The Conceptual Lens

Ontology, cosmology, epistemology, ethical biome: get ready for the big Greek words. In this episode, we unpack what we call our conceptual lens, a layered model we use to make sense of our own work. But we are not only geeking out, or showing off our academic credentials. We are also talking about dreams, care work, grieving, and connecting to the land. This is the fifth episode in a six-part series with World Ethic Forum co-leads Luea Ritter and Anaïs Sägesser, on cultivating a culture of care and kinship.

Show notes 

• Paper: Inquiry into the Prerequisites for Co-creating a Culture of Care and Kinship https://rsdsymposium.org/world-ethic-forum/
• Blogpost: What Happens at a Firekeeper Gathering https://www.worldethicforum.com/what-happens-at-a-firekeeper-gathering/
• Blogpost: Understanding wider ways of knowing https://www.worldethicforum.com/understanding-wider-ways-of-knowing/
• Blogpost: Collective Practices and Collective Capacities https://www.worldethicforum.com/collective-practices-and-capacities-for-radically-shared-aliveness/
• Donella Meadows: https://donellameadows.org/ 
• Presencing Institute https://www.presencing.org/ 
• Arne Naess (Deep Ecology): https://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/download/44/39/102

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Speaker 0:00

Ontology, cosmology, epistemology, ethical biome, get ready for the big Greek words. Today, Luea, Anais and I unpack what we call our conceptual lens. It's a layered model that we use to understand our own work. But don't worry, we're not only geeking out or showing off our academic credentials, we're also talking about dreams and care work and grieving and connecting to the land and all the practices that make up a culture of care and kinship.

Speaker 0:38

Hello! You're listening to the World Ethic Forum podcast. I'm Julien and I'm your host today. This podcast is exploring what we call a culture of care and kinship. It's a way of being in the world where humans feel and act as part of the web of life. We're not offering chewed up and pre-digested wisdom. Instead, we're sharing with you what a live inquiry into radically shared aliveness might feel like. Fair warning: some of what you will hear might feel strange or inconclusive. That's all by design. We're here to loosen something in ourselves and maybe between us. Because then maybe something else can emerge. New types of relationships, new questions, and new directions.

Speaker 1:37

Hi Luea. Hi Anais. Great to be back with you again today. So today we're talking about the conceptual lens that you articulated in one of the papers that you published. And sort of a model that you created to look at the various layers through which we can understand the relational work that is done by the World Ethic Forum. And I'd love to invite you to maybe tell us more about this conceptual lens, both what it is and how it came about, how why you felt that it was important to develop something of that nature for the work that's being done by the World Ethic Forum.

Speaker 1 2:17

Thank you, Julien, and really nice to be back again. Thank you for this question. And this I think is a moment of actually storytelling because it's not something that we were like um making up. It was more the conceptual lens, if I remember right, and Anais is here. I think we're co-creating backwards. We talked from the very beginning about this culture of care and kinship that radically share the liveness. And we had, as also highlighted in the other podcasts, different layers of the work and different, let's say, design um choices we made. That it's seven years, that it's inquiry-based, that there is a fire keeper circle that is fire keeping as practicing, that it is accompanied by a participatory action research process, etc. And I think it was in 2023, if I remember right, or towards the end, early 24, we were like, yeah, but how is that soil that culture of care? And we often also spoke about the ethical biome, how is that layered? What are the different by way of speaking, ingredients and um spheres or or parts that that constitute that layer? And what is there for important for us to really be explicit about? We often talked about the importance and the focus of the World Ethic Forum on building collective practices and capacities towards and for embodying, for practicing that culture of care and kinship. So that it's really also applied.

Speaker 2 5:01

So it's really at an ontological layer. And there we kind of were very clear that everyone who comes together comes together around this ontology of a radically shared aliveness, where we see that mountains are alive, that rivers are alive, all the animals, all the plants, all the humans as animals as well. So we see really this entire you know ecosystem of being or this ethical biome, uh, whatever metaphor we take there. But this is kind of um a common a common ground that we stand on.

Speaker 1 5:50

And it was highly also informed. I mean, I would say of Anais and I, we have a kind of natural resonance with aspects of system thinking, especially the work of Daniella Meadows with with the iceberg, but also then her latest work around dancing with systems. And inspired of and theory you the presencing institute, many people speak about that that what is visible at the surface, and you know, we can currently call it polycrisis. There is below that these kinds of some people call it metacrisis or diverse divides that are there, the ecological divide, the social divide, the spiritual divide. So they're different schools of thoughts, they all kind of name similar aspects. And for us, it was really important. So then if we have that aspiration and that you know daring inquiry of how to and live in and and and give shape to a culture of care and kinship, rising out of you know the current paradigm, however we want to call it, then what constitutes and what is inherently important to give give more um expression to what Anais just said about this relational part, so that we even can kind of by way of speaking, not as an external observer, track but kind of be very honest and and and and real to ourselves. How much of that what we aspire to are we actually already help shift? And what are the different layers almost like a form of archaeology excavating? What are the different layers that need to go together? Because it's not just one layer and then we have the fix and the solution for all, it is a highly delicate, interwoven fabric of layers upon layers upon layers that inform each other. Where the World Ethic Forum says this is this is what we see as potential, and our intervention point by way of speaking is then this what we call collective practices and capacities in order to help a culture of care and kinship become tangible in its actions and outcomes at the surface.

