Spiritual_Wellness_Holistic_Health_and_the_Practic

The Holistic Philosophy 39
THE RELATION OF MIND TO BODY
Conceptualizations of the relation between mind and body fill the voluminous works
of philosophy and no less science. In his address to the mind - body problem, Smuts
presents holism not as a new fact but as a new framework within which to view the
facts. His philosophy integrates body and mind within the forward whole - making tendency
of creative evolution. Williams and Oberteuffer made clear their holistic perspective
that mind and body were integrated elements within the totality of the
individual.
There is consensus between Smuts and Williams about the relation of mind to
body. Smuts considered that the evolutionary phase of organism and mind became
integrated in the human being. According to Smuts, the integration of organic and psychic
elements was synthetic and that “ disembodied mind and disminded body are
impossible concepts, as either has meaning and function only in relation to the other ”
(p. 261).
Williams (1943) advocated the view that mind and body were integrated elements
within the unified whole of the human organism. His perspective was based on the scientific
premise of human organismic unity. According to Williams, “[The] body is
always and inevitably dependent upon what we call mind . . . [and] mind can only lead
what is available. ”
Both Smuts and Williams rejected the dualistic viewpoint which separated mind
from body and considered them independent entities. Williams warned physical educators
against the “ back - to - the body ” idea and the concept of physical fitness as an
entity. According to Williams (1942), when physical educators believe in mind/body
dualism, “ we tie our hands behind our backs and stand mute and dumb before all that
science says about organismic unity. ” He advocated that physical education could
never go back to education of the body because the dualistic implications were contrary
to the scientific facts about the human being considered as a whole. Williams
(1943) held the view that physical educators and health educators must accept mind
and body as unified within the whole of the human organism or “ erect a mystical concept
of body, separated and distinct from mind. ” Williams ’ perspective is consistent
with Smuts ’ holistic view that mind and body are not independent reals but instead are
integrated within the whole person. Smuts and Williams supported the pagan concept
of the body and opposed the Socratic and early Christian viewpoint. According to
Smuts (1926), the pagan view considered the body clean, wholesome, and the embodiment
of pleasure. He believed this was a natural and proper view (p. 265). Williams
(1935) writes that “ we need to revive, even at the risk of being called pagans, the
delights and integrations of . . . the whole individual. ” According to Smuts, the historic
error was the philosophical separation of mind from body which began during
the fall of Roman civilization and the introduction of Oriental superstitions. He
believed that the perversion of the body as evil had its influence upon “ the spirit of
Christianity . . . and instead of the body being regarded as ‘ the temple of the Holy
Spirit, ’ it came to be looked upon as a fitter tabernacle for the devil. ” According to