aesthetic, spiritual, ideological goals. The identified forms of body modification reflect the difficulties of social adaptation and coping with stressors and are a sign of problematic behavior with a high risk of developing self-destructive forms of behavior. Researchers come to the conclusion that the presence of body modifications correlates with alcohol and drug abuse, sexual relationships, violence and school problems (Polskaya N.A., 2007).

Man's mastery of his physicality occurs, first of all, at the everyday level through actions that are taken by him under the influence of intentions and desires associated with everyday life. This is a great variety of everyday movements of our microbehavior, forming the world of “ordinary culture”, the scope of which also includes the skills of hygiene, cosmetics, jewelry, hairdressing, perfumery, “hiding” and “revealing” the body in clothes with the help of changing fashion.

According to the degree of specialization, scientists distinguish two levels of culture - ordinary and specialized. Everyday culture is the possession of the customs of everyday life and the national environment in which a person lives, the sphere of general conceptual knowledge and generally available skills acquired through three sources: communication in a small group (family, peers, relatives); schooling and general education; mass media The process of mastering everyday culture is called in science general socialization and inculturation of the individual.

Traditional culture makes established demands on the body: the child must master the “correct” poses, posture, head position - everything that creates an ethnic, national type of physical representation of a person among other people. By the end of childhood, the child develops an idea body image as a member of a certain gender and a certain culture. Bodily appearance, posture and plasticity begin to play a fundamental role for gender identification in adolescence and youth. Becoming - the general physique, a person’s posture, demeanor, as well as plasticity - consistency, proportionality of movements and gestures, have cultural content.

In “everyday culture” there is awareness and comprehension of one’s own physicality, influencing it, managing it, making maximum use of its capabilities. A special area of ​​everyday culture that deals with human corporeality is medicine, or rather its valeological sections. Physical culture and sports also belong to the sphere of everyday culture. Their main functional purpose is to identify, develop, and improve a person’s bodily and motor abilities.

Physical culture as a space for the formation of physicality. Throughout the development of mankind, specialized sociocultural practices were created to transform the bodily and motor qualities of a person: the Athenian and Spartan systems of physical education; knightly system of military physical training; German, Swedish, Sokol gymnastics systems; yoga; Wushu; qigong, etc. At the end of the 19th century, the strengthening of cultural exchange between countries, the interpenetration of cultures, including physical education systems, the development of psychosocial directions in the physical education systems of industrial states and with a deepening understanding of the social and cultural functions of physical exercise to describe a wide range of problems led to the emergence of a generalizing term sociocultural practices existing at that time. The term “physical culture” has become such a term in a number of countries.

Without delving into theoretical disputes regarding the essence of physical culture, we will highlight the main approaches:

activity-based (V.M. Vydrin, L.P. Matveev, etc.)

value-based (V.K. Balsevich, L.I. Lubysheva, V.I. Stolyarov, etc.)

cultural studies (I.M. Bykhovskaya)

We are more impressed by the cultural approach, according to which physical culture is an area of ​​culture that regulates human activity (its direction, methods, results) associated with the formation, development and use of a person’s bodily and motor abilities in accordance with the norms accepted in the culture (subculture), values ​​and patterns.

This view incorporates both activity and value approaches.

From the position of the three-dimensional model of culture proposed by A. S. Karmin (2003), established sociocultural practices (components of physical culture) have a space formed by three planes: technological, social-value and cognitive-value. Technological(regulatory-cognitive) component of space is represented motor actions, rules for performing actions, the composition of permissible actions and methods of sports competition(sports technique and tactics), inventory, equipment, grounds and stadiums, uniforms.

Cognitive-value component is theory and training methods, i.e. knowledge that ensures the success of the athlete’s actions, terminology.

Social-value component is relationships, which develop between members of the same team, rivals, competition participants, judges and fans, fan associations (clubs of fans of teams or athletes), norms of behavior, slang.

A person immersed in such sociocultural space“absorbs”, masters and appropriates socio-cultural experience, i.e. the process of socialization occurs, including the formation of physicality.

V. Mukhina notes that in competitive games with rules, reflection, ability to physical and volitional imitation. It is during the competition process directly in close bodily mutual communication the child learns to reflect on others and on himself. He learns to “read” his intentions from the expressive poses, movements, and facial expressions of his peer, which is facilitated by the competitive situation itself; he learns the dialogue of gesture, facial expression and gaze; at the same time, he learns to “hide” his intentions, to hide his facial expressions and bodily expressive postures and movements. He gains the ability to hide his conditions and true intentions. A child's reflective experience in play and competitive environments advances him in terms of social and personal development.

Competitive games provide a range of opportunities for the development of a child's personality. In competition, children focus on the achievements of their peers. The desire to “be like everyone else” stimulates the child’s physical development and brings him up to the general average level. At the same time, by competing, the child also claims to become a winner. The desire to win stimulates the competitor. If successful, the child takes on the pose of a winner: shoulders turned, head held high. The face is rosy, the eyes are shining.

Competition also includes the possibility of failure in comparison with others. If unsuccessful, the child immediately breaks down - his posture expresses a dejected state: his shoulders are raised, his head is lowered, his gaze is sad, there are tears in his eyes. Unfulfilled aspirations for success in physical exercises and games can deprive the child of the desire to achieve: he may begin to refuse to participate in physical exercises and competitions.

Thus, it can be stated that physical culture is a sociocultural space in which the formation of a person’s physicality occurs, starting from childhood and especially intensively in adolescence and youth.