Speaker 2 8:41

And so when we kind of build up this layered model, we were informed by all of uh what Luea has already been speaking to, and also kind of conceptually speaking, you know, by a tree of science where you would say, what is the ontology, what is the epistemology, what is the axiology? So what we did is kind of we interwove that uh with you could say an iceberg model with you know systems change theory, and then on the ontology, what we put as a next layer is the epistemology. So, how do we come to know uh things? And this is really like building on um then then this worldview of radically shared aliveness. It of course also means that you open up to wider ways of knowing, that there is not just you know one way of coming to know about things, of let's say doing science, but there is also intuition and dreaming and sensing into the field and all these other ways than kind of just you know observing, learning from observation, experiments, um, or also deriving um from theory. So this is kind of the first you know, opening then on the second layer.

Speaker 1 10:22

And when I look back, I don't know how it was for you, Anais, but I think it came out of this necessity of finding a language for what we are actually doing, because a lot of the choice points I said earlier, they were almost of intuition nature, kind of like there's something we need to do it in this way, and let's add this part, but then more and more as we tried to kind of not to explain, but but kind of sketch the contours of this yeah, rather vast exploration, we stumbled upon. So, how do we not ex um justify it, but how do we inscribe it in language, and with that I don't mean English or you know Spanish, but like um articulation of what are we actually really about, especially also for the action research part, where it was very clear we need to track our learnings, we need to see how it evolves, we need to see what we learn along the insights, the the you know, you could say the creative mistakes that then lead to novel realizations, etc. And so the conceptual lens was really like what are we actually doing and have already come to understand as critical key ingredients, and how are they inscribed? What Anais just said about, for example, in a tree of science, so that by way of speaking, the world out there can also start to better understand where we really come from, that it's not just about radically shared aliveness, it's not just about practice, it's not just about diversity and multitude, but how they in our understanding and how we try to at least be designing and and co-designing and co-creatively unfolding this process, how we see that ecosystem we try to tend to and in our words, fire keep around.

Speaker 2 12:46

Yes, and I think what was also important is then uh we had different discussions, of course, at moments in a way, then of co-creation with at least some firekeepers. And uh I remember very well when one of our firekeepers, Erin, um, you know, really also said that there was uh some resistance towards having a conceptual lens, and that she needed to think it through or feel into it much more strongly, and you know, kind of then really making the point that even though we meet around, let's say, a similar worldview, underlying that are different cosmologies, different cosmologies really meaning different uh origin stories, different kind of belief systems, and so we extended the model to show that, and if you look at it, you will see that there's a divergence uh there. And this kind of the way of depicting it was uh inspired by the April model of Arne Naess, the philosopher and and also proponent of ecocentrism, who had also once made a model different, but what was similar is that he had also said that there can be different underlying uh religions and belief systems, and how we then put it into words is just talking about different cosmologies, and I think that is very important because for us it's um you know, we we come also from a thinking of a of diversity, of a pluriverse, of many different worlds being possible at the same time, and at the same time, there is this uh radically shared aliveness which does bring us together, so there is you know, like this narrowing of the apron before it all opens up again. There is this kind of um this uh joined ground.

Speaker 15:13

So I'd love to uh come back to the to the lens itself and uh ask more questions about the higher levels of it for our uh listeners. That conceptual lens has uh six layers with cosmologies at the bottom that you spoke about beautifully, the the layer then above of relational ontology and shared ecocentric worldview as the the key uh converging layer of everyone in the World Ethic Forum, and then the layer of multiple epistemologies and understanding the embrace of uh wider ways of knowing as a way to gain knowledge. And then there are layers uh above of uh relational fabric in the pluriverse, collective practices and collective capacities, and all the way at the top of the visible outcomes and actions. So I'd love to hear from you, Anais, Luea. Can you talk about those upper layers?

