[contradistinct]

I disagree. If it's not empirical, it doesn't count. There are millions of people with ideas, but ideas aren't good enough. Prove your idea is true, then we'll talk about deserving credit.

Exception: mathematical ideas which are difficult to come up with.

[mkrazzledazzle]

How is it fair to pick up/completely ignore published experiential observations, in continued practice for millennia from another culture elsewhere in the world, conduct a/b tests and publish results without credit? I'm pretty sure the western world is going to continue swindling wellness techniques/practices from ancient texts, quickly run half-baked experiments, cherry pick data to suit a result and "publish" findings.

When these techniques were in development, in the golden era for spirituality, most of the rest of the world were still hunter-gatherers. Empirical rigor was just not a thing.

It's a question of providing due credit for those who developed and practice these techniques as a way of life. If not share some of the capitalistic spoils in the billions from delivering stress relief(meditation based content) through shiny, addictive apps (Yes, meditation apps can be addictive! Surprise! i.e, Headspace, Calm), At least provide credit where it's due.