Potential, Probability, and the Relational Turn: V Probability as Metaphenomenal

In the last post, we explored readiness as the ontic substrate of reality: a relational field of abilities and inclinations, whose local alignments actualise as instances.

Now we turn to the question of probability: where does it belong, and what role does it play in a relational ontology?

---

1. Ontic vs epistemic indeterminacy

It is crucial to distinguish two forms of indeterminacy:

1. Ontological indeterminacy – the field of readiness itself; what can happen given system capacities and tendencies.

2. Epistemic indeterminacy – our knowledge of the field; the uncertainty about which alignment will actualise.

Probability, in the conventional sense, measures the latter, not the former. It is a metaphenomenal construct: a reflection of our partial knowledge of reality, not a property of reality itself.

---

2. Probability as a meta-phenomenal tool

Probability allows us to:

• Quantify uncertainty about outcomes when interacting with a field of readiness.

• Model tendencies over repeated cuts or instances.

• Coordinate across multiple observers or measuring systems.

In each case, probability is about our relation to potential, not the potential itself. It emerges above the ontic stratum, in the meta-phenomenal layer of reflection and measurement.

---

3. Table of strata

Stratum	Function	Relation to potential	Key concept
Ontic	Field of readiness	Capacities + inclinations	Potential (modulation)
Phenomenal	Actualised instance	Local alignment of readiness	Event
Metaphenomenal	Reflection on uncertainty	Observer knowledge of potential	Probability (modalisation)

This table clarifies why probability should not be conflated with potential. Probability is derived, not primary; it describes our construal, not the field itself.

---

4. Probability in physics

In quantum mechanics:

• The wavefunction encodes readiness: the ontic dispositions of the system.

• Measurement reveals an actualisation of readiness, a local alignment.

• Probabilities arise from our epistemic position relative to the system: they describe what we can predict given our constraints, not what exists inherently.

This reframing resolves longstanding debates about the “collapse of the wavefunction” and the ontic status of superposition. Collapse is a perspectival actualisation, not a probabilistic selection.

---

5. Implications

Recognising probability as metaphenomenal allows us to:

• Maintain ontological clarity: readiness remains the primary mode of potential.

• Understand measurement and modeling as epistemic activities above the field of being.

• Reconcile statistical formalisms with a dispositional, relational ontology, avoiding category errors that have historically plagued interpretations of quantum mechanics.

---

6. Preview of Part VI

Next, we will explore quantum mechanics and readiness more directly: how wavefunctions, superpositions, and uncertainty principles can be reframed entirely within a relational ontology where potential is readiness and probability is epistemic.

We will see how this shift dissolves long-standing confusions and allows a coherent picture of the dynamics of potential in both physical and symbolic systems.