Meta-Genealogical Reflection: 1 Prelude: From Genealogies to Meta-Genealogy — Tracing the Becoming of Construal

The genealogical series has carried us across myth, philosophy, science, and art, revealing how successive symbolic, conceptual, and material systems have structured the horizon of possibility. Each post was not merely a catalogue of thinkers, theories, or phenomena, but an exploration of how possibility itself was enacted — how relational fields were cut, shaped, and made intelligible.

In reviewing these trajectories, a persistent pattern emerges: relation is the medium of possibility. Whether through the ordering of light in classical optics, the formal abstraction of fields and forces, or the narrative architectures of imagination, construal has always been relational. Entities, events, or symbols appear not in isolation but as nodes within fields of potential, shaped by constraints, affinities, and historical conditions.

This recognition marks a phase shift in our inquiry. The genealogical method has been retrospective, excavating and sequencing instances of relational structuring. But now the horizon moves forward: the question is no longer only what was but what is the evolving nature of construal itself? How does the very capacity to construe — to order, select, and render potential intelligible — transform across time, space, and symbolic medium?

Phase II, then, is a meta-genealogical reflection. Its focus is not isolated epochs or disciplines, but the dynamics of construal as an ontological process. It asks how possibility becomes, persists, and is re-cut across domains; how symbolic, material, and conceptual fields co-constitute one another; and how the evolution of relational structures conditions the very horizons from which we perceive, imagine, and act.

In practical terms, this means that the next series will trace not discrete objects or thinkers, but the evolutionary rhythms and principles of relationality itself. We will examine how the patterns we have already uncovered — in cosmology, light, consciousness, and symbolic orders — interweave, reflect, and amplify one another. Possibility is no longer a historical artefact to be described; it is a living field to be inhabited, understood, and extended.

By pivoting to this meta-genealogical perspective, we prepare to explore the becoming of construal itself: its processes, constraints, and emergent horizons. What follows is a reflection not on what has been made possible, but on the conditions that make possibility possible — a relational, reflexive, and perspectival inquiry into the structure of becoming itself.