“We Think Because We Move !”
Not the other way around…
“We Think Because We Move !”
Not the other way around…
This title is the genesis of the approach that stems from the work of Bertrand Théraulaz and Ralph Hippolytes on individuation through motor skills preferences and their ActionTypes® approach.
We develop here why it is so fundamental to understand it.
To keep it simple, in terms of motor skills, mobility and coordination, we essentially use two modes of psychomotor organization, depending on whether or not the contexts or environment in which we live affect us.
One mode is natural to us and we use it most of the time as soon as the context is familiar, favorable or positive… This motor organization is beneficial to us in many ways and gives us energy.
The other mode is a complementary alternative to the first one; it complements it, or more precisely, it replaces it when we are faced with situations that are out of the ordinary, that surprise us, that stress us, that seem heavy or even negative. If we easily call upon this alternative system cerebrally, spontaneously and unconsciously, we have lost the capacity to physically lean on it, which induces a psychomotor incoherence that is the source of many inconveniences.It is our desire, or the need that we have developed on the basis of external injunctions (such as the technique in sports, social behaviors, fashions or education) which, by dint of being inoculated, that constrains us to call upon only one of our two psychomotor organizations and moreover only partially when we call upon the second one.
It is our desire, or the need that we have developed on the basis of external injunctions (such as the technique in sports, social behaviors, fashions or education) which, by dint of being inoculated, that constrains us to call upon only one of our two psychomotor organizations and moreover only partially when we call upon the second one. This is the cause of many of our clumsinesses, for example.
Perceiving and recognizing our motor preferences according to the context allows us to feel which of our motor organization modes is acting or reacting to the environment and the context in which we are living; it also allows us to identify the nature of this context, if it is energizing or if it costs us.
In terms of mobility and coordination, this lack of awareness explains many clumsinesses, even accidents :
- objects that are dropped,
- loss of balance,
- clumsy gestures or throws,
- delays in reaction,
- knocks,
- falls
- sprains
- cuts…
The difficulty is not so much to use one system rather than the other, but to feel how and when to benefit from one or the other and to avoid finding oneself straddling the two from a psychomotor point of view. This last eventuality generates at various levels a potential inconsistency in our psychomotor organization which results in a loss of influx with the above-mentioned consequences. We often succeed in coping with these inconveniences, sometimes less so…
This title is the genesis of the approach that stems from the work of Bertrand Théraulaz and Ralph Hippolytes on individuation through motor skills preferences and their ActionTypes® approach.
We develop here why it is so fundamental to understand it.
To keep it simple, in terms of motor skills, mobility and coordination, we essentially use two modes of psychomotor organization, depending on whether or not the contexts or environment in which we live affect us.
One mode is natural to us and we use it most of the time as soon as the context is familiar, favorable or positive… This motor organization is beneficial to us in many ways and gives us energy.
The other mode is a complementary alternative to the first one; it complements it, or more precisely, it replaces it when we are faced with situations that are out of the ordinary, that surprise us, that stress us, that seem heavy or even negative. If we easily call upon this alternative system cerebrally, spontaneously and unconsciously, we have lost the capacity to physically lean on it, which induces a psychomotor incoherence that is the source of many inconveniences.It is our desire, or the need that we have developed on the basis of external injunctions (such as the technique in sports, social behaviors, fashions or education) which, by dint of being inoculated, that constrains us to call upon only one of our two psychomotor organizations and moreover only partially when we call upon the second one.
It is our desire, or the need that we have developed on the basis of external injunctions (such as the technique in sports, social behaviors, fashions or education) which, by dint of being inoculated, that constrains us to call upon only one of our two psychomotor organizations and moreover only partially when we call upon the second one. This is the cause of many of our clumsinesses, for example.
Perceiving and recognizing our motor preferences according to the context allows us to feel which of our motor organization modes is acting or reacting to the environment and the context in which we are living; it also allows us to identify the nature of this context, if it is energizing or if it costs us.
In terms of mobility and coordination, this lack of awareness explains many clumsinesses, even accidents :
- objects that are dropped,
- loss of balance,
- clumsy gestures or throws,
- delays in reaction,
- knocks,
- falls
- sprains
- cuts…
The difficulty is not so much to use one system rather than the other, but to feel how and when to benefit from one or the other and to avoid finding oneself straddling the two from a psychomotor point of view. This last eventuality generates at various levels a potential inconsistency in our psychomotor organization which results in a loss of influx with the above-mentioned consequences. We often succeed in coping with these inconveniences, sometimes less so…
MOTOR SKILLS PREFERENCES and NEUROSCIENCES
BACK TO MENU TOP OF PAGE
Neuroscience and brain imaging have confirmed that, when faced with the same situation or context, we do not all prioritize the activation of the same brain areas. These priorities are associated with motor preferences that differ from one individual to another. These preferences are therefore specific to each individual (or group of individuals).
