It seems necessary to appreciate the historical fact that various knowledge systems have had their genesis and basic evolution in specific cultural spaces in time and hence are bound to be different in their expression. The key to appreciating cultural plurality is an acceptance of the fact that cultures are guided by their own way of looking at the world and acquiring knowledge from it. Modern science as we know it today is a product of European culture. Thus modern western medicine cannot be viewed as the only valid form of health care.

In this context there is no need to describe Ayurveda as a complete ‘science’ to affirm its universality because ‘science’ by its very definition being based on reason and deduction is subject to change. What is science yesterday is not so today. Classic examples of changing concepts are found in every arena of both basic and applied sciences. Physics once saw the Universe as purely physical, now it is deduced as being pure energy. Modern drugs introduced into medical practice after much scientific experimentation are withdrawn in haste in the light of further ‘scientific proof’ of toxicity.

If one defined science as an ongoing methodological study of the world in order to discern knowledge, then it must inherently evolve and expand over time. The definition of science should continue to expand, beyond objectivity, towards phenomena that have not yet been explicitly defined or successfully examined by scientific inquiry. Ayurveda is thus science that has not yet been examined. There is an urgent need for modern medicine to move beyond the older ethos of scientific method, thus shifting towards pluralism, enlarging and expanding into a deeper perspective of disease and health.