Reflections on the infographic: Spirituality or a Way of Being?

Today, I revisited this post, and a few spontaneous thoughts and reflections came to mind...

This doesn't mean I don't find this infographic beautiful—quite the opposite! It inspired me to dig deeper into my own experiences to see which other ways of being I know could also fit beautifully within this framework.

When we encounter philosophies like Ubuntu, Sumak Kawsay, or Ifa, the question arises: do we see them as ethical guidelines, integrated ways of being, or as spirituality?

The infographic primarily describes these frameworks as relational and caring principles—systems focused on autonomy, reciprocity, and harmony. But how does our own cultural lens influence this interpretation?

In Western traditions, where spirituality is often separated from the practical and material, there is a tendency to reduce these concepts to ethics or social systems. But is that really the case? Or do they embody a way of living in which the boundaries between the spiritual, practical, and social dissolve?

Why are some frameworks missing? What stood out to me is that the additional frameworks I’ve mentioned—such as Ifa, Nkwam, Banana philosophy, and Tule—are often described in the literature as "spiritual traditions." This made me wonder if that’s why they were not included in the original list. Are we inclined to exclude certain philosophies when they are explicitly described as spiritual? And how do we make that distinction? Or is spirituality sometimes overlooked precisely because of our focus on social or ethical dimensions?

For example:

• Ubuntu is described as a system of reciprocity and collective humanity. Is it merely ethical, or is there a deeper spiritual core in this emphasis on interconnectedness?
• Ifa, with the concept of Ori, emphasizes personal reflection and alignment with one’s life purpose. This resonates deeply with my own expertise in relational metacognition because it offers a powerful form of self-awareness and inner alignment.
• Sumak Kawsay integrates harmony between humans and nature. Should we see this as an ethical model, or as a spiritual worldview that considers all life as sacred?

How do we learn from existing frameworks? Perhaps we don’t need to search for new answers but rather focus on rediscovering existing frameworks, such as:

• Nkwam (Akan), emphasizes respect and care for nature and community.
• Banana philosophy (Suriname), focused on balance and resilience within communities.
• Tule (Suriname), a framework centered on reciprocity and responsibility.

These philosophies offer valuable lessons about interconnectedness and harmony. How do we adopt these insights without reducing or distorting them?

A Call to Reflect

What lens are we using to view these frameworks? Are we guided by our separations between ethics and spirituality?

This is an invitation to reconsider how we understand these frameworks. Are they ethical systems, spiritual frameworks, or simply integrated ways of being? And how can we respectfully apply this wisdom to guide us toward a more connected, harmonious existence?