Speaker 2 16:07

So the relational fabric in the in the pluriverse is really about how it all um how we weave the fabric together, all of us. You know, so we're informed here already by this understanding that we are interconnected and actually intraconnected, meaning that we're always part of everything else, and everything else is also part of us, you know. From a more scientific perspective, you could think of the exchange of molecules and atoms by the way of uh you know, breathing or uh drinking water over there. They're permanently semi-permeable. So it is also always about where do we draw maybe boundaries of a system that we look at as a system. You know, we can look at the a person as a system, but we can also extend those boundaries and then maybe look at as a at the whole um local bioregion as an ecosystem and call that our system and draw, for example, the boundaries along the confluences of rivers. So there's many different ways of doing that. So it is really around connecting the diverse ways of being in the world, and um this is again something which is mostly not uh not visible or at least not directly we can name it, we can speak to it, but often it is also something which would take an aha moment for people to realize it. So it was very important for us also to make that explicit, and then building on that, it's really how do we now do things and what is necessary really for us to be able to do them? So, and this again, you know, coming from this relational understanding, we really mean collective practices and collective capacities. How do we do things together? How do we do things from this deep understanding and the relational fabric, you know, of inter and intra connection? And you know, what are the collective capacities that we need to build also together in order to do this, so that then we have visible outcomes and actions in the world, so that we see that collectively we assume agency and then also the material world that there are visible shifts in how things are being done. So this is really then the core inquiry of the World Ethic Forum of its initial seven years arc to surface now these collective practices and collective capacities.

Speaker 1 19:39

Maybe to refine there a little bit and build upon what you just said, but with collective practices and capacities, we do not just mean um invent new things, but actually becoming um explicit of what are we actually already doing constantly that this culture of care and kinship is palpable or is still around us and among us and in us, and that of course has to do with acknowledging different lineages and practices from you know sprouting from there, being inspired by that, different traditions, uh customs, earth-based wisdom, ancestral knowledge, etc. And also from an understanding that often when things are really working actually well, or these kind of care work, and and um now meaning also care work of like taking care of our elders or of each other, or there's such a huge, vast layer of care tending that it often gets unnoticed or is undervalued and undervalidated in our especially you know Western-informed system, to really say what are we already doing and what can we learn from each other, and what happens when we instead of just look just looking at the outcomes and the actions and you know, by way of speaking technologies and and intervention projects, but look at these ways of how have we already done it and how are we doing it? That's really important to kind of it's not just saying uh we have to start by from scratch, there's nothing there, no, there is a richness, but that richness has been not given attention to often. And if it works well, it's taken for granted often. And if it then doesn't work, we actually then in hindsight often realize oh we have not given attention or paid attention to something that is actually that glue that makes things gel and bring forth goodness, brings forth alignment, brings forth a form of coherence. So it's really to say, so what is it then? And what is there also that we need to give more attention to, more validation, shine more light on?

Speaker 22:36

There's something that I really enjoyed in the way that I heard you talk about this, Luea, which ties to the word lens. When I was reflecting on the on the expression conceptual lens, I just I visualize the lens as something that we use in order to see better or to see something in with more detail, uh from a distance or from up close. And so it's I love that you spoke of it as something that allows us to uh reveal or uh pay greater greater attention to something that is already there rather than generating something new. Uh and so yeah, I was wondering if that if that is indeed the case, that one of the one of the functions of this conceptual tool, of this conceptual lens, is that it's essentially um an attentional tool. It's something that allows us to reveal what is present in the world so that we can build on it, test it, see where it would go. And uh, if that is the case, what are some of the some of the things more granularly that you have been able to see or detect in the world through this lens?

Speaker 1 23:48

First of all, I also want to acknowledge that even you know the choice we made finally of like it's a conceptual lens. I remember like turning around and like what are the right words that A would be understood and and yet give acknowledge that it's not just indeed looking, and I guess it is very much a tool. Where are we sometimes it even helped me in conversations? Um like, are we now speaking about ontology, or are we now speaking about issues or questions or um you know um disturbances on an epistemological level? So even that you can in in conversation because there it's so complex and so multi-layered and everything is intertwined and ta-ta-ta. Where where on which um level are we now really finding each other? And are you maybe talking about practices actually, but I actually just came from an understanding of like, you know, how do we generate, create, enliven knowledge? So that's definitely one thing that it helped us, um, even in in our conversation, and then of course, um, more and more also with in within the fire keeper circle, so that we don't get confused and therefore then feel not heard and uh understood or kind of you know met by the other. Um and I think it also as a tool says for or helped me definitely to say like there are all these layers cosmology, epistemology, ontology, etc. etc. And where we come in as the World Ethic Forum, that one thing that we like to give shape to in these first initial seven years is the collective practices and capacities, and can we become specific? And if and then when we look at the thematic strands that also emerged in a way, and we gave also an articulation of these tension lines. So, what is then within these thematic strands, concretely practices and capacities that we can build upon and are called to nurture together, and so for example, to see that grieving as a practice, and of course informed by there are multiple different ways of how to understand grieving and how grieving is and mourning is is um traditionally informed and through faith-based practices informed, through cultures informed, but it's still all grieving practices and and and to kind of give light to that as an important ingredient, even if it has a huge, vast diversity of how that can be approached and why it is approached in a certain context differently than in another. Um you know, for example, where in certain parts and cultures this is celebrated, while in others it is um yeah, it's often seen as something heavy and sad and dark. And not to say one or the other is right or wrong, but like, oh wow, that's a beautiful spectrum within that grieving practice. And so, what does that grieving practice then invite us to both celebrate and feel the heaviness? And is there a beauty emerging from co-holding these differences at the same time while we are all in grieving together?