This way of working of our brain with the rest of our body belongs to us since we are hominins (6 million years ago…). This brain has only evolved since then, it has not been replaced by a different model or version. At that time, this brain was designed to allow our ancestors to move just as we still do today… with notoriously less vital stakes than at the time.
The evolution that we benefit from today was built on, around and in this same brain, without modifying its original structure. On the other hand, we have distanced ourselves from listening to our body and its functioning in the “animal”, sensory and instinctive sense of the terms.
It is therefore this same brain and the same neuro-cerebral organization that have allowed us to evolve and to function in terms of our motor skills and our coordination capacities, and also for relational, cognitive or emotional purposes, then as now. It is a global system, specific to each person, which must be understood for what it is.
Physically feeling which motor preferences are called upon according to the context allows us to better understand these contexts. Conversely, being aware of our own motor preferences allows us to anticipate and act proactively in predictable situations by respecting and relying on our intrinsic resources.
It is a precious help to better understand and apprehend our environment, our surroundings, our own reactions or feelings as well as those of others in aspects as diverse and varied as :
- tensions within a group
- induced stress
- relational ambiguities
- latent or open conflicts
- communication issues
- difficulties in cognitive understanding
- concentration issues
MOTOR SKILLS PREFERENCES and NEUROSCIENCES
BACK TO MENU TOP OF PAGE
Neuroscience and brain imaging have confirmed that, when faced with the same situation or context, we do not all prioritize the activation of the same brain areas. These priorities are associated with motor preferences that differ from one individual to another. These preferences are therefore specific to each individual (or group of individuals).
This way of working of our brain with the rest of our body belongs to us since we are hominins (6 million years ago…). This brain has only evolved since then, it has not been replaced by a different model or version. At that time, this brain was designed to allow our ancestors to move just as we still do today… with notoriously less vital stakes than at the time.
The evolution that we benefit from today was built on, around and in this same brain, without modifying its original structure. On the other hand, we have distanced ourselves from listening to our body and its functioning in the “animal”, sensory and instinctive sense of the terms.
It is therefore this same brain and the same neuro-cerebral organization that have allowed us to evolve and to function in terms of our motor skills and our coordination capacities, and also for relational, cognitive or emotional purposes, then as now. It is a global system, specific to each person, which must be understood for what it is.
Physically feeling which motor preferences are called upon according to the context allows us to better understand these contexts. Conversely, being aware of our own motor preferences allows us to anticipate and act proactively in predictable situations by respecting and relying on our intrinsic resources.
It is a precious help to better understand and apprehend our environment, our surroundings, our own reactions or feelings as well as those of others in aspects as diverse and varied as :
- tensions within a group
- induced stress
- relational ambiguities
- latent or open conflicts
- communication issues
- difficulties in cognitive understanding
- concentration issues
CONTEXTUALIZATION
BACK TO MENU TOP OF PAGE
To better perceive ourselves and to better feel how we adapt to contextual changes, however small, brings more understanding of both the environments in which we live and the people who make them up. It also allows us to distinguish between the context, the environment and the person. For example, it is too often desired to change or adapt people in the face of changing situations, whereas it is more important to adapt the environment to people so that they can express the best of themselves.
Our education, our society model pushes us to position ourselves in a binary way in relation to values. In doing so, we judge the difference, and therefore the person, rather than considering the person globally in a given context. This is a facility that we observe on a personal, individual or collective basis, therefore also in our interactions in the governance models that are being proposed to us, for example :
- at a social level, on the themes of inclusion or exclusion (think of the themes of emigration-immigration, gender or color issues…);
- at the political level on the radicalization of positions and proposed measures (think of the themes of representativeness, the exercise of power and the profile of those who exercise it, anticipation and prevention versus reactivity…);
- at the economic level on the theme of the distribution of wealth (think of the use of technologies and sciences…).
The result of these arbitrary and contradictory positions is a society that spends its time generating new problems and tries to solve them using slingshots. An example ? The ecology, the buzzword par excellence, its existence then its necessity is a concept invented to manage the consequences of actions carried out by a society model, model that is the cause… To impact on this cause, the human kind has not yet found neither the concept nor the word that goes with it. On the other hand, the recommended solution is to save the planet, a planet that has cosmic time to recover and that has survived much worse than the human beings mistakes. Expressing things in this way shows two things :
- Those who have thought, conceived and promoted this priority in this way show a depersonalized way of thinking and acting :
- To position the planet as a victim and the climate as responsible is a form of this.
