Knowing and doing belong together

Over the past weeks, I have written here about Shengtai Wenming, the Chinese notion of ecological civilization, a vision that gestures toward a different civilizational posture and a different relationship between humans and the living world.

While working on that thread, I was reminded of another Chinese concept that I first encountered some years ago through Chinese friends and colleagues while working with the Aurora Borealis Foundation, when someone mentioned a short phrase from the Confucian tradition: Zhi Xing He Yi. My friends translated it simply as the unity of knowing and acting.

At the time, I let it pass. But the phrase stayed with me, and in recent weeks it has resurfaced – I’m not entirely sure why.

In the West, we tend to assume that thinking and doing are separate realms. Some people are thinkers, others are doers. Some analyze, others implement. Universities produce theories, entrepreneurs execute them. Think tanks write reports, practitioners build projects. This division feels natural to us, almost obvious. Yet the more one looks at it, the stranger it becomes.

Many of the crises surrounding us today unfold precisely in the gap between knowledge and action. We understand the climate crisis, the science is robust, the models are detailed. And still, emissions rise and not enough is done. It’s tempting to blame politics and vested interests, and often that is justified. Yet something deeper may also be at work: our culture has become comfortable with separating knowing from doing. Thought from practice.

Charles Eisenstein often writes about the “myth of separation,” the illusion that humans stand apart from nature. Yet a similar split runs through modern culture itself. We have learned to separate knowing from doing, reflection from practice.

In classical Chinese philosophy, such splits were viewed with suspicion. My inquiries later pointed me toward Confucianism and to the Ming dynasty thinker Wang Yangming, who is often associated with the idea of Zhi Xing He Yi. He taught that genuine knowledge cannot remain theoretical. If you truly know something, it will show itself in action. And knowledge that does not transform how we live is incomplete. In that sense, knowing and doing are not two stages, they are one movement.

This insight lands uncomfortably in many modern settings. Universities reward abstraction. Consultants produce frameworks. Conferences circulate ideas. Entire professions exist around analysis, strategy, and advisory work. Of course, none of that is useless.

But the separation has hardened into identity. One often hears people say, almost with pride, “I’m just a doer.” Entrepreneurs sometimes dismiss thinking as irrelevant. And intellectuals and academics sometimes retreat into analysis while remaining distant from practice. It’s almost like two tribes, speaking different dialects.

And yet the problems we face refuse to respect that boundary. Ecological breakdown, social fragmentation, technological acceleration demand something else. They require people who think carefully and act responsibly. People whose ideas are tested in the texture of lived experience.

Perhaps this is why the phrase from my Chinese friends continues to echo in my mind. Zhi (知) means knowing. Xing (行) means acting, moving, doing. And He Yi (合一) means that the two belong together. Not first one, then the other. And not hierarchy, where one is deemed superior to the other. Unity.

When I reflect on the people who have influenced me most deeply over my life, many of them embody this posture. I think of Bo Ekman, with whom I have worked for decades, who combines astute reflection about our times with the practical work of organizing conferences, gatherings, manifestations, and concerts. I think of Göran Gennvi, who does not separate ecological reflection, often drawing from Indigenous knowledge systems, from the practice of bringing leaders outdoors to explore vision and leadership. And I think of Christopher Chuang in China, who moves comfortably between entrepreneurship and the path of a Daoist master. These three, and many others like them, embody a coherence between what they know and how they live.

Perhaps this is also something I need to remember for my own path. Because it is easy, at times, to retreat into something like Voltaire’s Candide, quietly cultivating one’s own garden while the world outside grows more troubled. The Chinese phrase gently unsettles that comfort. If an insight does not reshape how we walk in the world, how deep was the insight? And if our actions never cause us to see differently, were they truly meaningful?

The point is not to abandon thinking. Quite the opposite. Ideas must survive contact with reality. They must prove themselves in practice. In that sense, the phrase also becomes a quiet guide for how we choose companions along the way. To seek out people whose thinking and doing belong together. People whose ideas are lived rather than merely expressed.

Knowing and doing. Thinking and acting. Insight and practice.

Not separate realms after all. Just one path.

This article is also published on Substack. illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

Track the real‑world impact behind the sustainability headlines. illuminem’s Data Hub™ offers transparent performance data and climate targets of companies driving the transition.