Speaker 2 28:19

I think maybe another beautiful example is um the connection to land and place and how to how is this practiced and what attention it is being given to. People all over the world have practices, collective practices of connecting with land and place, but very often these are not named, and very often, at least now in in the global north, these or some of these practices are no longer practiced in the collective or only you know at uh certain occasions, so or in a in maybe a bit more uh in a way which is is a bit far from from what the original intentions were. Let's just think, for example, of Thanksgiving, which is you know stems from a very deep and from multiple um deep traditions of really giving thanks to the land, to the place that allows us all to be fed and in this reciprocal relationship with our fellow beings, of plants, animals, etc. So for us to resurface some of these uh practices in the sense of that they're named also in different contexts, that they're collectively seen, and that we make them explicit. That is also part really of the work, which of course then touches upon all the other layers and manifests in something very concrete. So this can you know range from us when we gather physically, from greeting and inviting all the elements to actually having someone always there who is a spaceholder, placeholder, someone who really feels this um connection to the very locality that we are and brings us all, you know, invites us all into that, and it can also be practices then of in one year we had um one woman who made a flute, uh a very special flute, she made it um herself, and she integrated uh clay from the nearby glacier in the making of that that uh flute, and the flute was then of course burned in the fire, and it was a flute where um in one part there was water, and if you move it through space, then the wind coming in, it would create you know a sound, um, and we would collectively you know gather around the sound, and at one moment the flute was also passed around. So this is a very specific practice maybe of connecting to land and place, and there are many, many other ones, but it's just a a beautiful memory that came up now.

Speaker 32:24

So there's something that I'd like to uh almost to test what when I heard you describe um this is it the case that what this conceptual lens enables is to essentially to find common ground or commonality between practices that have the same shape, the same resonance, but that without this lens would be tied to different cosmologies. Like, you know, I I grieve in a certain way because I think of the world as structured in a certain way, and I'm stuck in a certain story, and you're also grieving, but you're grieving differently because you're in a different story and you understand the world differently, and therefore we can't connect. But by looking at things through this conceptual lens, we're suddenly able to say, oh no, we're both grieving, or oh no, we're both interrogating how to make sense of the world, or oh no, we're both looking at what the world is made of, and that it it allows to find this commonality by disentangling things that have been woven together in a way such that we can't uh separate them and therefore find this connection. Um, yeah.

Speaker 2 33:41

It's a very interesting question, and it ties for me to this notion, you know, what are any kind of models also good for? And I think they're good if they help us in a way explain the world and understand the world. Now, in the example of griefing, I think you don't even, you know, you don't need a model per se to understand that grief can take uh different forms, and it can maybe um support you in understanding better, you know, by what are these different forms of griefing informed. Um but but I do, you know, let's say grief as an emotion is not very um it is not very different, it it is maybe practiced differently, and maybe what we grie for uh may be different. So it's an interesting question, which you know I'm just wrapping my my head around. Um and I do think you can go into maybe a deeper conversation, um which you could also otherwise. So I actually think uh it's then it's this fineness to to discern and and make distinctions, but it's certainly not a necessity to have a model there.

Speaker 1 35:33

I liked how you offered that question, Julien, because building on what you just said, Anais, it is both to to celebrate the differences and seeing the shared ground we are standing not only on but in and are informed by and nurtured by and a kind of like parallel process of both disentangling where we may you know get stuck in we are different and we do things differently and we have different backgrounds, and at the same time also not just unified into everything is the same and all one, but to to balance between yeah, it it's funny. I I I when you spoke, I just had the feeling, yeah, that to celebrate that it's both and at the same time, and and to be specific, distinct, and see how everything is interrelated, interconnected, interwoven.

Speaker 36:58

Thank you for joining us today. We're making this podcast to track the ripples of our inquiry and harvest some of the learnings we make along the way. It's our attempt to name and articulate things that are often left unspoken, too subtle to capture in words. If something resonated with you, we hope that it can inform your practice and benefit the collective spaces around you. Everything we mentioned in this episode is in the show notes. You can also find more at Worldethicforum.com. In our next podcast, we will be talking about our thematic strands. We look forward to having you with us again.