[Xmca-l] Movements specific enough to the object (something) to pick up on the object's specificities

[Lplarry]

We have been exploring the relationship of the general and particular in identity processes.

Kym MacLaren, exploring the relationship of perception & movement as intertwining offered a phrase that caught my attention in this sentence.

“None of these movements are movements we think about and purposely set in motion. These movements are specific enough to the object to pick up on the object’s specificities..

The relation of *specific enough* and *specificities* within intertwining perception & moving  (living form  coming to *know*) pre-reflectively.


Example: Moving our hand too slowly over a coarsely textured surface or moving our hand too quickly over finely textured surface will fail to DISCERN the relevant *specificities* (textures)

Merleau Ponty asked the question,
“How is it then that my movements are so fitted to this object’s determinacies?.
M-P’s answer.
Our body (according to the body’s potentialities) is guided by indeterminate directives in the thing being perceived. They are *possible routes* offered by the indeterminate something to take up the something (*given* our human anatomy and bodily capacities.)


The determinate specific thing or object *is born* out of the bodily assumption (ambiguity, vagueness) of these *specific enough* indeterminacies/possibilities THROUGH intertwining perception & moving *prior* to becoming determinate specificities.

May be relevant to explorations of human/ness and human/ity.

Not sure if I supplied enough background or if too fragmented a posting.
The relation of movements being *specific enough* to discern *specificities/textures* of objects and persons.
Returns us to dialogical movements.

Sent from my Windows 10 phone