Are We Looking At Evidence, Or Just Looking For Evidence?

I recently came across a short video from Ken Arrington that introduced two words I’d never encountered before: eisegesis v exegesis.

They’re terms from biblical scholarship, but the more I thought about them, the more I realised they describe something that happens all the time in vocal pedagogy.

Eisegesis, he says, is essentially this:

“Here’s what I already believe. Let me find evidence that supports it.”

Exegesis is the opposite:

“Here’s evidence. Let me find out what it means.”

And once you’ve heard that distinction, it’s difficult not to see it everywhere.

Particularly on social media.

Particularly in voice teaching.

Particularly in yourself.

The Seduction Of Being Right

Most of us like to think we’re objective.

We’re not, we’re human.

If I’ve spent ten years believing that a particular exercise works, I’m naturally pleased when I see it work.

If I’ve built a teaching career around a particular idea, I’m naturally drawn to examples that support it.

If I already have a strong opinion about breath, resonance, registration, tongue position, posture or vocal health, I can usually find a singer, a study, a famous performer or a student success story that appears to back me up.

The internet has made this easier than ever. Whatever your position, somebody somewhere is producing content that agrees with you.

The danger is that we can start mistaking evidence for proof.

Or worse, we can start mistaking agreement for evidence.

The Research Paper Game

One version of this appears whenever teachers talk about research.

A paper gets published. Somebody shares the finding.

Then two groups immediately emerge.

One group says, “This proves what I’ve been saying all along.”

The other says, “Well that research is flawed.”

Strangely, both groups often arrive at their conclusion before they’ve properly examined the study.

The study itself almost becomes irrelevant. What matters is whether it supports the position they already hold.

For example, research papers are often highly specific in their outcomes, context and participant profile, but it’s very easy for enthusiastic people to take them entirely out of their inbuilt, documented context.

I’ve seen this happen repeatedly throughout my career.

A piece of evidence is welcomed when it confirms existing beliefs and scrutinised when it doesn’t.

That’s not exegesis, that’s advocacy.

The Student Success Story Trap

Teachers do this with students as well.

A singer improves after six lessons. Excellent.

Why?

That’s the interesting question, but unfortunately, it’s often the question we don’t ask. Instead we decide the improvement happened because of the thing we already value.

The breathing work worked, the resonance work worked, the mindset coaching worked, the semi-occluded exercises worked, the bodywork worked.

Perhaps.

But how do we know?

Human beings are complicated. Learning is messy. Singing is messy.

Progress rarely comes from one thing. Yet we’re remarkably good at constructing stories that place our favourite intervention at the centre of the success.

Building Camps

Ken Arrington makes another point that resonated with me.

He says eisegesis defends the camp you’ve already created.

Voice teaching has plenty of camps. Sometimes they’re obvious. Sometimes they’re hidden.

We gather around approaches, methods, traditions, schools of thought and preferred explanations. That’s perfectly natural.

The problem comes when protecting the camp becomes more important than understanding the evidence. At that point, curiosity starts to disappear. Questions become uncomfortable. Alternative explanations become threatening. People stop investigating and start defending.

I’ve become increasingly convinced that this is one of the biggest obstacles to progress in vocal pedagogy.

Not a lack of information.

A lack of curiosity.

How Gillyanne And I Handle Evidence

One of the things Gillyanne and I have worked hard to avoid over the years is deciding the answer before we’ve looked at the evidence.

That doesn’t mean we always get it right. Far from it.

It means we’re willing to change our minds.

Some of the things we taught thirty years ago we would now explain differently.

Some of the things we once felt confident about have become more nuanced.

Some ideas have become stronger because the evidence supporting them has become stronger.

The goal isn’t to be right forever. The goal is to keep getting closer to what’s true.

Those are very different objectives.

A Useful Question

The next time you find yourself agreeing strongly with a claim about singing, it might be worth pausing for a moment.

Not to ask whether it’s right. Not even to ask whether it’s wrong.

Just to ask:

Am I looking at evidence to discover what it is?

Or am I looking for evidence to discover what it can do?

They’re surprisingly different activities.

And one of them is much more likely to teach us something.

Eisegesis v Exegesis – which camp are you in?

 

PS If you’ve got questions about singing, teaching or vocal technique, just hit reply and send them over.

Or for a more personalised and private conversation, book a 45 minute “terminology translation session” with me or with Gillyanne