- To act for the planet is a way to give oneself peace of mind without changing anything about what caused the planet to be in this state.
- As a consequence of the above one, this way of functioning illustrates, in this case as in so many others, a propensity, even an inclination, to consider the consequences as the causes, out of a spirit of ease.
These few examples show you the importance and influence of our psychomotor priorities in the social models we develop. Don’t misunderstand what I am saying; I am talking about qualities, but they are not expressed where they should be, where they have to be, I should say.
BACK TO MENU TOP OF PAGE
To better perceive ourselves and to better feel how we adapt to contextual changes, however small, brings more understanding of both the environments in which we live and the people who make them up. It also allows us to distinguish between the context, the environment and the person. For example, it is too often desired to change or adapt people in the face of changing situations, whereas it is more important to adapt the environment to people so that they can express the best of themselves.
Our education, our society model pushes us to position ourselves in a binary way in relation to values. In doing so, we judge the difference, and therefore the person, rather than considering the person globally in a given context. This is a facility that we observe on a personal, individual or collective basis, therefore also in our interactions in the governance models that are being proposed to us, for example :
- at a social level, on the themes of inclusion or exclusion (think of the themes of emigration-immigration, gender or color issues…);
- at the political level on the radicalization of positions and proposed measures (think of the themes of representativeness, the exercise of power and the profile of those who exercise it, anticipation and prevention versus reactivity…);
- at the economic level on the theme of the distribution of wealth (think of the use of technologies and sciences…).
The result of these arbitrary and contradictory positions is a society that spends its time generating new problems and tries to solve them using slingshots. An example ? The ecology, the buzzword par excellence, its existence then its necessity is a concept invented to manage the consequences of actions carried out by a society model, model that is the cause… To impact on this cause, the human kind has not yet found neither the concept nor the word that goes with it. On the other hand, the recommended solution is to save the planet, a planet that has cosmic time to recover and that has survived much worse than the human beings mistakes. Expressing things in this way shows two things :
- Those who have thought, conceived and promoted this priority in this way show a depersonalized way of thinking and acting :
- To position the planet as a victim and the climate as responsible is a form of this.
- To act for the planet is a way to give oneself peace of mind without changing anything about what caused the planet to be in this state.
- As a consequence of the above one, this way of functioning illustrates, in this case as in so many others, a propensity, even an inclination, to consider the consequences as the causes, out of a spirit of ease.
These few examples show you the importance and influence of our psychomotor priorities in the social models we develop. Don’t misunderstand what I am saying; I am talking about qualities, but they are not expressed where they should be, where they have to be, I should say.
BACK TO MENU TOP OF PAGE
The esSENSiel does not dissociate the physical from the cerebral; it relies on one (the physical) to better perceive the other, because one and the other work together globally all the time; they are inseparable and unique for each individual.
Compared to any other approach to work on oneself, here :
- it is not about overthinking;
- it is not about subjectivity,
- it is not about ready-made conclusions;
- it is not about questionnaires
It is a question of (re)discovering yourself through playful contradictory exercises of balance, reaction, vision and concentration which are evaluated kinesiologically and put into perspective according to the Jungian typology. It is by paying attention to the adaptation of your own motor skills in your personal or professional life, in your sports or other activities that the answers to the question will appear :
- should I be involved or not in a given context;
- is this effort or result relevant to me ?
This is a “simplex” approach : approaching a very complex subject in a simple way without hiding its complexity.
B. Théraulaz
I would like to thank Bertrand Théraulaz and Ralph Hippolyte, co-founders of the ActionTypes® approach, for their immeasurable contribution, without which the esSENSiel approach could not have emerged.
BACK TO MENU TOP OF PAGE
The esSENSiel does not dissociate the physical from the cerebral; it relies on one (the physical) to better perceive the other, because one and the other work together globally all the time; they are inseparable and unique for each individual.
Compared to any other approach to work on oneself, here :
- it is not about overthinking;
- it is not about subjectivity,
- it is not about ready-made conclusions;
- it is not about questionnaires
It is a question of (re)discovering yourself through playful contradictory exercises of balance, reaction, vision and concentration which are evaluated kinesiologically and put into perspective according to the Jungian typology. It is by paying attention to the adaptation of your own motor skills in your personal or professional life, in your sports or other activities that the answers to the question will appear :
- should I be involved or not in a given context;
- is this effort or result relevant to me ?
This is a “simplex” approach : approaching a very complex subject in a simple way without hiding its complexity.
B. Théraulaz
I would like to thank Bertrand Théraulaz and Ralph Hippolyte, co-founders of the ActionTypes® approach, for their immeasurable contribution, without which the esSENSiel approach could not have emerged.
Recent Comments