Knowing requires an embodied process : A classroom vs. Dojo

– Ravi Pradhan –

The Prevailing Superstition
There is a widespread belief among Nepali educational experts – and also globally – that memorisation-based knowledge and passing written tests lead to skills and competencies, despite scientific evidence to the contrary. This view assumes that teachers in schools and colleges are content experts, regardless of how outdated the content may be, and that they should not be questioned. Educational institutions, holding a monopoly on certification, perpetuate this outdated approach, even if it results in graduates who lack the skills, competence, and know-how needed for real-world work.

Likewise, in the corporate world in Nepal, this same belief is evident in hiring practices, which are mostly based on degrees and grades, and in training programmes, which focus primarily on information and theory, rather than skills and competencies. However, in practical fields such as IT, computer programming, piloting, and culinary arts, this model is different.

Mind-Body Duality and New Science
The Western theory of knowledge – on which our education system is based – is grounded in the outdated theory of separating the mind from the body and its situational context. Known as Cartesian duality, this concept underlies current science, including medicine and psychology, and forms the basis of the gene-centric theory of life and disease. This theory views genes as independent, selfish entities sufficient for life reproduction. Such views, as taught in medical schools and biology classes worldwide, have been challenged by scientists like Denis Noble in his book Understanding Living Systems.

My first exposure to the concept of ‘embodied cognition’ was in 1988 through neurobiologists Maturana and Varela (The Tree of Knowledge) and Fernando Flores’s training programmes. Later, from 1993–2003, I conducted ‘dojo’ training programmes in Nepal, emphasising a different learning model from typical government, donor, and INGO programmes.

Why a Dojo Method?
‘Dojo’ is a Japanese term for a hall or space to learn and practice martial arts or meditation. Any martial art, such as karate or taekwondo, involves a disciplined process of learning through ongoing practice, feedback, and improvement in a cycle. The learner must be eagre, open-minded, and unafraid of mistakes, while also open to feedback without ego.

Such embodied practices are largely absent in Nepal’s (and global) school and college systems, where memorisation of information is emphasised over understanding. Exam answers are often required to align with outdated texts, disregarding the latest science or evidence. Even though students now have access to up-to-date information, they cannot use it in exams or discussions. Tools like Generative AI give students unprecedented access to knowledge, akin to having an Einstein on their devices.

In essence, a dojo model goes beyond intellectual study and written tests, focusing on continuous practice, reflection, feedback, peer learning, and hands-on experience. In martial arts, for instance, advancing from a white to a black belt requires far more than just written tests – it requires actual skill practice. Similarly, one cannot learn meditation by obtaining a degree without any actual practice.

Some professional fields like cooking, programming, and piloting include embodied learning in their training. It’s worth noting that top tech companies globally now hire based on actual skills, sometimes without requiring a degree.

The dojo method also aligns with habit-building models recently proposed by western experts (e.g., Atomic Habits, Tiny Habits, The Power of Habit), which stress the embodied process of setting clear goals, finding mentors, taking incremental steps, receiving feedback, and recognising progress. Isn’t this how mastery is achieved in martial arts or meditation?

A Tragic Unfolding in Nepal
New neuroscience research shows that real cognition is naturally intertwined with bodily actions and emotions, which become ‘embodied’. Through new experiences – like field trips, travel, or skill training – we develop new neuronal networks and grow the brain. In 2015, the conference ‘The Science of Character’ in Boston concluded that thinking, emotions, and biological functions are deeply interconnected with learning.

In Nepal, however, it could take 15-20 years to shift toward an embodied learning process in education, despite the impact of Generative AI and breakthroughs in cognitive biology. Sadly, Nepali educators and foreign experts in donor agencies continue to overlook this new evidence and the opportunities Generative AI presents. Politicians lack the courage, wisdom, and skills to initiate such fundamental reforms, particularly in education.

As a result, I foresee an increasing number of young people seeking education and better opportunities abroad. Parents, regardless of income, will continue to invest in their children’s education to give them a chance at a better life, even if that means leaving Nepal.

(Ravi Pradhan is a management consultant. He has introduced many innovative programmes in Nepal)

Scroll to Top