Morphogenesis I: The Organism and the Collective: 4 Functional Differentiation as Construal

In multicellular systems, the emergence of specialised cell types is often described in mechanistic terms: genes switch on or off, signalling pathways activate, and cells “assume roles.” From a relational ontology perspective, however, differentiation is less a matter of predetermined roles and more a process of construal: a perspectival alignment in which each cell actualises its potential relative to the collective.

Differentiation as Perspectival Alignment

Functional differentiation arises because the relational field of the collective constrains and affords particular potentials. Each cell “interprets” its position in this field, adjusting behaviour to align with the needs of the collective. This does not imply intentionality; cells are not consciously negotiating their roles. Rather, construal is an emergent property of relational positioning: the system actualises certain patterns of function because they are coherent with the collective potential.

Consider a developing tissue: some cells become motile, others secretory, others structural. These roles are not fixed by preordained blueprints but emerge from local interactions and the constraints of the collective. Each cell’s function is defined by its relational context, and the collective maintains coherence through the ongoing alignment of these individuated potentials.

Construal and Identity

Crucially, construal is inseparable from identity. A cell’s functional role both expresses and constitutes its individuation within the collective. Identity is therefore perspectival: it exists in the relation between the cell’s potential and the structured potential of the organism. Cells are individuated precisely because their functional potentials are differentiated within the collective grammar.

Coordination without Teleology

Relational construal dispenses with the need for teleological explanation. Specialisation is not a goal-directed process; it is an emergent alignment of potentials. The “purpose” of a differentiated cell is not intrinsic to the cell or prescribed by a central plan — it arises from the mutual actualisation of collective and individual potentials. Function is a consequence of relational consistency, not intentional design.

Implications for Multicellularity

Understanding differentiation as construal shifts our view of multicellularity. The organism is not simply a container of roles but a dynamic grammar in which potential is distributed, individuated, and actualised. Functional patterns emerge because the relational field affords them, not because they are encoded in advance. This perspective illuminates how complexity arises naturally from relational constraints, and how individuality and collectivity are co-constituted in living systems.

Conclusion

Functional differentiation is an emergent, perspectival process: cells actualise potentials that are defined in relation to the collective, producing coherent patterns without teleology. By seeing differentiation as construal, we recognise multicellularity as a continuous negotiation between individual and collective potentials — a living grammar in which identity and function co-evolve.

In the next post, Morphogenesis without Mechanism, we will explore how these relational processes produce patterned organisation without recourse to mechanistic or teleological explanations, further elaborating the ontological shift that defines multicellular life.