Interesting clip on alignment 
I’m uncertain whether the definition of alignment or aligned is being used in the same way it is used when applied to asana. That having been said …
The method or perspective of a particular training has to suit its intention. What is appropriate for Jeet Kune Do may not at all be appropriate for Pilates, what is appropriate for functional strength training may not be appropriate for Nia.
Alignment in asana is not intended to allow a person to be aligned at every moment in their living - though a result of an alignment-based practice may be a greater propensity to be aligned on a daily basis. Rather it is to maximize a flow in the body, enhance the prospects of self-discovery as a result, create a sound structure (in much the same way a building has alignment), and facilitate these things in as safe AND effective a way as possible.
So for his work, whatever that might be, his principles are likely very sound and completely appropriate. To draw any parallels to asana would, pardon my pun, be a stretch.
[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;83564]The method or perspective of a particular training has to suit its intention. What is appropriate for Jeet Kune Do may not at all be appropriate for Pilates, what is appropriate for functional strength training may not be appropriate for Nia. [/QUOTE]
As I understand that’s his point - a situation in which things appropriate for “Jeet Kune Do person” are not appropriate for “Pilates person” is an unhealthy situation and should not be accepted but worked on. One would think that well developed and balanced body could do any type of movement/exercise without great risk and difficulty. And that avoidance of specific areas of body position/movement is actually harming the body.
[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;83564]Alignment in asana is not intended to allow a person to be aligned at every moment in their living - though a result of an alignment-based practice may be a greater propensity to be aligned on a daily basis. Rather it is to maximize a flow in the body, enhance the prospects of self-discovery as a result, create a sound structure (in much the same way a building has alignment), and facilitate these things in as safe AND effective a way as possible.[/QUOTE]
Actually I realized I don’t know much about history and function of alignment. I always thought it was for to minimize risk of injury while taking people into beneficial poses (for them). But now I’m not sure…
I remember once on yoga retreat we were watching old documentary on BKS Iyengar. I noticed that during demonstrations, Iyengar did several asanas with clearly improper alignment by standards taught during this retreat I asked the teacher why is that. He said smiling that Iyengar didn’t know yet it wasn’t proper alignment (and also, I assume Iyengar was demonstrating asanas in a way he was taught by his teacher).
If you could share some insight into specific function of alignment in asana I would be grateful. And whether you think experienced person should continue doing asanas the same way or modify position of body segments/joints ect.
One would think that well developed and balanced body could do any type of movement/exercise without great risk and difficulty. And that avoidance of specific areas of body position/movement is actually harming the body.
I don’t think this is a conclusion I’d arrive at. And this is why I added context. What my personal trainer thinks I should be able to do (as a well developed and balanced body) is not at all the same as what my modern dance teacher thinks I should be capable of. So the larger question begged by your post is “what exactly comprises the “list” of things one should be able to do in order to fit the definition of developed and balanced?”.
It isn’t even remotely possible that the construction of the human knee is designed to do what the human hip is designed for. To state that I should be able to stand on the sides of my ankles in order to be “balanced and well developed” seems asinine (to me). The knee has limitations and to me those are to be respected. The hip has fewer limitations (as joints go) and the shoulder fewer still. So it follows that what you can do with the knee is less than the hip which is less than the shoulder. This is by design of the complexity of the joint.
And I’ve actually already answered your question about the purpose of alignment in asana. Third paragraph, second sentence.
Further … asana is never done the “same way” by any seasoned practitioner that has been well taught. It is different every time the pose is approached. This is why it is never perfected and never over. It’s not an accomplishment. It’s an experience. The point of yoga is an opposite to living AND both are always changing. When people stopped being active in their living they had to be more active in their practice. When people began sitting more they needed more opening in the hip flexors. When people opted to use hand-held devices and keyboard there needed to be work to prevent carpal tunnel and arthritis in the hands.
