In a world obsessed with proof and accuracy (to a degree) how to do we talk about the practices and traditions of yoga that have been passed down for hundreds or thousands of years when they have not yet been "proven?"
I ran into this concept while teaching on Monday in the park. As much as possible, I like to teach from accurate knowledge and teach my students where the information comes from. As I was teaching about some energetic and emotional properties I referenced the long standing tradition and belief of many different eastern practices, all of which I deem extremely valid and beneficial. My westernized brain slipped in the word 'pseudo-science' while referencing the anatomy because no western model has attatched energetic properties to specific organs. That statement sparked a discussion after class and some reflection on my part.
To be clear - I do not think that eastern energetic practices and long standing traditions are pseudo-science, I am concscious, however, of how they are percieved in a western medical model because I was raised in the US and our colonial education very rudely assumes that if we haven't invented it or proven it through our methods, it is probably false (or pseudo-science, or childish, or heathen, or barbaric). This is one mechanism used by colonizers to erase indigenous knowledge and traditions even if there are mountains of evidence later that support the tradition - by then if they have burried the practice deep enough they can reclaim the 'new information' as their own.
Sadly, western civilizations have been reclaiming ancient wisdom as new discoveries for hundreds of years. It is no different in the context of yoga practices and traditions - as I search the studies, reviews, and books published in the US I find so often appropriated terms used to describe yoga practices as if by giving it a new fancy-schmancy title they have invented the practice. Think of some more recent buzzwords in the health & wellness sphere: mindfulness, somatics, social-emotional learning, brain based movement, mobility. All of these techniques or practices have their roots in eastern traditions that have been called, at one time or another "pseudo-science."
The term pseudo-science is not wrongfully applied to yoga tradition and practice. It just really doesn't matter. Yoga, over the past couple thousands of years, has not concerned itself with passing the rules and/or guidelines of any one 'rigorous scientific method' to prove that it is beneficial. It has presented itself as a theory - which is the beginning of any scientific method - in which the individual practitioner puts to the proof in their own life. Case studies of one life, however, are not considered rigorous or broad enough. Becasue much of yoga practice is based on philosophy, it ultimately comes down to the individualized application of any technique as to how effective it is - which is why a 'rigorous scientific method' or large case study group may never prove the benefits of yoga. Yoga is meant to be practiced and applied to indiviuals, not mass produced as a 'one size fits all.'
To think that yoga is pseudo-science is okay, as long as we are careful not to be dismissive of the long standing traditions and their practitioners. If we feel attatched to the scientific method and peer-reviewed cross-referenced studies, then we will likely miss out on the benefits of ancient and indigenous practices that can be helpful. Remember that yoga is an experimental practice. What is more scientific than continuously running experiments?! In the science of yoga you become the scientiest and the subject such that your reporting of findings is biased but factually true for you. The proof is in your practice.
Comments