Dan, a while back you discovered my post in another one of my threads, you welcomed it, and said you would write back when you found the time.
In regards to this one. I get and agree with some of the main ideas you are stressing. I wondered what "fingers" had to do with it when you started and continued. I think you are referring to the way many people learn to play the scales by "learning" their fingering, and then remembering 123/1234 and things like that. What you seem to be saying is that if we get an internal map of the piano itself, our fingers will naturally just reach toward those keys in the same way that we reach for a light switch in a house we've lived in for years - either hand will do - we know where it is. At the end with the Db major scale, you show that if you had not learned the "proper fingering" you could still play that scale, but it might be awkward. One can extrapolate from this, that by trial and error a student would find the right fingering, because that's the one that would be comfortable.
I get and agree with that part. It took a while to catch what you are countering, because I first learned to play self-taught as a child. I have a problem with a kind of visual geometry, and the result is that I tend to use touch and my ears. Shutting my eyes wouldn't change anything.
That said,
I do have a problem with the dismissal of the physical or relegating it to an unimportant place. This is the same thing that I wrote about in my response in the other thread. To understand, you might have to start studying an instrument that you have never played before, which is fundamentally different so that you can truly put yourself in the shoes of an adult student.
I was self-taught on piano as a child, did not play it for 35 years, played other instruments self-taught (recorders, classical guitar), and then took my first ever lessons on violin. I had a good ear, could pre-hear what I wanted to play - no problem there. Late into the game I discovered that there is a physical training that is involved which turns things topsy turvy: merely trying to produce what you hear in your head does NOT necessarily give you the right motions. Yes, you can produce what you hear, but it can be such a contortion that it prevents other things.
Going back to piano after 35 years, I suspected that what I had learned to do while self-teaching probably had similar problems, and I was right. For example, I could hear a crisp sharp staccato, and I played it by tensing my forearm and poking - that's how it "felt" as a sound, and the result was right. A loud angry sound became a heavy forceful action. could I do a fast loud angry sound? No - because the tension alone prevented it. I had to learn a counter-intuitive thing: loose speed, a whip-like action, or maybe how the entire body is engaged, will give me that sound. My attention is VERY MUCH on the physical. And I feel very strongly about this, because in my first experience, it was all about the "internal world" you are talking about --- it locked me out of a world I needed. It's part of the equation. In fact, there are teachers who are so obsessive about "correct physical motion" that they tie their students up in another way. These teachers create a greater harm, in fact.
You say "The body follows the mind." In some ways yes, in other ways no! I learned that at times when you focus on the body and how it moves, adding what you hear, these two things teach the mind. This is especially important for adults, since we are already cerebral and abstract. Children experiment, and they are very physical and concrete. If you go way back you will discover that concepts of mathematics, principles of physics, all start with concrete abstract actions of the small child.
It is not that I am against what you are saying. I believe it is missing some dimensions which personally I find very important.
Topic: The Internal Piano