the concept of 'fit'

   In the process of exploring the city, I learned a lot about the nature of the fitness business. It seems that the bigger the gyms are, the more compelling it is for the employees to give the customers the very best of  their time and attention. On the other hand, smaller gyms tend to be less 'hands on' and more inclined to leave people to learn on their own, either through a website or a brochure.
    No matter what the situation is, cause and conditions prevail. With more income comes a greater demand for any business to expand to accommodate new customers. That's certainly when the nature of the business changes into something more 'corporate'. I do wonder whether it's always necessarily good to go 'big'. It seems that there is room for everyone in this kind of business. While some customers prefer a quieter place to do their own exercise, others prefer the attention of a trainer. I think that there needs to be room for both the smaller/mid sized gyms and the larger gyms, just as there need to be room to accommodate different bodies and individuals.
       One of the themes that Aldous Huxley explores in his chapter on "Religion and Temperament" in The Perennial Philosophy is this idea that one size does not 'fit all' in spiritual practices. One example he uses is the parable of Martha and Mary in the New Testament. While Martha embodies salvation through work, Mary embodies salvation through contemplative practice. While interpretations of the Bible tend to suggest that Mary's way is favored over Martha's, Huxley points out that there isn't a single 'right way', and it really depends on the person and her needs. Huxley also advocates a sense of balance when it comes to one or more temperaments predominating in a religious movement. Hence he remarks, "In the course of history it has often happened that one or other of the imperfect religions has been taken too seriously and regarded as good and true in itself, instead of as a means to the ultimate end of all religions." (p.155). Now, it isn't clear what the ultimate end of all religions is, but I think that Huxley's point is that it is ideal to strike a balance between different ways of seeing and relating to the world, as a corrective to extremes. This is also something I learned regarding the Middle Path.
     The concept of "fit" gets problematized, when one considers how quickly things change. One may say that she or he has a specific body type, but that is bound to change over time. Someone may say they are not familiar with a certain language  or way of being, but then further interaction with it will change our own view of those things. In other words, there is nothing that stays the same in the course of learning from others or being in new environments.
    Many of the ideas of 'fitness' that Huxley explores in his book seem quite dated, even though they were fashionable ideas at the time he was writing. One such idea is that body type is a precursor to personality (the 'endomorph', 'somatomorph', 'ectomorph' theory). I don't hear too much of this theory nowadays. I doubt that there can be any model to summarize why people are as they are. Like any theory about 'fitness', categorizing bodies into types of being or personality has a potential to stereotype and to discriminate. At best, these kinds of typologies might attune people to diversity of ways of being.

Huxley, Aldous (1990), Perennial Philosophy. New York: Harper Collins