I think the fellow in the video is very entertaining and if he’s a capoeira instructor his points are likely valid. But not a perfect fit for Yoga. Should we be examining our stuck areas and addressing them? Yes indeed. Should we be balancing on our nose just to say we did? I’m not so certain.
[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;83601]I don’t think this is a conclusion I’d arrive at. And this is why I added context. What my personal trainer thinks I should be able to do (as a well developed and balanced body) is not at all the same as what my modern dance teacher thinks I should be capable of. So the larger question begged by your post is “what exactly comprises the “list” of things one should be able to do in order to fit the definition of developed and balanced?”.[/QUOTE]
I didn’t pose such question - please do not reduce my approach to list of things. If I would pose a question it would rather be how should we balance the time and devotion to forms (such as asana) in which we feel comfortable, and time devoted to venturing beyond comfortable forms.
[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;83601]It isn’t even remotely possible that the construction of the human knee is designed to do what the human hip is designed for. To state that I should be able to stand on the sides of my ankles in order to be “balanced and well developed” seems asinine (to me). The knee has limitations and to me those are to be respected. The hip has fewer limitations (as joints go) and the shoulder fewer still. So it follows that what you can do with the knee is less than the hip which is less than the shoulder. This is by design of the complexity of the joint. [/QUOTE]
I think you may have missed more subtle and general meaning of this example with standing on the sides of ankles. It’s not a thing on the list that would make you “balanced and well developed”, but rather an example that poses out of our normal alignment that could normally cause injury, are dangerous because we do not work in those “out of comfort zones”. Quite obvious actually…
[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;83601]And I’ve actually already answered your question about the purpose of alignment in asana. Third paragraph, second sentence.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I noticed this paragraph but it was very general (you could apply this to many other disciplines, e.g. pilates). I’m looking for more specific functions of alignment in asana. But now I think you may be right with just general answer.
[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;83601]Further … asana is never done the “same way” by any seasoned practitioner that has been well taught. It is different every time the pose is approached. This is why it is never perfected and never over. It’s not an accomplishment. It’s an experience. The point of yoga is an opposite to living AND both are always changing. When people stopped being active in their living they had to be more active in their practice. When people began sitting more they needed more opening in the hip flexors. When people opted to use hand-held devices and keyboard there needed to be work to prevent carpal tunnel and arthritis in the hands.[/QUOTE]
Thanks, that’s interesting…
[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;83601]I think the fellow in the video is very entertaining and if he’s a capoeira instructor his points are likely valid. But not a perfect fit for Yoga. Should we be examining our stuck areas and addressing them? Yes indeed. Should we be balancing on our nose just to say we did? I’m not so certain.[/QUOTE]
I like when you are in “ridiculing mode” 
To extract a “begged question” is not to reduce the whole.
All asana is a venture beyond comfortable forms. Alignment isn’t present to provide comfort and the yoga sutras reference to comfort is misconstrued all to frequently, to the point we could label it as common. It is the mind which remains in a certain state (which we’re now calling “comfort” though that is not the only term AND may not be the best term) despite what the body is doing. Even when the muscles are sending constant signals to the brain that something needs attention the mind is not reactive. I’m outlining this to perhaps head off the “but the Yoga Sutras say …” retort - not from you exactly but universally
Your question about time and devotion to form is a good one. I may come back to that much later (in life) because it warrants more thought (for me).
I don’t believe I missed the subtleties, but I’m not exempt from doing so. Standing on the sides of the ankles make not be the best example but if it is then I’d say it is a) not something we “do”, b) perhaps something we’re not particularly designed to do, c) possible we can do it, d) also possible we can damage ligaments by forcing one’s on the lateral side of the foot to lengthen beyond their designed range. It is something we don’t do, it is something we may be able to do, but is it something we should be doing? If the latter answer is yes then I’d need something far more compelling as a rationale than the chap provides in his diatribe.
Only two of the four things I listed could apply to Pilates.
Who’s ridiculing? It’s not ridiculous at all. It’s just a different modality and intention. More power to him. Yoga is different.