Human beings are born into relationship. From the beginning, survival depends on another who receives, nourishes, holds. The marks of these primary bonds structure the way we establish our connection with what is transcendent and enduring. We are, from the origin, relational beings.

This is why transformation does not occur "within" subjects in isolation, but in the shared relational space. Our practice cultivates the capacity to be affected together—to meet in that space where mutual resonance can reconfigure how we perceive, relate, and respond.

We work with the complexity of the subject across three dimensions: the symbolic (the language and culture that constitute us), the imaginary (desires, projections, identifications), and the real (that which resists symbolisation and returns).

The subject is not a unified entity transparent to itself. It is constituted by language, traversed by dimensions it does not fully control. This incompleteness is not a defect to be repaired, but the opening from which something new can emerge.

We work with that constitutive gap—the space where the subject does not fully coincide with itself—as the generative place from which a singular, non-automatic response can emerge.

Every living being carries within itself a tendency to persist, grow, and expand its capacity to act in the world. Our practice attempts to create the conditions for this vital force to manifest, for each subject to unfold their potency more fully.

But the human subject is not a closed, autonomous entity. It ex-ists: it is always already in the world, constituted by language, decentred from itself. This understanding—that the subject does not fully possess itself—runs through all our practice.

We do not work from the illusion of the sovereign subject who knows and controls itself fully, but from the recognition that the subject emerges in relation, in language, in encounter.

We trust in basic goodness: the inherent potential in each being to move towards coherence, compassion, and creative expression. And we trust that this potential can unfold when conditions are held for incompleteness to become generative opening.

We practice politics by creating ecosystemic spaces, and recognizing that transformation requires more than representation; it requires genuine collective construction. We value each subject for the difference that their singular way of responding introduces into the common. This is an ethics of the act: without guarantees, with the full responsibility of sustaining the conditions in which each singularity can manifest itself as a difference that expands the order of the possible and transforms the collective fabric. 

We are fully aware that we are merely instruments of a collective decision, but we fully assume the duties and responsibilities that this entails. There is no contradiction between recognizing ourselves as bearers of something that exceeds us and responding with total responsibility: precisely because each concrete act responds to a collective intention, it demands maximum commitment and the greatest ethical attention.

Cultivating the inner capacity to be affected, to respond, to remain open to what the world communicates to us. Because someone who experiences deep resonance with the world will naturally be responsive to the demands that world presents.

Doing is not separate from thinking or feeling. Our practice is embodied: we hold devices where knowledge emerges from encounter, from shared experimentation, from concrete acts within living relational contexts.

We work with groups because transformation arises from the relational fabric: each singularity that emerges in the shared space modifies the fabric that holds it. Community is the living space where the singular and the collective co-constitute one another.

Each project, each encounter, each device is also a learning space. Reflection is not subsequent to practice, it is part of it: we name what happens, we elaborate what emerges, we conceptualise from lived experience. Thus, practice also becomes knowledge production.